FIFA are considering new football rules

thundercats

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 14, 2021
Messages
125
Stuff I like to see changed

- stopping the clock at injuries, free kicks, throw ins so time wasting makes no more sense. It should be the end of play acting.
- red carded players should be replaced by another player. 10 vs 11 is too much of a disadvantage and it changes the game too much. Exciting games often get killed because of one rash tackle.
- to discourage players making horrible tackles, extend the suspension to 5 games
- no more passes to the keeper from own half, this encourages players to make runs and be available to receive a pass and it ups the tempo

and now for the big bomb, I want the end of penalties. They are always a cheap way to win a game, there is no consistency in what is a penalty and what is not and it completely eradicates diving.
I propose a fault in the penalty area to be awarded with for example a penalty corner like hockey, another possibility is just a shot at goal with a wall from where the fault was made. Basically anything that makes it harder to score a goal. Players get cheap penalties all the time and it is irritating. Another idea is if a player makes a fault in the area he gets an immediate red card and gets replaced by a teammate. This should result into no more foul play and diving
 

largelyworried

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2021
Messages
339
These feel like changes for changes sake. I don’t see any major problems being solved by these. So why bother? Novelty value?
 

lynchie

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
6,972
The timekeeping ones, taken together, seem like good ideas to stop the likes of Burnley time wasting from 5 minutes in.

Unlimited subs is no good, although I would like to see goalkeeper substitutions counted separately from outfield players. Having you goalie injured and having to stick a right back in net when you're out of subs is stupid.

Kick ins I don't really get. Would like to see a trial to understand how it works. It would need specific rules - no run ups, opposition have to be 5 yards away, etc.
 

ROFLUTION

Full Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
4,972
Location
Denmark
I hate FIFA's mindset.

And feck you for bringing VAR
 

Alex99

Rehab's Pete Doherty
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
13,011
Location
Barry
How is unlimited subs a good idea? Basically any team with a great squad immediately has an even bigger advantage than they already had.
That, and any team leading late is going to abuse it to disrupt the flow of the game.
 

Pink Moon

Full Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
7,673
Location
Glasgow
Supports
Celtic
The only one I don't hate is the clock stopping. The rest would be an absolute disaster.
 

FatTails

Full Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2021
Messages
552
Yes please, to the 30 mins and proper stoppages. It will help reduce time wasting, and make arbitrary added time a thing of the past.

Not sure about the rest.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
8,716
Supports
Man City

zkap

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Messages
151
Supports
Barça
What pauses would occur under a stopped clock system that wouldn't occur under the current system?

I can see how the stopped clock would reduce stoppages, as you could no longer waste time by feigning injury. But I can't for the life of me see how it would create "constant pauses" that don't already exist.
The pauses we have would remain obviously, but with less pressure to continue play immediately as you'd remove the danger of being booked for wasting time. This would evolve into longer pauses, like water breaks, time-outs etc., as the first step would be to normalize the idea of the clock being stopped. That's the prerequisite, because without that you can't have opportunities to insert adverts during a game unless you're willing to miss play. If the stopped clock becomes normal, next up will be something else that takes advantage of that, like a team time-out and that's when ads kick in. I think the main thing is to introduce a change that ushers in the stopped clock, and things will develop from there. It's what other sports have, it's not like I'm making it up.

The way you can be sure this will happen is if you consider what is being gained by this. If you have a 45 min half with no stopped clock and a 30 min half with the clock stopped, and that comes to about the same amount of time overall, what is the actual difference then? TV networks will alot approximately the same amount of time, football will be played approximately the same amount of time, the only difference is that you'd have times when the clock isn't ticking. Sure, you can look for the impact in reduced time-wasting, but how is that not immediately solvable by strict refereeing? If there is a reason why we need a rule change to eradicate time-wasting, tell me because I'm missing it. And what is the other benefit to the sport other than eradicating time-wasting by stopping the clock?
 

Poborsky's hair

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
780
Supports
Bohemians 1905
some radical changes. Playing throw in with your feet is great for futsal but in footy it would make it pretty much a freekick anytime closer to players goal, which would even further slowed the game down..

5 min suspension for a yellow would be interesting, would make the teams, go a gear up to exploit that rule and take the advantage. I'd expect more slowing down though so that 30 minute clear time would have to be implemented. Not sure how much that was but I 've read somewhere football is really played only for 30 minutes of clear time anyway, because of all the time wasting and situation to play the ball in.

Unlimited subs is a quite a nonsense that would take all the fun from tactics and preparation for the game. Would add more variation though, I can see it would only work when it was still somehow limited by halves and actual number of subs. Extra subs for OT games makes total sense and not sure why it is not implemented already, if it hasnt been through covid, not sure they changesd it yet tbh.

I would add my favourite rule of penalties if the game is level though, or perhaps even a short extra time before that, like it's ice hockey, makes every game more fun, and spliting the points 2 for winner in over time and in penalties and 1 to a loser after that time would definitely make the game more competeing and top teams or anyteams who would need to act much quicker and attack sooner before losing 1 or possibly two points.

Loved it when we as kids always took penalties after every competitive games, just for the training..
 

Wednesday at Stoke

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
18,084
Location
København
Supports
Time Travel
I find the idea of shorter clocks and pausing when not in play quite interesting. They should trial it in some meaningless competition like the charity shield to see how it goes.
 

choccy77

Full Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
1,975
Hate the idea of unlimited subs
5 subs a game

45 minutes stop time or 40 minutes minimum stop time no need for less.

Still prefer throw in's but could make things interesting

Re the yellow cards, only works if ref gets it 100% correct
 

RedDevilRoshi

Full Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2017
Messages
6,823
30 minutes a half - Interesting but I personally prefer the 90 mins.

The game clock stops when the ball goes out of play - This is the one I definitely want to see implemented out of the lot. Cuts out the time-wasting tactics.

Unlimited subs - Seem this during project restart and I can see all the bigger clubs pushing for it. Personally I’m not a big fan of it.

Throw-ins played with feet - This is essentially a free-kick or even a corner-kick if the ball went out of play near the corner flag. No thanks, just stick with throw-ins.

5 minute suspension for a yellow card - On the fence about this one. Right now, not a fan of this but opinion may change if seen it trialled.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
8,716
Supports
Man City
5 subs a game

45 minutes stop time or 40 minutes minimum stop time no need for less.

Still prefer throw in's but could make things interesting

Re the yellow cards, only works if ref gets it 100% correct
Of course there is, the ball spends 50-55 minutes in play currently and that's when 2 top teams play.
 

choccy77

Full Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
1,975
Of course there is, the ball spends 50-55 minutes in play currently and that's when 2 top teams play.
No, you misunderstand. 45 minutes stop time will mean 45 minutes of football. As per what it should be.

That's why no need to reduce it. or at worst 40 minutes stop time.

That will be satisfactory
 

PSV

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 26, 2014
Messages
126
Suggested:
30 minutes a half
+ The game clock stops when the ball goes out of play:
- These aren't happening individually, so grouping them. Not a terrible idea.
- 20 x 3 could also be decent, if there's a change to satisfy the money I can see it moving towards either more periods or timeouts and prefer the first one.

Unlimited subs.
- Kind of like this, but I would love it to be like handball where you don't really spend any time doing subs.
- Could lead to more games per season as players would be more rested and squads being used more.
- This also allows players with "injuries" (emphasis on the quotation marks) to be treated on the sidelines with a new player being brought on.

Throw-ins played with feet.
Why replace one thing with the other? How about just letting players use any method they want to put the ball back into play? Throw it like a goalie? Go for it.

5 minute suspension for a yellow card.
I like this idea, but have a very clear bar set on what a yellow card offense is before implementing because at times it seems completely based on the referee.

An idea not mentioned that I would also love is if they added some type of overtime so that games always had a winner with a 3/2/1/0pts. system (3/0 regular time, 2/1 overtime).
It could be as easy as just adding penalties at the end of regular time, or they could try some type of golden goal (15 mins?) followed by penalties.
Ice hockey does it, basketball does it. Let's make it happen.
 

Dancfc

Full Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
4,720
Supports
Chelsea

Lebo

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 6, 2016
Messages
182
Think the stopping the clock and 30 min halves are not bad ideas at all, though perhaps go down to 40 minutes first.

Not sure I get the point of changing throw-ins?

Unlimited subs is a terrible idea and will make the gap between the top teams and those below them even bigger. Absolutely ridiculous.

5 minute suspension for a yellow seems too big of a jump but I do think there should be something like this for cynical fouls where there is literally no intention whatsoever to play football.
That’s the one I’ll definitely support. Most throw ins end up with he opposition team to an extent that it doesn’t seem to matter much who gets it at some point.
 

Beans

Full Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
744
Location
Midwest, USA
How about refs start giving out cards for time wasting? I'd at least try that before changing the game so fundamentally.
 

paulscholes18

Full Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
16,467
So would a throw-in would become a free kick? Awful idea
Maybe 40 minutes with a stop clock but 30 is way to short for me
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
8,716
Supports
Man City
No, you misunderstand. 45 minutes stop time will mean 45 minutes of football. As per what it should be.

That's why no need to reduce it. or at worst 40 minutes stop time.

That will be satisfactory
I understand but having hte ball in play for 80 minutes would be asking the players to put in and extra half hour approx to what they do now. The average 90 minute match has the ball in play for 50-55 minutes so having the ball in play for 45 minute per half would mean the average match (with similar stoppages) would take nearly 3 hours real time.
 

choccy77

Full Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
1,975
I understand but having hte ball in play for 80 minutes would be asking the players to put in and extra half hour approx to what they do now. The average 90 minute match has the ball in play for 50-55 minutes so having the ball in play for 45 minute per half would mean the average match (with similar stoppages) would take nearly 3 hours real time.
Ah I get ya.

As a former Hockey (Ice) player i totally understand this.
 

World Game

Full Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2014
Messages
705
Location
Australia
30 minutes a half.
The game clock stops when the ball goes out of play.

- enjoy the missing 30 minutes filled with commercial breaks during pauses
- rewards in play time wasting (e.g bringing it to the corner) because now your actions are taking up a greater percentage of the total time

Unlimited subs.
- Increases the gap between rich and poor teams
- An advantage of being the attacking team is that you keep the ball and stretch/tire out the opposition's defence. This will no longer be the case and help out defensive teams.

Throw-ins played with feet.
-So basically throw-ins become indirect free kicks/corners.
-Attacking team would wait for their players to get in the box like a set piece further slowing the game down.

5 minute suspension for a yellow card.
-
Makes referees even more influential in deciding a match's result.
- There are enough bad referees out there, their bad decisions shouldn't be given even more power.
- The team playing 11v10 or 11v9 would just decide to park the bus/waste time until their player is back.
 

Baneofthegame

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
1,252
They should bring in the rule in basketball where you have 5 seconds to inbound the ball or you turn it over to the opposition.

30 minute half’s I could also get behind, unlimited subs would ruin the flow of the game in my opinion.
 

Leanshig

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
89
Location
Cork
Probably been said, but stopping the clock I'm all for. It's the most needed change of the whole lot. If you get 4 minutes of added time 2 minutes is just time wasting and you never get the right amount.
 

rpitroda

Full Member
Joined
May 9, 2013
Messages
15,290
Location
Los Pollos Hermanos...
Principally I agree with them except:

- Unlimited subs - this would ruin flows of the game and would benefit teams with big squads and budgets. Having said that, increasing from 3 to say 5 wouldn’t necessarily be bad.
- 5 minute suspension for yellow cards. I think that this should be something in between a yellow and red card, an “orange” card, if you like.

Otherwise, stopping the clock when it goes out/play stops I think is much needed to end time wasting. Throw ins becoming pass ins, meh I’m indifferent to that.
 

Longshanks

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
380
Stopping the clock and 30 min of playing time seems sensible. The only problem is it would surely spell the end of quick free kicks and throw ins which gives and advantage for the defending team always having time to re-set when the ball goes out of play.

Unlimited subs is a horrible idea, 3/4 is enough with a concussion sub aswell. The advantage for rich clubs would be ridiculous in a unlimited sub world.

Not sure why kick ins are being suggested? Seems like a daft idea nothing really wrong with throw ins is there.
 

KirkDuyt

Full Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2015
Messages
15,540
Location
Dutchland
Supports
Feyenoord
Combating the blight that is time wasting is a fantastic idea. I'm curious to see what the actual time of a half would be with 30 minutes of pure playing time though. I expect it would be a lot longer than it is now.

The rest of the suggestions are a bit ehh. Throw ins seem fine to me. With a kick in a high throw in would be just as good as a corner, so what's the point in corners then. Unlimited subs can feck right off, rich clubs have enough advantages as it is. No need to give them the ability to switch between 4 world class strikers in a single game.
The yellow and red card system seems fine to me, no need for a sin bin.
 

Reiver

Full Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
1,740
Location
Near Glasgow
I'm definitely in favour of the clock stopping when the ball isn't in play. Should essentially stop all time wasting. I don't know if that means halves should be reduced to 30 minutes though? I'm sure it's been looked at and that's what they expect footballers to be able to manage.
 

Hughes35

Full Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2014
Messages
1,032
More changes to slowly make the game worse and worse.... Stopping the clock is the only good idea.

Unlimited subs would an absolute disaster. Kick ins would probably be rubbish too as throw ins would become like free kicks.... Too many set pieces.
 

Cloud7

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
7,671
I remember reading somewhere that they only introduced the standard way of doing a throw-in because there used to be a player who was also a top bowler in cricket. The guy could arrow it over arm pretty much the length of the pitch.
:lol:
 

JebelSherif

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 31, 2021
Messages
152
Supports
Huddersfield Town
They're trying to Americanize the game, which should come as a surprise to no one as 3 of the biggest clubs in English football (United, Liverpool and Arsenal) happen to be owned by Americans. This wreaks of their influence.
Also unsurprising as the 2026 World Cup is to be held in that well know football (or should I say "soccer") mad location of the USA, Canada and Mexico - ok, Mexico I will accept! But the others, not so much...

See: https://www.football365.com/news/world-cup-2026-goes-to-us-canada-and-mexico