Has the backpass rule come full circle?

[Marwood]

30 years ago the backpass rule was introduced with the aim of reducing ball with goalkeeper time and to generally speed up play.

But with goalkeepers now being so good with their feet and nearly all teams using them as a sweeper, are we now back to where we were 30 years ago? i.e. Too many backwards passes, too much involvement from the keeper.

 

[Spaghetti]

It probably has, although most keepers aren’t as good on the ball as they think they are, and this creates goalscoring opportunities in nearly every game

 

[Pexbo]

What we see today is a million miles better than backpasses. You can’t tackle a goalkeeper with the ball in his hands.

 

[Red the Bear]

You could still rush the keeper which creates opportunities/speeds up the play so it's nowhere near as bad, in the good old days you just kill the attack in it's entirety with some shithousing , not anymore.

 

[Chief123]

30 years ago the backpass rule was introduced with the aim of reducing ball with goalkeeper time and to generally speed up play.

But with goalkeepers now being so good with their feet and nearly all teams using them as a sweeper, are we now back to where we were 30 years ago? i.e. Too many backwards passes, too much involvement from the keeper.

Even though Gks are better with their feet and are happy to receive the ball I still think it’s completely different to the old back pass. Simply because the opposition can press high and be rewarded for it as the GK can’t pick the ball up. Opposition can plan and target these situations.

When the GK could pick it up back in the day, it was just exposing the game to pure time wasting abuse.

 

[Josh 76]

What we see today is a million miles better than backpasses. You can’t tackle a goalkeeper with the ball in his hands.

This.

What a strange thread!

 

[Marwood]

What we see today is a million miles better than backpasses. You can’t tackle a goalkeeper with the ball in his hands.

Yeah good point.

There is more risk in the backpass now.

But how often do we actually see goalkeeprs get tackled relative to how many backpasses there? Seems very low to me.

Impossible to find out I guess but with managers now intentionally using goalkeepers as a kind of sweeper are we seeing even more backpasses now than we saw 30 years ago?

 

[Mb194dc]

Back pass is not a big issue. Other recent law changes are definitely damaging the spectacle though.

 

[Shane88]

I don't even know how the sport survived with a backpass rule.

 

[Marwood]

Even though Gks are better with their feet and are happy to receive the ball I still think it’s completely different to the old back pass. Simply because the opposition can press high and be rewarded for it as the GK can’t pick the ball up. Opposition can plan and target these situations.

When the GK could pick it up back in the day, it was just exposing the game to pure time wasting abuse.

True its possible to pinch the ball from the goalkeeper. There is a bit more danger to a backpasd.

But the aim of the rule was to speed up play.

Now pretty much all teams go back to the keeper so often, has the aim of the rule now been lost?

 

[moses]

Maybe in theory but in reality no, the back pass to the keeper was a fecking disaster in terms of the flow of the game.

 

[Chief123]

True its possible to pinch the ball from the goalkeeper. There is a bit more danger to a backpasd.

But the aim of the rule was to speed up play.

Now pretty much all teams go back to the keeper so often, has the aim of the rule now been lost?

I wouldn’t say people are passing back to waste time. It’s a very conscious effort by most teams to play out from the back and along the floor. That now involves the Gks getting involved in the build up while the defence provide as much width as possible.

Like I mentioned it’s an opportunity for opposition to deploy a very high line and press high up the pitch if the opponent repeatedly goes back to the GK. There’s no long term gain in passing to GK without any intended progression. You are jus taking a risk with very little reward in that case.

 

[Marwood]

I don't even know how the sport survived with a backpass rule.

It was a brilliant rule. A massive success in speeding up play and reducing the role of the keeper. After all who wants to see the keeper on the ball?

But then keepers improved with their feet and managers started to use the keepers to maintain control.

Now we've got goalkeepers having as many touches as midfielders.

I think the rule no longer achieves its aim.

 

[Marwood]

I wouldn’t say people are passing back to waste time. It’s a very conscious effort by most teams to play out from the back and along the floor. That now involves the Gks getting involved in the build up while the defence provide as much width as possible.

Like I mentioned it’s an opportunity for opposition to deploy a very high line and press high up the pitch if the opponent repeatedly goes back to the GK. There’s no long term gain in passing to GK without any intended progression. You are jus taking a risk with very little reward in that case.

Agree I don't think that's the intention but I don't think there's any doubt it slows the game down and ultimately does waste time. Especially compared to the period when the rule was introduced. Keepers then didn't want to know and would launch it forwards. Which is exactly what the rule intended.

Now we see the back four and the keeper pass it between themselves over and over, a much slower version of football than the immediate post rule change period.

I wonder how many times a goalkeeper touched the ball in the 80's compared to now.

 

[Chief123]

Agree I don't think that's the intention but I don't think there's any doubt it slows the game down and ultimately does wastw time.

I don't think anybody pays to watch the back four and the keeper pass it between themselves over and over.

I wonder how many times a goalkeeper touched the ball in the 80's compared to now.

We see the ball played back to the GK in the premier league all the time and I never feel a sense of the game slowing down or time being wasted.

I think it may be feeling like that in this World Cup just because of how slow paced and laboured a lot of the games are turning out to be. I do think the lack of preparation time and coming off the back of an extremely hectic first half of season is a big factor in the lethargy we’re seeing in a lot of teams.

 

[Samid]

Next step is implementing an actual backpass rule where you can't pass it to your own half if you have possession in the opposition's half.

 

[711]

The current back-pass rule is better than no back-pass rule.

If people think more needs doing one could restrict the goalie's options, say he's only allowed two touches, or even one. Would swing the advantage a bit to an attacker charging the keeper down, and make the defenders less likely to use him.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Next step is implementing an actual backpass rule where you can't pass it to your own half if you have possession in the opposition's half.

You could go softer.

If you pass back to your goalkeeper, he can’t pass it inside his own half.

That makes a backpass a potential loss of possession and massively disincentivises it.

 

[Marwood]

Maybe in theory but in reality no, the back pass to the keeper was a fecking disaster in terms of the flow of the game.

But I'm talking about the initial impact of the rule, which was brilliant, compared to today. Which has gone back to massive involvement from the keeper. So many games now have no flow to them at all.

We see the ball played back to the GK in the premier league all the time and I never feel a sense of the game slowing down or time being wasted.

I think it may be feeling like that in this World Cup just because of how slow paced and laboured a lot of the games are turning out to be. I do think the lack of preparation time and coming off the back of an extremely hectic first half of season is a big factor in the lethargy we’re seeing in a lot of teams.

Really?

I always feel I'm slightly wasting life watching a back four and goalkeeper shuffle the ball between them over and over.

Even with City, the best at it, I feel a frustration in the least talented players in the team getting so much of the ball.

After the rule was introduced ,for the first 20 years, it worked a treat. Keepers didn't want the ball, defenders didn't want to give them the ball.

As I say I think its now come full circle. Goalkeepers want to get involved, defenders and midfielders more inclined than ever it seems to go backwards.

 

[moses]

I always feel I'm slightly wasting life watching a back four and goalkeeper shuffle the ball between them over and over.

Still, they would do that before too, until the other team were forced to press, then the keeper would pick it up. The team would eventually retreat, he'd drop it, roll it forward and whack it. Liverpool and Jack Charlton's Ireland were total cnuts for it.

 

[Marwood]

Still, they would do that before too, until the other team were forced to press, then the keeper would pick it up. The team would eventually retreat, he'd drop it, roll it forward and whack it. Liverpool and Jack Charlton's Ireland were total cnuts for it.

But my point is are we not roughly not back there now. It's not exactly the same, the goalkeeper won't whack it forwards. But he will make another square pass to the centre back whose dropped so much he's sometimes deeper than the keeper.

Although done in a different fashion we are back to the pre rule era of the ball being with the goalkeeper too much.

As an example, when City battered us in that first half this season, their keeper had the ball more than any of our outfield players.

Now I'm not talking about how effective it is or what's the best strategy to win a game. Nor do I think City fans would care one bit cos they won.

But when my team is so incredibly dominant in a 45 min period, do I want to see he the keeper with the ball so much?

I don't think so, which is what the rule initially stopped with great success.

Now the rule change has been flipped on its head and they're in possession more than ever it feels.

 

[Stookie]

Still, they would do that before too, until the other team were forced to press, then the keeper would pick it up. The team would eventually retreat, he'd drop it, roll it forward and whack it. Liverpool and Jack Charlton's Ireland were total cnuts for it.

Liverpool especially. It was boring as feck.

 

[moses]

But my point is are we not roughly not back there now. It's not exactly the same, the goalkeeper won't whack it forwards. But he will make another square pass to the centre back whose dropped so much he's sometimes deeper than the keeper.

Although done in a different fashion we are back to the pre rule era of the ball being with the goalkeeper too much.

As an example, when City battered us in that first half this season, their keeper had the ball more than any of our outfield players.

Now I'm not talking about how effective it is or what's the best strategy to win a game. Nor do I think City fans would care one bit cos they won.

But when my team is so incredibly dominant in a 45 min period, do I want to see he the keeper with the ball so much?

I don't think so, which is what the rule initially stopped with great success.

Now the rule change has been flipped on its head and they're in possession more than ever it feels.

Aye, we do see the ball with the keeper more than any time since the rule came in. But the ball is still in play and the press opens up space. Previously everyone was in the third with high defensive lines. It was tumescent.

 

[moses]

Liverpool especially. It was boring as feck.

They could play too.

Ireland wasted so much time against better opposition, and they employed an insane full court press out of possession so used the keeper for mid game recuperation.

 

[Ibi Dreams]

Before the backpass rule was there anything stopping the team ahead from just passing it between defender and goalkeeper indefinitely? Other than the opposition team pressing the defenders?

 

[Vidyoyo]

Before the backpass rule was there anything stopping the team ahead from just passing it between defender and goalkeeper indefinitely? Other than the opposition team pressing the defenders?

Fear of a riot. You'd never get that these days sadly

 

[moses]

Before the backpass rule was there anything stopping the team ahead from just passing it between defender and goalkeeper indefinitely? Other than the opposition team pressing the defenders?

Nope. Sonetimes they would pretend to be doing a long punt, only for a centre back to run back avd do a one two back to the keeper to kill more time, depending on how willing the other team was to press. It was the best rule change in any sport ever I reckon.

 

[Sandikan]

I don't even know how the sport survived with a backpass rule.

It just looks utterly mad watching old games doesn't it.

Pass it round the back 4, to the keeper. Picks it up, To the back 4 , back to the keeper etc.

 

[Marwood]

It just looks utterly mad watching old games doesn't it.

Pass it round the back 4, to the keeper. Picks it up, To the back 4 , back to the keeper etc.

Are we not seeing that now? Minus the picking it up bit of course.

 

[Mas Risky]

You raised an interesting point, OP, but as it is right now, no change is needed. In the future, I can imagine the time for goalkeeper handling the ball (both by hand or feet) will be reduced or you can't pass to goalkeeper in a penalty box.

 

[Tyrion]

What we see today is a million miles better than backpasses. You can’t tackle a goalkeeper with the ball in his hands.

That's the big difference for me. The goalie picking it up basically stops the game because no-one can tackle. The goalie being passed to is actually pretty risky and can be entertaining when a goalie tries to play their way out.

 

[nygaard]

Much better to see back passes than a million hoofed balls of the 80s

 

[justsomebloke]

What we see today is a million miles better than backpasses. You can’t tackle a goalkeeper with the ball in his hands.

This. If anyone thinks what we see now is problematic time-wasting, then they probably didn't watch football before the backpass rule was introduced. Or have suppressed the painful memories.

 

[justsomebloke]

Are we not seeing that now? Minus the picking it up bit of course.

Precisely. Minus the picking it up bit. Which a) stops play, and b) can easily be made to take 20 seconds, every time.

 

[Marwood]

Precisely. Minus the picking it up bit. Which a) stops play, and b) can easily be made to take 20 seconds, every time.

But the current trend of working it back to the keeper over and over pretty much stops play. Or at least really slows it down.

I don't know for sure bit whilst pre rule keepers could pick it up I bet they now have way more touches on average.

The end result is the same. The ball with the keeper for too much in terms of entertainment. Opposite intention of the rule change.

 

[Nick7]

Are we not seeing that now? Minus the picking it up bit of course.

No, we really are not.

 

[SilentWitness]

No way. We (Everton) are absolutely guilty of time wasting with Pickford who will take any opportunity he can to hold onto the ball. I can't imagine how bad it would be if there was no backpass rule. It's a great rule and doesn't need any changes to it.

 

[Gio]

But the current trend of working it back to the keeper over and over pretty much stops play. Or at least really slows it down.

I don't know for sure bit whilst pre rule keepers could pick it up I bet they now have way more touches on average.

The end result is the same. The ball with the keeper for too much in terms of entertainment. Opposite intention of the rule change.

I'm not sure I agree. When the keeper has the ball at his feet, the game isn't necessarily slowed down. Majority of teams will press a goal kick, or when the keeper has the ball, because they have the opportunity to win it back in a dangerous area. What happens next is high-tempo either way, be it a turnover in the attacking third or playing-through-the-press which opens up the entire pitch and sees a high-pace attack. That is a good thing and if it didn't exist we'd likely see more teams sitting in, which would be coutner-productive. And if a team have to resort to going back to the keeper from the half-way line, it's basically an admission that their technique and build-up shape isn't good enough and they have to go back to the keeper who will launch it and the ball will turn over again.

 

[justsomebloke]

But the current trend of working it back to the keeper over and over pretty much stops play. Or at least really slows it down.

I don't know for sure bit whilst pre rule keepers could pick it up I bet they now have way more touches on average.

The end result is the same. The ball with the keeper for too much in terms of entertainment. Opposite intention of the rule change.

No. The end result is not remotely the same. Before the pass-back rule you could time-waste in a way and to an extent that simply isn't possible today. There was much more of it, it went on for much longer, and it was much, much easier.

Frankly I don't even see that there's much of a problem at all currently. Put up a high press with about 3 players (which is probably what you're doing anyway, if the clock is running down and the match situation is that the other team benefits from wasting time), and suddenly doing that is difficult and dangerous. You're much better off moving the ball around to different areas where's it's not so risky if you lose it.

 

[Zehner]

But the current trend of working it back to the keeper over and over pretty much stops play. Or at least really slows it down.

I don't know for sure bit whilst pre rule keepers could pick it up I bet they now have way more touches on average.

The end result is the same. The ball with the keeper for too much in terms of entertainment. Opposite intention of the rule change.

I think it is entertaining when teams integrate the keeper in their build up play. I don't want teams to push forward all the time. Prefer sophisticated football over kick'n'rush.