New rule changes and var

Gdog
Trialist
FilledEmptyEmptyEmptyEmpty
For post default

hi I'm in London on holiday and went to the hammers man city game yesterday awesome day.there are at least 2 new rules brought for this season.1 goal kicks don't have to go over the 18 yard line to be deemed in play.Makes for  a much faster game.2 if a ball strikes a defender's arm in the penalty for whatever reason it's a penalty if deemed a fact by the var.

In another note there were what appears to be a tidied up set of rules around the role of the VA announced which I thought were quite good.there's a good you tube explanation on them in the hammers website.

My question is - are these worth a new topic and some discussion before the new a league season?

Gdog

Oi Oi Edgecumbe
One in a million
FilledFilledFilledFilledEmpty
For post picture 91

And will these rules apply in the A League?

Oi Oi Edgecumbe... lets have a clean sheet

ClubOranje
Phoenix Academy
FilledFilledEmptyEmptyEmpty
For post default

And will these rules apply in the A League?

Anything under Laws of the Game are FIFA rules and supposed to apply to official leagues where the new season kicks off after June 1st.

VAR is not mandatory, nor is allowance for 4th sub for extra time games.

The goal kick rule, new handball rules, attacking players 1m from wall, uncontested drop ball for injury stoppages or ball hitting refereee are all supposed to apply.

Edit to add:  except where permission given by FIFA to federation to modify rules for internal competitions.

patrick478
Moderator
Listen here Fudgeface
FilledFilledFilledFilledFilled
For post siggy hit2

Yellow Fever - Misery loves company

newzealandpower
Starting XI
FilledFilledFilledEmptyEmpty
For post picture 919

What's the attacking player 1 m from the ball rule? Not sure about how I feel about the ball not needing to leave the box after a goal kick...

What I would REALLY like to see is a mandatory rest period of 5 minutes after injuries requiring treatment! That will speed up the game and weed out all the divers...

VUW AFC - Victoria University Football for life

el grapadura
Moderator
Woof Woof
FilledFilledFilledFilledFilled
For post picture 1609

What's the attacking player 1 m from the ball rule? Not sure about how I feel about the ball not needing to leave the box after a goal kick...

What I would REALLY like to see is a mandatory rest period of 5 minutes after injuries requiring treatment! That will speed up the game and weed out all the divers...

Attacking players have to be at least 1m away from the wall (i.e. they can't join the wall anymore, so you don't have to have all the jostling/pushing/shoving that used to take ages to sort out before a free kick is taken).

The JourneyFan
Starting XI
FilledFilledFilledEmptyEmpty
For post img 1193

What's the attacking player 1 m from the ball rule? Not sure about how I feel about the ball not needing to leave the box after a goal kick...

What I would REALLY like to see is a mandatory rest period of 5 minutes after injuries requiring treatment! That will speed up the game and weed out all the divers...

it's 1m from the wall - at free kicks ie when a defensive wall has 3 or more players in it attackers are not allowed within 1 meter of the defensive wall.

http://thejourneyfan.blogspot.co.nz/

New Zealand Football Media Association Website of the year 2015 & 2016

LSA2SB
Trialist
FilledEmptyEmptyEmptyEmpty
For post lsatsb

What's the attacking player 1 m from the ball rule? Not sure about how I feel about the ball not needing to leave the box after a goal kick...

What I would REALLY like to see is a mandatory rest period of 5 minutes after injuries requiring treatment! That will speed up the game and weed out all the divers...

http://theifab.com/news/clarification-law-16-the-g...

2. Opponent in the penalty area when a goal kick is taken

Law 16 requires all opponents to be outside the penalty area until the goal kick is taken and if an opponent remains inside or enters the penalty area before the kick is taken and plays, challenges or touches the ball, the goal kick is retaken.

However, Law 16 also applies the ‘quick’ free kick principles outlined in Law 13 – Free Kicks, 3. Offences and sanctions that if any opponents are in the penalty areas because they did not have time to leave, the referee allows play to continue.

In practical terms, this means that referees should manage goal kicks (and defending team free kicks in their own penalty area) in the same way as they manage free kicks:

- Unless the kick is taken quickly, opposing players should be required to be outside the penalty area and remain outside until the kick has been taken.

- If the kick is taken quickly and an opponent genuinely did not have time to leave the penalty area, the opponent may not interfere with or prevent the taking of the kick but may intercept the ball once it is in play. This is allowed because the defending team, as at a quick free kick, tried to gain an advantage by taking the kick quickly and if this ‘goes wrong’ the Law is not there to ‘save’ them.

- Players who deliberately remain inside or enter the penalty area before the kick is taken should not gain an unfair advantage, even if the kick is taken quickly.

If an opposing player commits an offence (as outlined above) the goal kick is retaken; there is no disciplinary sanction unless the offence occurs a number of times (persistent misconduct).

Referees are skilled at managing 9.15m at free kicks and they should apply these skills and principles to the management of goal kicks and defending team free kicks in their own penalty area. 

liberty_nz
Budgie lover
FilledFilledFilledEmptyEmpty
For post king mo

What I would REALLY like to see is a mandatory rest period of 5 minutes after injuries requiring treatment! That will speed up the game and weed out all the divers...

More players get kicked just enough so the team is down a player (or 3). 

It is a problem but don't think that is the solution.

newzealandpower
Starting XI
FilledFilledFilledEmptyEmpty
For post picture 919

Thanks for the overview. I guess quick goal kicks could we useful when you're losing etc. There will probably be more attacking opportunities as well when the quick goal kick is taken poorly or possession is lost.

Re: 5 minute suspension, I know it's not a new rule, just speculation so feel free to move the post.

I think giving 5 minute (or 3, 4...) will significantly reduce injury stoppages. Nothing irks me more than seeing a player go down and stay down, only to trot off the pitch  and go straight back on after receiving 'treatment'.

The way I see it, if you're genuinely hurt, you probably need treatment and a short rest anyway. And of course this rule would need to go hand in hand with safeguarding the better players so that Messi doesn't spend half his game on the sidelines because he's getting kicked to shreds.

VUW AFC - Victoria University Football for life

Gdog
Trialist
FilledEmptyEmptyEmptyEmpty
For post default

Thanks for the update guys.The other rule changes are interesting.

Re the VAR.

These were explained pre match and at half time at the match I was at.Also found a YouTube video on the Hammers web site in which Alan Sheared explains how it's going to work in the EPL this year.Can't provide the link as using a Kindle.If someone can post the link that would be helpful.

Read somewhere last year's A -league season was one of the first comps to trial the VAR. 

20 Legend
First Team Squad
FilledFilledFilledEmptyEmpty
For post ole

1. The rule that required the ball to leave the box was a good one. Made it harder to play out from the back. It was abused by teams who, when pressed on a goal kick, would just step back into the box to receive the ball forcing a retake. Solution here is simple - if the ball doesn't leave the box it's an indirect free kick.

2. Don't like subbing off anywhere, just feels a bit awkward I'm sure it'll be abused somehow (player being subbed and talking shark to fans, other players, something). Mitigates a problem which wouldn't exist if referees applied stoppage time correctly.

3. Drop ball rule has also been removed. Fair enough. I was disappointed that I never got to exploit it in a rule match - previously there was no requirement that one player from each team could contest. You could have all 11 players contesting if you wanted.

4. Changes to penalties and goal keeper's feet are really really stupid though. So stupid in fact that VAR isn't allowed to rule on it.

kwlap
Starting XI
FilledFilledFilledEmptyEmpty
For post no spain

I don’t mean to highjack this thread, but just interested to hear what rules others think should be changed or modified?

I’ve got two on my list, and they are pretty out there I’d have to admit. Firstly, I’d change penalty shootout penalties to be like ice hockey shoot outs, where the penalty taker starts from ½ way and moves towards the goal, except I’d have them start about 1/3 away from the goal. I think the MLS used to do this(??)

Secondly, I’d have a team of refs review each match and hand out bans and fines to players for any sort of simulation or rushing of the ref. Starting at say 1 match and 20% of match salary and going up with each infringement, and a game could have multiple infringements. While it wouldn’t deal to the potential damage done during 1 match. I think with a systemic approach like this enforced over a period of time, that players would very quickly learn to stop that shark.

Anyone else got any other changes they’d make?

(mods – sorry if there is already a thread for this chat. I couldn’t find one)

ClubOranje
Phoenix Academy
FilledFilledEmptyEmptyEmpty
For post default

kwlap wrote:

I don’t mean to highjack this thread, but just interested to hear what rules others think should be changed or modified?

I’ve got two on my list, and they are pretty out there I’d have to admit. Firstly, I’d change penalty shootout penalties to be like ice hockey shoot outs, where the penalty taker starts from ½ way and moves towards the goal, except I’d have them start about 1/3 away from the goal. I think the MLS used to do this(??)

Secondly, I’d have a team of refs review each match and hand out bans and fines to players for any sort of simulation or rushing of the ref. Starting at say 1 match and 20% of match salary and going up with each infringement, and a game could have multiple infringements. While it wouldn’t deal to the potential damage done during 1 match. I think with a systemic approach like this enforced over a period of time, that players would very quickly learn to stop that shark.

Anyone else got any other changes they’d make?

(mods – sorry if there is already a thread for this chat. I couldn’t find one)

Don't like your first idea. Seen it, it's just as much a lottery.

Second idea has merit.

I'd go with Fergies timekeeping idea. 30 minutes ball in play each half. 

I'd also do the futsal thing with time to get ball back in play. Don't have it in pay within"x" seconds, throw goes other way. Currently players take up to 60 seconds to take a throw in or corner or free kick, but only get called up on it in the last 3 minutes of game.

I'd like to see a card for any player touching the ball after whistle goes (or ball out of play) if it's not their ball. Stop that picking it up and walking back ten yards before tossing it to other team thereby stopping them taking quick throws and free kicks. Need ref discretion on this though; sometimes the other team is trying to get the ball back to the opposition quickly.

ConanTroutman
Marquee
FilledFilledFilledFilledEmpty
For post kyuss study  3

One change I've thought about  is just to tighten the definition of what constitutes an advantage in attacking areas, and to extend the time that it takes for the advantage to be happening .  At the moment if you are fouled but stumble and get a shot off then your deemed to have received an advantage, even if the shot is nowhere near the goal. Or you pass to another player and then they get dispossessed. If that was changed so you would only be considered to have gained the advantage if you score, win a corner, keep possession for another 15 seconds or so, or have a second phase shot then attacking players might not go down so easily and  the game might flow a bit more. Because as it is, there's no incentive for players to try to stay on their feet and keep playing in those situations. Basically it's more like the rugby or league interpretation of advantage.

It might not work at all of course. It might have all sorts of stupid unintended consequences but it could be trialled in friendlies first.

People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.

siac
WeeNix
FilledFilledEmptyEmptyEmpty
For post pc user

Not sure if this is the right thread to ask this in, but I can't see others more appropriate...

I've never played football (and only watch the A-League, and NZ games) so sorry for the stupid question, but could someone please clarify the offside rule for me. I always thought if part of the player was onside, and part offside, that is considered onside? But after the Kosta goal (disallowed on VAR) for Sydney last night I'm confused... as most comments I've read online seem to agree with the VAR decision that he was offside. 

If part of the player is onside (e.g his left foot), and part is offside (e.g his right foot), is that considered okay or offside?

aitkenmike
Marquee
FilledFilledFilledFilledEmpty
For post picture 1277

siac wrote:

Not sure if this is the right thread to ask this in, but I can't see others more appropriate...

I've never played football (and only watch the A-League, and NZ games) so sorry for the stupid question, but could someone please clarify the offside rule for me. I always thought if part of the player was onside, and part offside, that is considered onside? But after the Kosta goal (disallowed on VAR) for Sydney last night I'm confused... as most comments I've read online seem to agree with the VAR decision that he was offside. 

If part of the player is onside (e.g his left foot), and part is offside (e.g his right foot), is that considered okay or offside?

If anything that can play the ball legally (so anything but the hands/arms) is offside then you are offside.

siac
WeeNix
FilledFilledEmptyEmptyEmpty
For post pc user

aitkenmike wrote:

siac wrote:

Not sure if this is the right thread to ask this in, but I can't see others more appropriate...

I've never played football (and only watch the A-League, and NZ games) so sorry for the stupid question, but could someone please clarify the offside rule for me. I always thought if part of the player was onside, and part offside, that is considered onside? But after the Kosta goal (disallowed on VAR) for Sydney last night I'm confused... as most comments I've read online seem to agree with the VAR decision that he was offside. 

If part of the player is onside (e.g his left foot), and part is offside (e.g his right foot), is that considered okay or offside?

If anything that can play the ball legally (so anything but the hands/arms) is offside then you are offside.

Thanks for clarifying. I feel like after following the Phoenix for several years I should of known that by now!

Tegal
Moderator
Head Sleuth
FilledFilledFilledFilledFilled
For post 6a831056 9031 45d7 8d6d 949589ae360d

siac wrote:

aitkenmike wrote:

siac wrote:

Not sure if this is the right thread to ask this in, but I can't see others more appropriate...

I've never played football (and only watch the A-League, and NZ games) so sorry for the stupid question, but could someone please clarify the offside rule for me. I always thought if part of the player was onside, and part offside, that is considered onside? But after the Kosta goal (disallowed on VAR) for Sydney last night I'm confused... as most comments I've read online seem to agree with the VAR decision that he was offside. 

If part of the player is onside (e.g his left foot), and part is offside (e.g his right foot), is that considered okay or offside?

If anything that can play the ball legally (so anything but the hands/arms) is offside then you are offside.

Thanks for clarifying. I feel like after following the Phoenix for several years I should of known that by now!

Don’t worry about it. Even those who played the game professionally for years then went on to be fox sport commentators don’t seem to know the offside rule (or any laws of the game)

Allegedly

newzealandpower
Starting XI
FilledFilledFilledEmptyEmpty
For post picture 919

Besides I feel that rule was clarified fairly recently (eg in the last 5 years or less). Growing up it was always if you could see 'light' between the attacking and defending player so you could be 99% offside and still be considered to be on.

VUW AFC - Victoria University Football for life

Post New Reply

Please Login or Create an account to post a reply.