test

Welcome to Talk Chelsea

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
KevinAshburner

Football New Rule and Law Changes Coming

Started by KevinAshburner,

23 posts in this topic

Football New Rule and Law Changes Coming.

A New Look of Football.

 

These New Rules in Football.

The Main Important Changes are.

1. 30 Minute Halves.

2. 60 Minutes Football Matches.

______________________________________

Football reforms: Scrapping 45-minute half to be debated at Ifab

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40311889

A proposal to scrap 45-minute halves is to be looked at by football's lawmakers to deter time-wasting.

Instead, there could be two periods of 30 minutes with the clock stopped whenever the ball goes out of play.

Lawmaking body the International Football Association Board (Ifab) says matches only see about 60 minutes of "effective playing time" out of 90.

The idea is one of several put forward in a new strategy document designed to address football's "negativities".

Another proposal would see players not being allowed to follow up and score if a penalty is saved - if the spot-kick "is not successful", play would stop and a goal-kick awarded.

Other ideas include a stadium clock linked to a referee's watch and a new rule allowing players to effectively pass to themselves or dribble the ball when taking a free-kick.

Former Chelsea striker Gianfranco Zola is in favour of the proposal to cut matches to 60 minutes.

"I personally like this rule because there are so many teams who try to take advantage of it because they are winning and wasting time - so I think it is not a bad rule," he told the BBC.

"Football is fast enough. Some of the changes I don't like very much, but this is a good one."

_________________________________________________

Football rule-makers to consider reducing games to 60 minutes

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/jun/17/football-rule-makers-reducing-games-60-minutes

• International Football Association Board looking at radical rule changes 
• Attempts to cut down time-wasting and make game more attractive

World football’s rule-makers are to consider a proposal to reduce each half of a game to 30 minutes in a bid to prevent time-wasting.

The International Football Association Board (Ifab) has outlined a raft of radical proposed changes to the rules of the game in a new strategy document titled Play Fair! Adopting two halves of 30 minutes with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play is one of dozens of ideas put forward by Ifab in an attempt to make football more attractive.


Smolov launches Confederations Cup mission to spark Russia World Cup fever
 Read more
Ifab says the Fair Play! document has three aims – to improve player behaviour and increase respect, to increase playing time and to increase fairness and attractiveness. “Many people are very frustrated that a typical 90-minute match has fewer than 60 minutes of effective (actual) playing time (EPT) i.e. when the ball is in play,” Ifab said in the document. “The strategy proposes measures to reduce time-wasting and ‘speed up’ the game.”

Ifab said some of the proposals could be implemented immediately and require no law changes, while some are “ready for testing/experiments” and some are “for discussion”.

Among the ideas up for discussion is that of a player being allowed to pass to themselves at a free-kick, corner and goalkick, a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee’s watch, and allowing a goalkick to be taken even if the ball is moving.

Other ideas up “for discussion” include referees blowing for half-time or full-time only when the ball goes out of play, and a penalty kick being either scored or missed/saved, with players not allowed to follow up to score, in order to stop encroachment into the penalty area.

Plans which need no law changes mostly apply to Ifab’s bid to combat time-wasting. The document says match officials should be stricter on the rule which allows goalkeepers to hold the ball for six seconds.

Ifab suggests match officials should be stricter on time-keeping, stopping their watch from a penalty being awarded to the spot-kick being taken, from a goal being scored until the match resumes from the kick-off, and from the signal of a substitution to play restarting.

The proposals already being tested include the idea of only allowing captains to speak to referees to prevent match officials being mobbed. This is being trialled at the Confederations Cup in Russia, which started on Saturday.

Another proposal already being tested is a change to the order of penalty kicks in shootouts, known as ABBA. Instead of teams taking alternate penalties, the new system involves team A taking the first kick, then team B taking two, then team A taking two.

“The ‘first’ kick in kicks from the penalty mark has a built-in advantage primarily because there is greater mental pressure on the second kicker (in each round) who often faces instant elimination if they miss their kick (especially once the first four kicks for each team have been completed),” the document says.

Ifab is made up of world football’s governing body, Fifa, and the four British home football associations and is responsible for making the final decision on law changes. The Play Fair! document will be discussed at various meetings before decisions are taken on whether to develop ideas further or discard them.

______________________________________________

David Elleray backs 'radical' IFAB proposals for football laws

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/10918689/david-elleray-backs-radical-ifab-proposals-for-football-laws?

Penalty goals and 60-minute matches are among the "radical" proposals up for discussion by football's law-making body.

The International Football Association Board has developed a strategy document spearheaded by technical director and former Premier League referee David Elleray intended to make football "fairer" and "more attractive".

Some of the possible rule changes
60 minutes of actual playing time

Penalties when keepers handle backpasses

Penalty goal for handling on the line

Players can dribble from free-kicks and corners

Ball does not need to be stationary for set-pieces
Under the proposals players would be allowed to play free-kicks and corners to themselves instead of passing; the ball need not be stationary for a free kick; a penalty would be awarded for a goalkeeper handling a backpass; and a penalty goal could be given if an outfield player handles on or close to the goal-line.

Elleray told Sky Sports News HQ: "It's a starting point to say 'can we make the game better?' People will find reasons not to do it but we just want to explore some of these and see if they come into fruition. Some are being tested by FIFA in the Confederations Cup and by UEFA in some of their competitions.

"Some of the more radical suggestions may take a couple of years, but we can test at different levels. At youth level, international, we may have some countries that say in their league they would like to try something.

"We're not putting a time limit on them, it's a five-year strategy. Some may come in much quicker, some may not come in at all. It depends on what football wants.

"What we're saying is can we use the laws of the game to make football more attractive, fairer, to improve the behaviour of players and to gain greater respect."

 

Possible changes to time keeping include the whistle only being blown for half-time and full-time when the ball goes out of play; and using 60 minutes of actual playing time rather than 90 overall minutes as at present. Teams could also be docked points for surrounding a referee.

"That's quite an extreme one," added Elleray, when discussing a rule change to reduce playing time to 60-minute matches. "But in other sports the clock is stopped when the ball goes out of play.

"We know that in most top-level football you only get about 60 minutes of play where the ball is actually in play.

"It's often [late in the game] when we see the most time wasting, time lost, because a team is winning 1-0 and want to preserve their win no matter what. This is certainly quite extreme and something we might move to more gradually."

Minor amendments include a goal kick not having to leave the penalty area before a defender touches it and a goal kick being awarded if a player misses a penalty kick, instead of any follow up being allowed.

The strategy document, called Play Fair, will be discussed over the next few months, before the 2018 IFAB annual general meeting in March, which will decide which proposals should be trialled in competitive matches.

"The underlying philosophy of 'Play Fair' is a call to the conscience of everyone involved in football," said a statement on the IFAB website (www.theifab.com).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that on the average the playtime is 62-63 minutes if they make it like basket ball with chronometer and if the matches last 60 minutes, it won't be much of a change.
The other ideas are ludicrous.

What the FIFA-UEFA supremos should do is introduce video refereeing.
It's long overdue.
They can easily work out what types of situation are amenable to correction after the replay video is played.
We have seen some ridiculous situations like Peru v. Brazil last summer for the CONCACAF. Peru scored with a hand ball, everybody saw it but the goal counted.You may think that it was one of those things that happen in a football match, but the weird thing was that the referee and the linesman were conferring for five minutes to decide if it stands or not and in that time in the stadium's tv studio had seen it clear as daylight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, cosmicway said:

What the FIFA-UEFA supremos should do is introduce video refereeing.
It's long overdue.

It's being tested now in the FIFA Confederations Cup. It's been working great, but it messes up goal celebrations.. score today, celebrate tomorrow if you're lucky. :D Other than that, in the games I have watched, they got all close decisions right thanks to video replays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, manpe said:

It's being tested now in the FIFA Confederations Cup. It's been working great, but it messes up goal celebrations.. score today, celebrate tomorrow if you're lucky. :D Other than that, in the games I have watched, they got all close decisions right thanks to video replays.

How goal celebration messes up with the effectiveness of video refereeing ?
It's dead time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

How goal celebration messes up with the effectiveness of video refereeing ?

I don't understand your question. Video refereeing messes up goal celebrations, not the other way round lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, manpe said:

I don't understand your question. Video refereeing messes up goal celebrations, not the other way round lol.

How ?
Many times goals are scored, we celebrate and then it does n't count.
What changes ?

Re. goals there will be somewhat fewer now with this new system though.
But I don't think it's something weird. Only the position of the referee changes. It becomes something like water polo refereeing.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

How ?
Many times goals are scored, we celebrate and then it does n't count.
What changes ?

You killed a light joke by trying to seriously analyze it, forget it. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, manpe said:

You killed a light joke by trying to seriously analyze it, forget it. <_<

sorry !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

sorry !

Take it easy :) Had you seen those games with video replays, you would have understood the joke about celebrations. Think the players themselves aren't used to such intense waiting and delays in decisions, imagine it's quite brutal in high pressure games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, manpe said:

Take it easy :) Had you seen those games with video replays, you would have understood the joke about celebrations. Think the players themselves aren't used to such intense waiting and delays in decisions.

I have n't seen videos.
So they make them wait for ratification by the high court you say ?
It need n't be so.
Things do n't have to change so much. The ref. points to the centre circle and that's it. Now if there is a buzz in his earphone then he recalls it.
As is we have seen many late disallowings - justified or otherwise. I remember Sevilla v. Benfica, the  Europa cup final three years ago. Benfica scored and as that happened I left the room and then I thought Benfica had won the match but then people told me they had n't of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, manpe said:

Take it easy :) Had you seen those games with video replays, you would have understood the joke about celebrations. Think the players themselves aren't used to such intense waiting and delays in decisions, imagine it's quite brutal in high pressure games.

It still has plenty of little details to be clean out. I like the direction, it will take a couple more years i think before it is going to be implemented in epl or ucl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, communicate said:

It still has plenty of little details to be clean out. I like the direction, it will take a couple more years i think before it is going to be implemented in epl or ucl

What details? How it works is pretty straightforward, I don't know what else there is to clean out that could take years. Ideally this would be in use in major competitions starting from next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it is dead time it's easy.
Suppose a defender gives us a corner. The ref says goal kick, Alonso raises his arms and says "hey it's a corner". But by the time the ball boy gives the ball back to the players the referee is notified by the studio and changes his mind. No hassle. This will happen if it is clear in the video that it was a corner.
When there is no dead time what happens ?
A player is brought down in the penalty area the ref. thinks it was fair challenge and waves play on. The defender makes a long Fabregas pass and a goal is scored at the other end. But the video shows it was a pen. Now what ?
In another situation if an attacker runs with the ball in open space and the linesman waves offside, but they see from the video it was n't offside then what happens ? Can we recall the players and ask them to take the exact same positions and resume ?

It can work like this in my opinion:
First in dead time all wrong decisions can be corrected - unless even the video can't help (unlikely but that too can happen).
Second if there is no dead time they have to decide. Who can blow the wihistle ? The man on the ground or the man in the studio ?

A case when even the video could not decide was the Greek cup semifinal of 2015.
It was AEK - Olympiakos 0-1. Is Jara using his hand ?
The one who speaks in this video below says he did n't, I can't decide.
There are some 3 or 4 videos from different angles. No definite answer. The view from behind the goal posts is of no help either. In that one Franco Jara's body is hidden by a flag pole at the crucial moment !
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, manpe said:

What details? How it works is pretty straightforward, I don't know what else there is to clean out that could take years. Ideally this would be in use in major competitions starting from next season.

Just watch Varane red card, did he trip Ali? Yes. Was it intentional? It is hard to say yes but because the there was contact, it was a red card. I think the var can only decide whether there is contact or not, he cannot say it was kinda not intentional. 

Oops just read in wiki, maybe he can but I am not sure still. I personally want VAR to be wrong a lot more so we can clean up everything before it is being used in meaningful game. 

I think think there was also a offside call against Chile. It was maybe cm, is that enough to say it is clear offside because you have to consider when the ball is being kicked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

When it is dead time it's easy.
Suppose a defender gives us a corner. The ref says goal kick, Alonso raises his arms and says "hey it's a corner". But by the time the ball boy gives the ball back to the players the referee is notified by the studio and changes his mind. No hassle. This will happen if it is clear in the video that it was a corner.
When there is no dead time what happens ?
A player is brought down in the penalty area the ref. thinks it was fair challenge and waves play on. The defender makes a long Fabregas pass and a goal is scored at the other end. But the video shows it was a pen. Now what ?
In another situation if an attacker runs with the ball in open space and the linesman waves offside, but they see from the video it was n't offside then what happens ? Can we recall the players and ask them to take the exact same positions and resume ?

It can work like this in my opinion:
First in dead time all wrong decisions can be corrected - unless even the video can't help (unlikely but that too can happen).
Second if there is no dead time they have to decide. Who can blow the wihistle ? The man on the ground or the man in the studio ?

A case when even the video could not decide was the Greek cup semifinal of 2015.
It was AEK - Olympiakos 0-1. Is Jara using his hand ?
The one who speaks in this video below says he did n't, I can't decide.
There are some 3 or 4 videos from different angles. No definite answer. The view from behind the goal posts is of no help either. In that one Franco Jara's body is hidden by a flag pole at the crucial moment !
 

 

If there is no definitive answer, they will just use the initial  referee decision. 

I am interested how far back can you check, can you check whether the ball go out of bound or not even though it happen like in your own half

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, communicate said:

If there is no definitive answer, they will just use the initial  referee decision. 

I am interested how far back can you check, can you check whether the ball go out of bound or not even though it happen like in your own half

If it's dead time you can reverse a bad decision.
What you say is interesting, because in my video the yellows complained for hand ball but also that the cross was from out of bounds.
The veteran ref who speaks in the video says it was no hand ball as well as no out of bounds.
Suppose the hand ball was obvious. Then because play is stopped it's no problem to give a free kick to the yellows.
Suppose now there is no hand ball but the out of bounds claim was true for the initial cross.
That really calls for rolling things back in time.
Maybe they can resort to this: Leave it up to the referee on the ground to resort to video help and if the video ref is definite about it then the referee on the ground accepts the verdict.
As things stand now the referee is not even allowed to consult the video (e.g. Peru v. Brazil).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, cosmicway said:

If it's dead time you can reverse a bad decision.
What you say is interesting, because in my video the yellows complained for hand ball but also that the cross was from out of bounds.
The veteran ref who speaks in the video says it was no hand ball as well as no out of bounds.
Suppose the hand ball was obvious. Then because play is stopped it's no problem to give a free kick to the yellows.
Suppose now there is no hand ball but the out of bounds claim was true for the initial cross.
That really calls for rolling things back in time.
Maybe they can resort to this: Leave it up to the referee on the ground to resort to video help and if the video ref is definite about it then the referee on the ground accepts the verdict.
As things stand now the referee is not even allowed to consult the video (e.g. Peru v. Brazil).

Yup I heard it is up to the var to give advice to the head ref. I read in wiki you can review goal from the moment you recover the ball. In your video, should the goal be overturned? , what happen if it occur deep in your own half during the build up.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.