What's new

Rule Changes Discussion

FibreOpticJesus

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2005
2,789
4,991
I like the new, Subs going off at the nearest touchline rule. Players taking forever to get off the pitch, drives me mad. Not sure about the defensive handball though. That new rule has totally been brought in because of VAR imo.
The rest are fine, until they effect us negatively. At which point they'll be shit new rules, and suck.

I do not think this will fully deal with the issue. You will have players heading for the dug out and then the ref saying no you need to turn round and go to the other side. Just book the player if he takes more than 20 seconds. Stopping the clock will help but the real issue is that the idea behind time wasting is to disrupt the play to their advantage. By stopping the clock I could see the stoppage being even longer. If refs dealt with the issue properly by booking players then no need for changing the rules.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
I do not think this will fully deal with the issue. You will have players heading for the dug out and then the ref saying no you need to turn round and go to the other side. Just book the player if he takes more than 20 seconds. Stopping the clock will help but the real issue is that the idea behind time wasting is to disrupt the play to their advantage. By stopping the clock I could see the stoppage being even longer. If refs dealt with the issue properly by booking players then no need for changing the rules.

Spot on Like most of these things, the problem is that the referees don't enforce them properly rather than the rule itself being the problem.
 

Tucker

Shitehawk
Jul 15, 2013
31,131
146,020
Premier League rule changes to affect Arsenal, Chelsea, Palace, Spurs and West Ham next season

To be fair, it's not just the London clubs, but because it's Football London reporting, they've opted to just name the aforementioned.

Anyways...

https://www.football.london/premier-league/premier-league-rule-changes-affect-16299268

Interesting rule changes. And nothing against you, but what a badly written article. The first four paragraphs were just padding in order to get you to scroll past the first four adverts.

Really hate how sites like this operate. Yuck.
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
39,885
62,561
Interesting rule changes. And nothing against you, but what a badly written article. The first four paragraphs were just padding in order to get you to scroll past the first four adverts.

Really hate how sites like this operate. Yuck.
I hate how even the good writers on that site (like our very own @Allygold ) have their work cut apart and presented in such an awful way. Good web design and formatting out of the window to incorporate as many ads as possible.

The actual rule changes are fairly sensible, although you wouldn't have a Galatasaray player walking round the whole pitch to be subbed off away at Besiktas, for example. Need som common sense to be applied.
 

Houdini

No better cure for the blues than some good pussy.
Jul 10, 2006
56,725
78,457
I hate how even the good writers on that site (like our very own @Allygold ) have their work cut apart and presented in such an awful way. Good web design and formatting out of the window to incorporate as many ads as possible.

The actual rule changes are fairly sensible, although you wouldn't have a Galatasaray player walking round the whole pitch to be subbed off away at Besiktas, for example. Need som common sense to be applied.

I can see it now, the intended subbed player pleading and remonstrating with the ref and explaining how his life is in mortal danger and all the while knowing its just to waste time!
I reckon there will be some outrageous simulations occuring!
 

Tucker

Shitehawk
Jul 15, 2013
31,131
146,020
I can see it now, the intended subbed player pleading and remonstrating with the ref and explaining how his life is in mortal danger and all the while knowing its just to waste time!
I reckon there will be some outrageous simulations occuring!

Could all very easily be solved by having a clock that stops whenever the ball is out of play. Can’t understand why this is so resisted by IFAB.
 

Houdini

No better cure for the blues than some good pussy.
Jul 10, 2006
56,725
78,457
Could all very easily be solved by having a clock that stops whenever the ball is out of play. Can’t understand why this is so resisted by IFAB.

I reckon it has more to do with the flow of the game being interrupted for longer than necessary, tucker, if it's a straight forward tactical swop then that player should be able, or expected, to run off the pitch.

Does anyone else remember this incident?

I remember a player being subbed and he stayed on the pitch talking to a team mate, the ref was physically pushing him away and towards the touchline he then tried to strike up a conversation with the ref about being touched and the ref pointed to the touchline/dug out.
The player eventually began to walk in that direction when he stopped and waved at people in the crowed, the ref ran towards him again and threatened to book him, the player shrugged as if suggesting to the ref 'whats your problem?' the ref, again ushered him towards the side lines where the sub was in no hurry to come on either, the player was about 15 yards from the side lines when he suddenly stopped again and.......knelt down, undone his boot laces and began to slowly, re tie them!!!
The ref walked up to the player touched his watch and the player shrugged, the ref then pulled out the red card and sent him off!
The shenanigans that followed were laughable.

(I thinking might have been Jamaica...don't fucking hang me if it wasn't.)
 
Last edited:

Tucker

Shitehawk
Jul 15, 2013
31,131
146,020
I reckon it has more to do with the flow of the game being interrupted for longer than necessary, tucker, if it's a straight forward tactical swop then that player should be able, or expected, to run off the pitch.

Does anyone else remember this incident?

I remember a player being subbed and he stayed on the pitch talking to a team mate, the ref was physically pushing him away and towards the touchline he then tried to strike up a conversation with the ref about being touched and the ref pointed to the touchline/dug out.
The player eventually began to walk in that direction when he stopped and waved at people in the crowed, the ref ran towards him again and threatened to book him, the player shrugged as if suggesting to the ref 'whats your problem?' the ref, again ushered him towards the side lines where the sub was in no hurry to come on either, the player was about 15 yards from the side lines when he suddenly stopped again and.......knelt down, undone his boot laces and began to slowly, re tie them!!!
The ref walked up to the player touched his watch and the player shrugged, the ref then pulled out the red card and sent him off!
The shenanigans that followed were laughable.

I don’t remember that but it doesn’t surprise me that people do this kind of thing. I get what you’re saying about the flow of the game, but time is the main factor. If there was less benefit to this kind of malarkey it would be less worth the risk of a booking or red.
 

Houdini

No better cure for the blues than some good pussy.
Jul 10, 2006
56,725
78,457
There is no need for more rule changes there is a need for better refs, and most likely younger bodies that can keep up with the pace.

I watch a lot of football from S America and the likes, and the refs out there allow outrageous fouling and tactics!
The game however is kept going and only when someone is literally assaulted is the game stopped, its regular for fights to break out.
On the other hand, I'm 100% in agreement that referees should grow a pair and do their jobs to full effect.
A season of shock sending offs and bookings would, I believe, be beneficial in the following season.
 

Houdini

No better cure for the blues than some good pussy.
Jul 10, 2006
56,725
78,457
I don’t remember that but it doesn’t surprise me that people do this kind of thing. I get what you’re saying about the flow of the game, but time is the main factor. If there was less benefit to this kind of malarkey it would be less worth the risk of a booking or red.

The reason why the 4th official adds time on, it's meant (was) to be 30 seconds per sub plus any injuries, so someone thought, "it only takes 30 seconds to get one player off and one player on the pitch" obviously not taking time wasting in to consideration!
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
The reason why the 4th official adds time on, it's meant (was) to be 30 seconds per sub plus any injuries, so someone thought, "it only takes 30 seconds to get one player off and one player on the pitch" obviously not taking time wasting in to consideration!

I think it still all just comes down to refs actually bothering to apply the rules. There'd be no need for this "exit at the nearest sideline" rule in the first place if refs just added the time on like they're supposed to rather than sticking some completely arbitrary number up on the board. This rule change is just a silly roundabout way of fixing a problem that wouldn't exist in the first place if refs applied the current rules. Therefore I'm not optimistic that they'll apply this one correctly either
 

Houdini

No better cure for the blues than some good pussy.
Jul 10, 2006
56,725
78,457
I think it still all just comes down to refs actually bothering to apply the rules. There'd be no need for this "exit at the nearest sideline" rule in the first place if refs just added the time on like they're supposed to rather than sticking some completely arbitrary number up on the board. This rule change is just a silly roundabout way of fixing a problem that wouldn't exist in the first place if refs applied the current rules. Therefore I'm not optimistic that they'll apply this one correctly either

You're saying what I said in my first post o zio and i agree with yours.
Refs have become soft and, I believe, they are under orders not to be be too officious or strict because it doesn't look good for the game, a few years ago a ref lost his place in reffing a final because he booked too many players in a previous game, a world cup or European Championship.
 

WalkerboyUK

Well-Known Member
Jun 8, 2009
21,658
23,476
Not sure I agree with the ban on attacking players being in the wall.
By all means, award a free-kick to the defending team if an attacker does something physical to a defensive player, such as shoving him out of the way to create a space as the ball is kicked.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
Not sure I agree with the ban on attacking players being in the wall.
By all means, award a free-kick to the defending team if an attacker does something physical to a defensive player, such as shoving him out of the way to create a space as the ball is kicked.

Yeah I'm not entirely sure what the reasoning is for that change. I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed. As long as they stay 10 yds and don't push/hold the defending players in any way, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to stand their ground. But maybe I'm missing something obvious..? Could just be because there's always a certain amount of pushing and shoving and it's too hard to police consistently so they've decided it's just easier to not let them stand there in the first place or something like that I guess.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
Yeah I'm not entirely sure what the reasoning is for that change. I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed. As long as they stay 10 yds and don't push/hold the defending players in any way, I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to stand their ground. But maybe I'm missing something obvious..? Could just be because there's always a certain amount of pushing and shoving and it's too hard to police consistently so they've decided it's just easier to not let them stand there in the first place or something like that I guess.

This is why. It's just become a group of players pushing each other.
 

Hotspur33

Well-Known Member
Apr 21, 2014
1,605
3,908
This is the bit about the defenders:

"Another change to the laws of the game means that if the player's arms extend beyond a "natural silhouette", handball will be given, even if it is perceived as accidental.

Elleray says this is an effort to put an end to defenders placing their arms behind their backs in fear of giving away a free-kick.

"We've changed it to say the body has a certain silhouette," said Elleray. "If the arms are extended beyond that silhouette then the body is being made unnaturally bigger, with the purpose of it being a bigger barrier to the opponent or the ball. "

Are they saying that if the ball here was to hit the players arm that would be a handball/penalty? The player's trying to block the cross with his foot.

View attachment 46239
This seems pretty apt after the CL Final.

Sissoko punished because of where his arm was. I personally don't know what the answer to handball is. I had a heated debate with an Arsenal fan who said that the rule should be simplified for the referee by saying any time the ball hits hand/arm its a penalty. I believe, if that was the rule, there would be 10 pens a game as attackers would chip the ball at defenders arms.

The natural silhouette doesn't work for me either as it's too vague, arms are used for balance and for propulsion. I guess it comes back to deliberate or not.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
This seems pretty apt after the CL Final.

Sissoko punished because of where his arm was. I personally don't know what the answer to handball is. I had a heated debate with an Arsenal fan who said that the rule should be simplified for the referee by saying any time the ball hits hand/arm its a penalty. I believe, if that was the rule, there would be 10 pens a game as attackers would chip the ball at defenders arms.

The natural silhouette doesn't work for me either as it's too vague, arms are used for balance and for propulsion. I guess it comes back to deliberate or not.

I don't know why a non deliberate handball has to be a penalty. It could be an indirect free kick inside the area. That would be a much better punishment for all these handballs that stop crosses. If the handball stops a goal bound shot then a penalty would be a suitable punishment.
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
39,885
62,561
I don't know why a non deliberate handball has to be a penalty. It could be an indirect free kick inside the area. That would be a much better punishment for all these handballs that stop crosses. If the handball stops a goal bound shot then a penalty would be a suitable punishment.
Indirect free kicks have almost completely disappeared apart from offsides and the occasional handled back pass. Non-deliberate handballs would be a good place to reintroduce them.
 
Top