FIFA are considering new football rules

OnlyTwoDaSilvas

Gullible
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
19,281
Location
The Mathews Bridge
30 min halves and clock stoppages sound good. Time wasting is a scourge on the game. That would combat it directly. Hard to believe the clock just rolls on the way it does no matter what. I don't watch any other clock sport where that happens. However, I'd perhaps maybe trialling 40 or 35 minutes first, rather than go straight to 30.

Kick ins sound bad. Just get rid of the foul throw rule. As long as you throw the ball in with two hands over your head, who cares if you have a foot off the ground, or if you release the ball too far infront of your head, or not far enough. If you want to drop the ball right infront of your feet, you should be able to, it's your possession. There is no advantage to be gained from a foul throw.

Unlimited subs would benefit the bigger teams with bigger squads. Does it also mean that players can go off and then come back on? I don't like that idea. I think it would make games disjointed tactically. Though speaking of subs, I'd rather they just happened, rather than the game stopping so they can applaud the crowd or whatever. You should be ready to come off and go on, like in rugby. Maybe that will be the case if they're unlimited, but it should be the case anyway.

Sin bins for a yellow don't sound great either, particularly as bookings are so inconsistently awarded anyway. You get players who don't get booked until their 4th or 5th foul, and then others who get one immediately for a nothing challenge. I don't trust referees to apply this effectively.
 

limerickcitykid

There once was a kid from Toronto...
Joined
Oct 3, 2012
Messages
13,595
Location
East end / Oot and aboot

Abraxas

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2021
Messages
640
Not really a fan of any of them. Not because it is change, but because I don't really see the problem they are trying to "solve" nor do I see any great benefits in the reasons being put forward as to why they're good.

A throw in being a kick in for example..why? What does it do? The throw in is just a simple mechanism of determining who has and likely keeps possession, what does kicking it in do to change that? They're not supposed to be corners either which would really bog the game down so I presume they mean along the floor, in which case, I ask again..why?

Unlimited subs. When has there ever been a football match where the entertainment has been improved by wholesale changes? Limited changes allows the manager to impact the game but also retains the importance of selection, pre-game tactics etc. This isn't a change that improves entertainment in my opinion, I hate friendly matches because as a spectacle they are diabolical and the subs are usually a big part.

The time and stopping the clock, potentially. I wouldn't mind seeing an experiment on that to see how it works. I don't immediately see what the improvement is but at the same time I don't see that it should hinder the game too much if it is play just as often.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
44,394
Location
Munich
30 min halves and clock stoppages sound good. Time wasting is a scourge on the game. That would combat it directly. Hard to believe the clock just rolls on the way it does no matter what. I don't watch any other clock sport where that happens. However, I'd perhaps maybe trialling 40 or 35 minutes first, rather than go straight to 30.

Kick ins sound bad. Just get rid of the foul throw rule. As long as you throw the ball in with two hands over your head, who cares if you have a foot off the ground, or if you release the ball too far infront of your head, or not far enough. If you want to drop the ball right infront of your feet, you should be able to, it's your possession. There is no advantage to be gained from a foul throw.

Unlimited subs would benefit the bigger teams with bigger squads. Does it also mean that players can go off and then come back on? I don't like that idea. I think it would make games disjointed tactically. Though speaking of subs, I'd rather they just happened, rather than the game stopping so they can applaud the crowd or whatever. You should be ready to come off and go on, like in rugby. Maybe that will be the case if they're unlimited, but it should be the case anyway.

Sin bins for a yellow don't sound great either, particularly as bookings are so inconsistently awarded anyway. You get players who don't get booked until their 4th or 5th foul, and then others who get one immediately for a nothing challenge. I don't trust referees to apply this effectively.
That would kill the players. I think that pretty much all the games last around 50-65 effective minutes per match. In the world cup, I think that the average was 32 minutes per half. I think some English team last year managed to finish the match only in 45 minutes.

Honestly, with the number of matches played (and apparently the young ones finding the games too long), 30 mins per half should be the upper bound. Probably go even lower and make the games shorter.
 

JebelSherif

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 31, 2021
Messages
152
Supports
Huddersfield Town
I'm sorry if this has been mentioned already, but it is something I certainly wrote about on another thread when I first joined: one obvious rule change would be to make the goals wider and higher.

As I said last time, the goals in football were based on an average man lay down x 4.5 I think (I'm not sure where the height came from). Now I bet an average man in 1875 was about 5ft 6" - 5ft 7" what is it now? nearer 6 foot I bet.

A re-calculation to account for 'evolution' would make a goal approx. 8m wide (up from 7.3) do that and make them proportionally higher to keep the same shape and try it out say in a pre-season mini-tournament. It would be interesting to see what would happen - ideally the players would not know, although a decent goalkeeper might spot it!

Would it make the games more exciting with more goals, or would teams change strategy to focus on defence ruining everything? One thing that might happen: it would end these sweeper-keepers playing as an extra-defender and that would also help the game too, it is supposed to be 10 outfield players vs another 10 with a goalie on each side, not as we have currently 11 vs 11 and a sort of rush-goalie system (especially the Scotland team!). But remember, rule changes have been tried in the past unsuccessfully. I remember the 'golden goal' was supposed to be great, but it made teams ultra cautious in extra-time and when golden goals did occur e.g. Euro 1996 it was a bit of an anti-climax.

I have another idea, this one is specifically to end penalty shoot-outs so great for England and Utd fans! Have the goals on some sort of mechanism so that 5 mins into extra-time they are widened say 15cm and telescopic side poles increase the height to keep the same proportion. Every five mins same thing happens again.

Now people will say this can't be applied to all football: school games, sunday league etc. but we have already crossed that line with VAR.
 
Last edited:

JB7

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
5,637
Location
TRA
Id be 100% for rolling substitutes with no stoppages to sub players, as long as there is 11 players on the pitch at a time who cares
I would suggest most people because it is football not basketball and is a completely ridiculous idea.
 

Moriarty

Full Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
17,046
Location
Reichenbach Falls
Not sure what to think about it. I don't recognize football anymore
https://www.insidesport.co/what-are...fa-are-considering-that-has-got-fans-furious/

30 minutes a half.
The game clock stops when the ball goes out of play.
Unlimited subs.
Throw-ins played with feet.
5 minute suspension for a yellow card.
I seem to remember - and I stand to be corrected - that when the NASL began in the USA, similar sweeping changes were proposed to the game there to make it more palatable to the American fan. Getting rid of the offside rule was another.
 

Random Task

WW Lynchpin
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
27,328
Location
Chester
VAR, the ESL, kick-ins, Jermaine Jenas. Urgh. Will it ever end? Not they've had their way it won't.

If, like me, you've had it up to here with the basardizing of our beloved game, then don't click this link and sign the petition
 

snk123

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
2,340
30 is too less. I'd want 35.

And also, if there are unlimited subs, then 40 min a half should be better because you can replace tiring legs easily.
 

Tony247

Full Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
5,213
30 mins break I agree with, unlimited subs absolutely no but 5 subs in modern day congested football should be reasonable i think. Sin bin like rule for yellow card is a high risk change. Players try to get other player on yellow all the time with their antics. That rule will encourage all kind of shenanigans.
 

padr81

Full Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
8,716
Supports
Man City
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.
The ball spends less than 30 minutes per half in play now so, no time wasting would use a lower percentage.

Covid has proven extra subs don't massively change games.

Kick Ins would lead to more in game action, goals and excitement.

Sin Bins are stupid but it would reduce tactical fouling.
 

Giant Midget

Aka - rooney_10119
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,512
Kick-ins sound awful. Every match would be a set-piece slog-fest, unless there's some restriction on the kick has to be a less than 10 yards pass or something.
 

Tragically Hip

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 24, 2016
Messages
71
I would suggest most people because it is football not basketball and is a completely ridiculous idea.
Basketball does not have rolling substitutes, but maybe you meant unlimited. As a basketball fan, unlimited subs would destroy momentum in football; the last two minutes of an NBA game can be excruciatingly drawn out when coaches start subbing offense for defense and vice versa.
 

UnofficialDevil

Anti Scottish
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
15,528
Location
I'm not anti Scottish, I just wanted Moyes out.
The International Football Association (FIFA) denied, in an official statement, today, Monday, that there is an intention to introduce any amendments to the football laws at the present time, against the background of what was recently circulated about making changes in the law, and trying them in the upcoming Youth World Cup.

FIFA confirmed that the news circulating about changing some football laws is incorrect, and confirms that there is no intention for the recent changes and they have not been discussed internally.



https://middleeast.in-24.com/sport/News/24545.html
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
2,914
Location
Wumming Gym
Yes, that would help remove the issue of endlessly interchanging the same players, but heavily rewards the richer clubs who inevitably have deeper squads, furthering the gap between the likes of City and Stoke, for example.
I think it would be crazy to have unlimited subs whereby the same player can come back on the pitch. It would become a farce.

You would have superstar players barely ever playing a full game of football. In fact it would end up with the best players just being used in bursts as and when needed.
 

SfcNervion

Full Member
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
720
Supports
Sevilla FC
Maybe I am old fashioned. But why is this game suppose to be changed for those who don't care for it in the first place? How about 'fixing' the game for us who actually follow it, for instance decrease the distance between big clubs and small clubs, or between the bigger leagues and small leagues.
 

jeff_goldblum

Full Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
3,116
Sin bins, unlimited subs, 30 minute halves and scrapping throw-ins wouldn't add anything, they'd just be gimmicks and/or ways to keep the advertisers/big clubs happy. Football's a great game as it is and there have been relatively few major rule changes throughout its history. Those which have been brought in have generally brought obvious benefits (allowing subs, bringing in the backpass rule). Making up new rules for the wrong reasons would set a bad precedent and cheapen the whole game.

Basically the only things i'd change about football is having someone off-pitch calculate extra time, automatic red cards for fouls where there is literally no attempt to play ball (think Chiellini on Saka) and maybe a rule to disincentive the little tactical fouls a lot of the top teams rely on. Maybe refs can give out yellow cards for soft fouls at their discretion to punish teams who get several players to commit not-quite-a-yellow fouls to disrupt the opposition. Oh, and re-write the rule about obstruction to make shielding the ball out of play with no intent to play it a foul.
 

Ole's screen

Full Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2020
Messages
281
Location
Right next to Ole’s seat
Supports
KC Chiefs
I'm sorry this is completely about having TV ad breaks in the stopped clocks and introducing time outs. This has nothing to do with appealing to youngsters. Does anyone seriously believe "young people" (I'm quite young and I hate this) think "oh look there's a stoppage in play, I'd much rather be watching an ad right now"?

Also I'm not of the the opinion that time wasting is such a big problem that it can't be fixed by just telling the ref to be strict about it and start handing out cards for it. It's a cash grab of a solution to a barely existent easy to fix problem that fundamentally changes the sport to allow people to run ads on TV. There is genuinely something valuable and important in the idea that when you're on the field - for 45 minutes - it is just the players. They have to cope with tactical changes through rushed messages and give their all while being out of breath and pushing it to the limit mentally as well and physically. This would be the ruin of the game.
 

Lagger

Full Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
1,023
Supports
FC Bayern
Let's not turn football into a bastardized US version of itself. Let's really not. I get it, greed is strong, and boy do I see the timeouts and commercial breaks after every attack coming, but let's really not do that.
 

wise_old_man

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
126
What is it with sports currently? F1 and now football tinkering with what works just to try to make their sports appeal to a younger generation who have the attention span of a goldfish and alienate their core audience.
Younger generation will become their "core audience" in the future.
 

Ueanuwug

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Messages
14
Not sure what to think about it. I don't recognize football anymore
https://www.insidesport.co/what-are...fa-are-considering-that-has-got-fans-furious/

30 minutes a half.
The game clock stops when the ball goes out of play.
Unlimited subs.
Throw-ins played with feet.
5 minute suspension for a yellow card.
The clocks top one is perfectly reasonable and about time to happen. Plus punishment for players who are pushing it regardless to have more regeneration time.

The other suggestions are horrible, though.

- Unlimited subs: This is not NBA or NHL. Despite the clocks top it would result in longer match days due to constant subbing. Additionally it would take away a good chunk of the endurance aspect that is important in football.
- Throw ins with feet: You have a lot less options with feet and as a result throw ins would become even weaker and less exciting than they already are.
- 5min suspension for yellow cards: Way too long. That's 1/12 of the entire game a player is missing. It would be fine with a reduced susepnsion time, though.
 

kouroux

45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
82,078
Location
Djibouti (La terre des braves)
The clocks top one is perfectly reasonable and about time to happen. Plus punishment for players who are pushing it regardless to have more regeneration time.

The other suggestions are horrible, though.

- Unlimited subs: This is not NBA or NHL. Despite the clocks top it would result in longer match days due to constant subbing. Additionally it would take away a good chunk of the endurance aspect that is important in football.
- Throw ins with feet: You have a lot less options with feet and as a result throw ins would become even weaker and less exciting than they already are.
- 5min suspension for yellow cards: Way too long. That's 1/12 of the entire game a player is missing. It would be fine with a reduced susepnsion time, though.
I feel like 5mins would have been ok if the clock changes weren't introduced.
 

Zlatan 7

We've got bush!
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
8,389
Don’t people and haven’t people liked football for decades because of what it is. Why the feck has it got to be changed so drastically.

The professional games seems intent on going further and further away from grassroots football, eventually Sunday league and lower divisions will be playing a different sport to the top leagues in the world and I hate that idea.
 

duffer

Sensible and not a complete jerk like most oppo's
Scout
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
42,012
Location
Chelsea (the saviours of football) fan.
Maybe I am old fashioned. But why is this game suppose to be changed for those who don't care for it in the first place? How about 'fixing' the game for us who actually follow it, for instance decrease the distance between big clubs and small clubs, or between the bigger leagues and small leagues.
You know the answer to that question, don't you?
 

dinostar77

Full Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2014
Messages
1,494
Younger generation will become their "core audience" in the future.
The younger generation who watch football and f1 for example will become their core audience. The younger audience who have the attention span of a goldfish, will probably always have an attention span of a goldfish. So why bend over backwards for the goldfish?
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
115,488
Location
Los Angeles

NicolaSacco

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 9, 2016
Messages
278
Supports
Ipswich
Beyond the fact that each of these are mindbendingly stupid ideas., why are they fiddling with the rules in the first place ? Makes no sense.
The only one of these that remotely makes sense is the 5 mins per yellow card- I think that’s long overdue. The system gif building up suspensions based on yellows over the course of the season is way too lax.

Throw ins changed to free kicks would be a huge change imho, it’s very difficult to see how that would pan out. You’d certainly see less fullbacks rushing to ‘save’ a corner given that a free kick from the touch line 10 - 20 yards up the pitch is potentially more dangerous than a corner.
30 minute halves would change the game beyond recognition and I hope to god they don’t go down that route.
 

kouroux

45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
82,078
Location
Djibouti (La terre des braves)
Beyond the fact that each of these are mindbendingly stupid ideas., why are they fiddling with the rules in the first place ? Makes no sense.
I think it's because of the Super League, specially the rule about reducing playing time. It was one of the things Agnelli presented as a necessary change as the attention span of the casual football viewer was really short
 

StBruno

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 23, 2021
Messages
13
To my mind, the reason we call it the Beautiful Game is because of its simplicity.
Leave it alone.
 

limerickcitykid

There once was a kid from Toronto...
Joined
Oct 3, 2012
Messages
13,595
Location
East end / Oot and aboot
I think it's because of the Super League, specially the rule about reducing playing time. It was one of the things Agnelli presented as a necessary change as the attention span of the casual football viewer was really short
The average play time with the ball in play is typically between 50 to 60 minutes. How would fixing it to 60 minutes reduce play time? It would increase it. So I’d say it has absolutely nothing to do with that. The idea has been suggested for years anyway, long before any super league.
 

kouroux

45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
82,078
Location
Djibouti (La terre des braves)
The average play time with the ball in play is typically between 50 to 60 minutes. How would fixing it to 60 minutes reduce play time? It would increase it. So I’d say it has absolutely nothing to do with that. The idea has been suggested for years anyway, long before any super league.
Yeah but I wasn't talking about the idea per se but more about the changes being made right now. The timing of it all is coincidental with those vultures. They wanna control the narratives concerning the big changes revolving around the game
 

abundance

Full Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
209
Supports
Inter
Anyone else think you shouldn't be able to make subs during throw ins?

To me a throw-in should be a quick restart of the game not a full stoppage.
In principle, everything in a game is quick restart, except penalty kicks and direct free kicks (where the referee measures up wall distance).
 
Last edited:

André Dominguez

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
4,414
Location
Lisbon
Supports
Benfica, Académica
I actually like the unlimited subs: teams would be playing always 100% effort, because they could rotate their players. No clock stop for needed for substitutions, though, and there would be a substituiton area where players would had to leave the pitch and enter it.

The 4th ref would control if both teams have a maximum of 11 players and if the players left the field in the substitution area.