I don't mind the ET so much. just away goals is resolutely unfair.
I think way too much stall is put on home advantage at that stage of a tie.
Printable View
I don't mind the ET so much. just away goals is resolutely unfair.
I think way too much stall is put on home advantage at that stage of a tie.
IFAB have come up with a list of possible rule changes to be discussed.
http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/40311889
The main one is that 45-minute halves be replaced with 30-minute halves with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play for these reasons (among others, read the link):
Other ideas up for discussion:Quote:
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
Quote:
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
30 minute halves - Very radical. Would like to have a closer look at collected data for the average amount of time a ball is dead in a match. Can't say I'm hugely in favour if only because it's such a gigantic alteration. Clock stopping is very American. More clearly defined rules and leeway for added on injury time would be preferable.
Passing to yourself - Maybe if within your own half or something like that? Feels like a rugby rule being transplanted. Maybe "advantage" should just be applied more.
Moving goal kicks - Yeah sure, always annoys me when they are called back. Completely needless.
Scoring a goal with handball being a red card - Only if intentionally I presume?
Handling backpass results in a penalty - Very harsh, indirect free-kick is perfectly fair IMO.
Stopping a goal with handball results in goal being awarded - As long as its clear the ball was going in before it was stopped illegally, seems very sensible.
HT/FT only coming with a deadball - That's another rugby rule, but would fit. There would have to be clarified exceptions for corners and attacking frees.
Penalty kick rebounds banned - God yes. The poxiest way to score in football is from a penalty rebound.
ABBA - Good idea.
Captain's only allowed to talk to refs - Yep. Aside from being an obvious step to cut out hassling of refs, it emphasizes the role of the captain, that I think has been downgraded a bit in recent years.
I wonder if that's to allow somebody brought down when through on goal (or similar) to just get up and carry on bearing down on goal whenever possible, or when, even after a foul, the opportunity to attack is still real. A redefinition of the quick free-kick.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
I don't know what this means:Isn't the law currently that a kick out can be taken from anywhere along the six yard line? Why would they want to limit it to one side?Quote:
a goal-kick being taken on the same side that the ball went out on
The rule used to be that it had to be taken from the side it went out and that was changed some years ago. Now keepers use it to waste time if necessary (i.e if it goes out to the right, the keeper gently trots over to the left to take the goal kick and vice versa). Can use up a good 30 seconds or more if done well and if it includes a few pretend shot kicks.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
Surprised not to see any mention of sinbinning now that I think of it. That would be a good deterrent to timewasting as well as anything else suggested, surely?
Why is the most popular sport in the world looking at bringing in rules from less popular sports?
Clock timers? No penalty rebounds? Dribbling free kicks? A stadium clock? Half-time/full-time only when the ball goes out of play?
Why to any of the above? If it ain't broke, etc.
I do agree on the goal-kick side rule though. The "penalty goal" arguably goes towards subjectivity - is there a tangible line between what does stop a goal and what doesn't? Is it going to go in off the post or bounce along the line? Does it count if the handball stops a tap-in?
Personally think the stop clock is a good idea.
VAR discussion moved here: https://foot.ie/threads/229978-VAR-Discussion
From watching games over the last few days and seeing some of the ridiculous time-wasting, what do people think of the idea (for a rule change) that if an attacking player goes inside the markings for a short corner, then a defending player is entitled to go in also.
I wouldn't see the merit in that really. Nothing wrong with short corners per se and time-wasting while the ball is in play has never been an offence.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
It still wouldn't be an offence, would just be harder to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Risteard
Might be better for a rule similar to a throw-in in GAA, where if the ref determines the ball isn't being played or is incapable of being played, for a few seconds, it becomes a contestable drop ball. The "into the corner" time-wasting tactic is perfectly legitimate, but I wouldn't shed a tear if it was cut out.
On a similar level, the clock should stop for subs being made, but then the argument could be made that the clock should just stop whenever the ball is dead, and I know that's a thornier issue.
As its not strictly VAR-related, I wanted to talk about the Ronaldo yellow card in the Portugal/Iran game here.
The Ronaldo decision is one well-worth talking about. Leaving aside interpretation of the written laws, I was glad to see only a yellow because I'm tired of any slight contact with the upper body/head resulting in ridiculous theatrics, and Iran got away with such an incident in the first half that not even the Portuguese players appeared to want reviewed.
But on the laws of the game, I think Ronaldo, being impeded while legally chasing after a ball, made to move around the Iranian player and reached his arm over to shove/gain leverage in the process. A foul, though you could argue it's six of one. But doing this, the arm/elbow made contact with the Iranian players face. Is there intention to hit the Iranian player in the face, or is he just trying to move him out of the way generally? Is this "violent conduct", defined as "excessive force or brutality" when not challenging for the ball? If it is, could that definition not be extended to a wide range of other kinds of pushing and shoving, like the corner-kick/set-piece stuff that has been a blight on several World Cup games?
And what was Ronaldo given a yellow card for? He can't be given a yellow for violent conduct, so what? Persistent infringement?
Recklessness in his attempt to get past the player?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
Keith Andrews made the point that it's a red or nothing, that basically he's either only trying to get past him or he deliberately elbows him in the face, there's no in between. I don't really agree. Ronaldo was clearly annoyed with the way the Iranian was obstructing him so he did kind of shove him back using his elbow/arm. I think it was pretty harmless though in terms of force and I'm not even sure he meant to connect with his face, so for me a yellow was about right. If you're going to be sent off for an elbow, do it right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvMYB0tZ0z8
Yeah, I didn't agree with Andrews either that it had to be all or nothing. I can see the argument that the fact that it was Ronaldo played on the ref's mind. But at the same time, I didn't think it was a blatant red card. It could be viewed as just a reckless attempt to push past a player.
Thinking about the carry-on in the hurling today, what is the punishment in football for a team that refuses to come back out for the second half of a game within the time limit? Is it a fine for the club, or does the ref actually start showing cards (unsportsmanlike conduct?). And at what point would a match be called?
Assuming they do eventually take to the pitch and the game restarts, I'd assume the ref writes the delay up in his report and disciplinary procedures would be taken by the governing body/league afterwards. Sanction might be governed by the competition rules or be under a broad heading like bringing the game into disrepute.
If they refuse to come out, and have no good reason for doing so, I suppose the ref would declare the match abandoned and the disciplinary outcome would probably be a 3-0 loss and maybe suspensions for individuals and the club. I don't know what constitutes a reasonable length of time and a quick look through the Laws of the Game didn't help much, but they deal more with play and on-field issues.
It's a good question. Whatever the answer is, I reckon the outcome would be a lot more severe than the one hand wagging a finger, the other giving a thumbs up attitude of the Gah towards discipline.