• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

IFAB Football Reforms

Would these new proposals benefit fotbal?

  • No, they crazyyyyyy

    Votes: 18 85.7%
  • Yeah, i would like the football matches to be shorter

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Cheese on Toast

    Votes: 3 14.3%

  • Total voters
    21
Status
Not open for further replies.

toffeejack

Player Valuation: £100m
http://www.bbc.co.uk/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.

Read the full strategy document here

Where have these proposals come from?
The ideas have been put forward to Ifab by stakeholders in the game to tackle "on-field issues" and form part of what it calls its "Play Fair strategy", which has three aims of:

  • improving player behaviour and increasing respect
  • increasing playing time
  • increasing fairness and attractiveness
Part of the problem the new document highlights is that a 90-minute match has fewer than 60 minutes of playing time because of stoppages and time-wasting.

Which plans need no law changes?
The document has put forward a number of radical ideas for discussion, but suggests some proposals can be implemented immediately without the need for law changes.

Most of these apply to trying to combat time-wasting. The document says match officials should be stricter on the rule which allows keepers to hold the ball for six seconds and be more stringent when calculating additional time.

Additionally, it suggests match officials stop 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
  • from asking an injured player if he requires treatment to play restarting
  • from the referee showing a yellow or red card to play resuming
  • from the signal of a substitution to play restarting
  • from a referee starting to pace a free-kick to when it is taken
Which plans are ready for testing?
Some of the proposals are already being tested. The idea of only allowing captains to speak to referees - to prevent match officials being mobbed - will be trialled at this summer's Confederations Cup, which starts on Saturday.

Another proposal involves changing the order of kick-taking in penalty shoot-outs, known as 'ABBA'. It is similar to a tie-break in tennis, with team A taking the first kick, then team B taking two, then team A taking two. That is a change from the traditional 'team A, team B, team A, team B' pattern.

New suggestions also include players who are being substituted leaving at the closest part of the touchline to them instead of at the halfway line.

Which ideas are up for discussion?
This is where it gets interesting. One of the proposals would allow being able to dribble straight from a free-kick to "encourage attacking play as the player who is fouled can stop the ball and then immediately continue their dribble/attacking move". Other measures include:

  • passing to yourself at a free-kick, corner and goal-kick
  • a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee's watch
  • allowing the goal-kick to be taken even if the ball is moving
  • a goal-kick being taken on the same side that the ball went out on
  • a "clearer and more consistent definition" of handball
  • a player who scores a goal or stops a goal with his hands gets a red card
  • a keeper who handles a backpass or throw-in from a team-mate concedes a penalty
  • the referee can award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line
  • referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play
  • a penalty kick is either scored or missed/saved and players cannot follow up to score to stop encroachment into the penalty area
Who has come up with these proposals?
Ifab is made up of Fifa and the four British home football associations - of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - and is responsible for making the final decision on law changes.

Former English referee David Elleray is Ifab's technical director and has overseen the document.

"Referees, players, coaches and fans all agree that improving player behaviour and respect for all participants and especially match officials, increasing playing time and the game's fairness and attractiveness must be football's main priority," he said.

The next stage would involve the ideas being discussed at various meetings before decisions are taken on whether to develop them further or discard them.
 

Just find this all a bit crazy myself, why on earth would they cut games to 60 minutes because of time-wasting? I've constantly banged the drum on stopping the clock which is a good idea ... but to then cut a game by a third, what?

They'd have to scrap nearly every record in history.

Not a big fan of being able to dribble from free kicks. Stopping the play from missed pens is a bit of a thinker, not sure on that one.

But they must be commended for looking into the negative aspects of football and trying to improve it, just watched the first confed cup game and didn't realise they'd brought in the rule that only the captain can speak to the referee, that's a no brainer for me, must be implemented.

  • a player who scores a goal or stops a goal with his hands gets a red card
that's interesting, but that's all about interpretation as to what's intentional or not.
  • the referee can award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line
I like this idea, similar to a penalty try in rugby, think it's a brilliant idea actually. With hopefully the player still being sent off as well as a consequence.
 
So they're saying, currently out of 90 mins, only 60 minutes is actually played...... And their solution to this is to play 2 halves of 30 mins (with clock stopped), meaning actual playing time would still be 60 mins..... Christ, these guys are getting paid a fortune and are all idiots or simply have no interest in reforming the game for the better of the sport, so just come up with nonsense like this....
 
So they're saying, currently out of 90 mins, only 60 minutes is actually played...... And their solution to this is to play 2 halves of 30 mins (with clock stopped), meaning actual playing time would still be 60 mins..... Christ, these guys are getting paid a fortune and are all idiots or simply have no interest in reforming the game for the better of the sport, so just come up with nonsense like this....
See the logic of 30mins playing time sort of, gets rid of injury time (contentious depending on who's winning), the kicking the ball to yourself thing is nuts - Sam Chegdzoy will be spinning in his grave.
Bit meh so dairy based product delicately heated atop a wheat based product for me.
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40311889

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.

Awful idea.....

If you are a fan of the attacking team, you cheer and get excited when a penalty is given. But that excitement can quickly turn to frustration when the penalty is saved, only for somebody else to run in and smash home the rebound. Happy again :-)

Or maybe vice versa.....you get angry because a controversial penalty has been given against your team... your keeper saves it and justice has been served. Everyone is instantly happy...but only for a split second until an opponent responds the quickest to tap home the rebound. Frustration again. These quick turns of emotion contribute to making the game so enjoyable.

Remember the last minute of the Watford v Leicester play-off match a few years ago? With this rule, this would never have happened....
 
Awful idea.....

If you are a fan of the attacking team, you cheer and get excited when a penalty is given. But that excitement can quickly turn to frustration when the penalty is saved, only for somebody else to run in and smash home the rebound. Happy again :)

Or maybe vice versa.....you get angry because a controversial penalty has been given against your team... your keeper saves it and justice has been served. Everyone is instantly happy...but only for a split second until an opponent responds the quickest to tap home the rebound. Frustration again. These quick turns of emotion contribute to making the game so enjoyable.

Remember the last minute of the Watford v Leicester play-off match a few years ago? With this rule, this would never have happened....

Yeah agreed, really don't see the reasoning for changing that.

  • passing to yourself at a free-kick, corner and goal-kick
I like this. A free kick is awarded when one team in possession during free play are fouled by the other team, what purpose does not being able to play the ball twice serve? You can do so in free play so should be able to do so froma dead ball.
  • a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee's watch
Good idea.
  • allowing the goal-kick to be taken even if the ball is moving
Why not, the ball having to be stationary seems kinda pointless.
  • a goal-kick being taken on the same side that the ball went out on
Pointless. Sure it used to be this way then they realised it was pointless so changed it so that a goal kick could be taken anywhere in the 6 yard area regardless of what side the ball went out. Don;t see the point of changing back.
  • a "clearer and more consistent definition" of handball
Interesting. Personally i think the rule is fine as it is, it's the players, managers, fans and pundits who have their own interpretations depending on how it suits them which is the issue. You know, the screams for "handbaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllll" if the ball touches a players arm regardless of how obviously not a free kick it is. And officials don't help themselves either.
  • a player who scores a goal or stops a goal with his hands gets a red card
Yeah why not.
  • a keeper who handles a backpass or throw-in from a team-mate concedes a penalty
Bit harsh for what is just an anti timewasting measure.
  • the referee can award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line
Nah, a goal is when the ball crosses the goal line between the goal frame, not when i might have crossed the line.
  • referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play
Pointless. Time is up when time is up.
  • a penalty kick is either scored or missed/saved and players cannot follow up to score to stop encroachment into the penalty area
See above.
 
I dislike most of these ideas. Keep footy as it is, it's hardly broken. Happy for them to stop the clock during major incidences like injuries, penalty awarded etc, but to then shorten the game itself? Pointless.
 
So they're saying, currently out of 90 mins, only 60 minutes is actually played...... And their solution to this is to play 2 halves of 30 mins (with clock stopped), meaning actual playing time would still be 60 mins..... Christ, these guys are getting paid a fortune and are all idiots or simply have no interest in reforming the game for the better of the sport, so just come up with nonsense like this....

it's utterly nuts isn't it? They come up with the good idea of stopping the clock so at least we'll get rid of all this time wasting bollocks which is the reason why we only get 60 minutes of play ... but they go and ruin it by saying the game should be cut to that length? If i was in the room when that was mentioned i would have slapped myself on the forehead so hard that i could file a claim for assault.

If that was the reason, they may as well leave it at 90 mins and let people time waste for a 3rd of the game haha, the only thing that changes is that fans get home quicker and get less value for money.
 

Awful idea.....

If you are a fan of the attacking team, you cheer and get excited when a penalty is given. But that excitement can quickly turn to frustration when the penalty is saved, only for somebody else to run in and smash home the rebound. Happy again :)

Or maybe vice versa.....you get angry because a controversial penalty has been given against your team... your keeper saves it and justice has been served. Everyone is instantly happy...but only for a split second until an opponent responds the quickest to tap home the rebound. Frustration again. These quick turns of emotion contribute to making the game so enjoyable.

Remember the last minute of the Watford v Leicester play-off match a few years ago? With this rule, this would never have happened....


totally agree. you would also have all 10 players of the defending team lined up on the half way line, with 9 players from the attacking team in the same place. because as soon as the pen is missed, the keeper is going to punt it far downfield and watch his 10 teammates chase after it, whilst they have an extra man advantage in outfield because the penalty taker is still in the bloody opposition box.

It's like they asked everyone in the room to come up with one idea and then they'd publish them straight away without anyone actually thinking it through nor actually debating the pros and cons.
 
Just leave the game alone. FFS, it's fine as it is. Why do middle-class mutants who would of been ashamed to be involved in football not so long ago think they have ownership of the game? If they want to deter time wasting start punishing teams for doing it. If they really must do somthing why not stop the clock everytime the ball is out of play or the ref halts play.
 
In terms of 30 minute halves with the clock stopping when the ball is out of play, how does this flow down to amateur football where half the time the ref doesn't turn up and when he does, he is usually incapable of moving from the centre circle?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top