The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
There’s often plenty of debate and discussion in the other football threads about sensible and/or infuriating changes in the laws of football, so I thought it would be good to have a keep up with any changes but also to give them the ltlf treatment. What are your favourite & least favourite? Which laws need changing? Etc
To quote the IFAB:
“ The Laws of the Game are the same for all football throughout the world from the FIFA World Cupfinal through to a game between young children in a remote village.
That the same Laws apply in every match in every confederation, country, town and village throughout the world is a considerable strength which must be preserved. This is also an opportunity which must be harnessed for the good of football everywhere.
Football must have Laws which keep the game ‘fair’ as a crucial foundation of the beauty of the ‘beautiful game’ is its fairness – this is a vital feature of the ‘spirit’ of the game. The best matches are those where the referee is rarely needed as the players play with respect for each other, the match officials and the Laws.
The integrity of the Laws, and the referees who apply them, must always be protected and respected. All those in authority, especially coaches and team captains, have a clear responsibility to the game to respect the match officials and their decisions”.
Discuss.
Stand Firm And Strike Hard
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
Well as a starting point that's incorrect!Originally Posted by Ravi
Kids football in this country has it's own set of rules/laws, which while they are certainly based on the laws of the game for association football, there are any number of significant differences.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
You missed out the Anfield Clause.
It replaced the Fergietime clause
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your palms are holding her neck and thumbs are at her ears regulating the speed of her head as she swallows and then sucks up your machinery. She is topping up your engine oil for the cross-country coming up. Your RPM is hitting a new high. To wait any longer would be to lose prime time... She picks up a Bugatti's momentum. You want her more at a Volkswagen's steady trot. Squeeze the maximum mileage out of your gallon of gas. But she's eating up the road with all cylinders blazing.
Aniruddha Bahal (Bunker 13
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
How about the FA Cup.
Some games have ref & 2 linesmen.
Some have ref, 2 linesmen and goal line technology
Some have ref, 2 linesmen, goal line technology and VAR.
In the same round.
Ridiculous
By "relegation battle", do you mean 7th, 12th or 14th?
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
The way the pricks place the ball outside the corner quadrant riles the granny out of me
Crap bastards then overhit the corner but don't have the brain capacity to realise that their cheating is what lead to the overhit corner
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
Every time someone says "but he got the ball" an angel dies
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
Penalty rule is out of date.
Back when it was there to prevent attacking teams from being unfairly disadvantaged from being impeded in the box it worked. Now they impede themselves it doesn't.
It is far too easy to get a penalty, especially now with VAR. For ninety-five percent of penalties given, the spot kick offers a far greater chance of scoring than the attacking team had before the infringement. The punishment is far too severe for the crime.
And all this does is encourage attacking teams to look for penalties, and discourage teams from trying to create chances in open play. Playing the percentages, you win more games if you prioritise trying to 'win' penalties over trying to create goalscoring opportunities with a bit of skill.
Last edited by Francis Benali (on loan); 21-01-21 at 22:06.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
Sadly the people who change the Laws don't seem to realise that the changes should enhance the game.
They have some other idea, but the basis for that idea escapes me.
They also are very much like politicians and are loath to say they got it wrong; they just plough along trying to modify a daft idea instead of binning it.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
And also, time for game clocks that stop when the ball is not in play.
Not that is would have made any difference to the results but last night's game was a good advert for this. For the last five minutes that the game was considered still in progress, there might have been less than sixty seconds of football (even that was running the ball to the corner). Every team wastes time and kills the game when they're winning. You don't mind it when it's your team. Hate it when it's the opposition and even just when you're neutral and just wanting to be entertained by a game of football.
The average time the ball has been in play in the Premier League this season is 55 minutes and 09 seconds. Call it 30 minutes each way, with the clock stopping every time the ball's out of play. You get more football, a whole lot less shithousing in pretty much the same amount of time.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I'd only card people if there's blood.
"Ive only met Andy....last week actually and can confirm he is in 2nd place in sexiest fucker on here stakes." -Barry
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I'd let them have a tear up like ice hockey. Once one player is down send them to the sin bin.
I'd imagine footballers would just cry saying "not the hair" though.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
Too many subs, what is it now about 25 per team
1 sub + goalie is enough
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
This.
To compensate, the penalty spot should be scrapped and a direct free kick should be taken from the exact position of the offence.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I'd scrap over the ball, too. The rewards far outweigh the risks in professional football, let's rebalance that.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I would scrap where the defenders are allowed to shield the ball out of play. The law should read that unless you are in control of the ball it is classed as obstruction.
‘In Control’ of the ball means that the ball has been touched by the player.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
According to The Beatles, „All You Need Is Love“. But when it comes to football, this is all you need:
„I believe in socialism because it seems more humanitarian, rather than every man for himself and 'I'm alright jack' and all those arsehole businessmen with all the loot. I made up my mind from viewing society from that angle. That's where I'm from and there's where I've made my decisions from. That's why I believe in socialism“
„Don't forget you're alive. 'Cause sometimes when you walk around the city and you're in a bad mood, you can think, hey, wait a minute, we're alive! We don't know what the next second will bring and what a fantastic thing this is. This can get easily forgotten in the routine of life, and that's something I'm trying to bring to my attention at all times. Don't forget you're alive. We're not dead, you know. This is the greatest thing.”
— Joe Strummer
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
Once upon a time, you had to be within playing distance of the ball to shield it from other players. Now it's perfectly acceptable to wrestle the other player away from the ball with no regard to distance or foul etc.
I also look upon the great days when we would see the keeper bounce the ball as he waltzed around the area looking for a boot upfield. No more pass back now, maybe, but what about the six second rule to get rid of the ball?
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I agree. It works in Rugby, 40 mins per half.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I agree with this too. The unintended consequences of the current laws are an incentive for players to look for contact in the area in order to 'win' a pen.
One answer would have been for refs to give pens for fouls against players who tried to stay on their feet, but that ship has sailed.
Maybe a free kick as in any other area of the pitch is worth a trial.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
The other element that makes this worse is the current application of the handball rule. So many times players just aimlessly kick the ball towards defenders at waist height in the hope of it clipping an arm and winning them a penalty. Its blatant what they're trying to do and it's in no way entertaining to watch.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I'd outlaw any form of dickishness in the run-up to a penalty.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
Also, why not give linesmen a coloured plastic marker of some sort. When the ball goes out of play, the marker is placed where the throw in is to be taken from.
The problem of stealing yards is removed.
Last edited by Flagman; 22-01-21 at 13:51.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I'd also rigidly enforce the "retreat 10 yards from a free kick".
Team A has a free kick. It has nothing to do with team B. A cricket style regulation like handling the ball would sort this.
Team B in any way interferes with the free kick after it's awarded and before it's taken, except with the consent of team A, yellow card.
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
I'd also enforce the "goalkeeper goes on his line and stays there" as soon as the penalty is awarded. Tell him once and then he's got 4 seconds to avoid a yellow card
Re: The Laws of the Game thread - not Brian, and not sponsored by the IFAB
The player going to ground every time is a relatively new thing. There used to be situation a bit situation where there was probably a bit of contact, but not enough to give a penalty. Player isn't impeded play goes on. That's completely gone, because the player will go to ground every time, that is often their intention before they receive the ball. Now the view in the game has shifted to...if there's no contact the player is cheating and shouldn't have dived.....if there's contact it's a clear cut penalty. No matter how much contact and how much the forward played in initiating it. Almost every slightest contact with from the defender on the forward with any contact with the ball is considered a penalty (except grappling from corners and set piece cross strangely), so long as the attacking player gets themselves to the ground, which is a given.
On top of that now, video technology is used and in football to stay. If there was contact, it'll be seen in the replay even if missed by the official on the pitch.
So now it is so much easier to win a penalty, which offers a team roughly a 75% chance of scoring a goal, than it is to create a goalscoring chance from open play than offer a 75% chance of scoring a goal. Or even a 40% chance. So there's no incentive to prioritise to play the game as it was meant to be playing for the slightest bit of contact and over chucking yourself on the floor, bringing another attacking move to end one way or the other.
Don't know what the answer is, but lots of football matches, particularly in the Premier League are now settled by penalties from relatively unthreatening attacks that would only have been given this century. It's not a great situation.
Think it was this game where I thought the penalty stuff was starting to get a bit silly.
Leicester won by three goals, and scored three penalties. For all of them there was contact, and in commentary and after the game they said there could be no argument about any of them. But they were all penalties won by an attacking player with winning a penalty the aim.
For the first one Vardy feels contact and goes done like a sack of spuds. There's contact, football now deems that a penalty. He wasn't impeded.
For the second Vardy deliberately runs into the path of the defender who he knows won't be able to get out of the way.
The third one was the worst dive of the the lot, but there's contact again as he runs across him.
In bygone eras for the first and third the attacking player stays on their feet and continues the attack. The second one, he possibly takes the ball and is running away from goal. For only the first one did the position the attacking player was in offer anything more than about 10% when he found a way to be impeded and give his side a 75% chance of scoring from the spot.
Vardy has 11 goals this season, 6 from penalties and he's also missed two. Can't blame him. He's just maybe better at winning them than other players, but they nearly try it. It's every team's approach.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks