FIFA are considering new football rules

17Larsson said:
This is my first reaction.


I actually think they understimate the younger generations attention span. Surely nobody wants shorter F1 races or shorter games? I know people are saying the ball is only in play for 30 minutes a half but I don't like the idea
Click to expand...

It is just an observable fact that the ball is in play for around 30 mins as is. It wouldn’t reduce the amount of time in a game to cater to shorter attention spans.

LilyWhiteSpur said:
While I get the idea behind it, does it not take away some of the essence of football, the extra time winner the extra time equaliser? That bit of the game that keeps you clinging on for hope. I'm probably in the minority but, there is much more to football and why its so popular than just the football itself.
Click to expand...

You have those moments in sports with shot clocks too. They happen just before playing time is over, in exactly the same way, it’s just an arbitrary classification.
 
The 30 minutes half needs to happen, time wasting has become a joke.
 
Champ said:
I think this has been already addressed.

The ball is in play 60 minutes or less most games, so stopping the clock and playing 60 minutes outright is no different to what's happening right now really.
Click to expand...

I noticed, but I'm not entirely confident it will work out that way. Stretching sides will no longer be possible, as the unlimited subs rule will allow them to take a player off for a few mins and then bring them back on fully rested.

Not seeing any real benefit to the bigger sides, besides being able to make full use of their bloated squads. Then again, what's the need for a large squad when you can permanently rest your top players a few mins and then bring them back on?
 
Unlimited subs is unfair, would just increase the advantage of the greater squads / richer teams.

Stopping the clock is a thing that is long overdue. So ridiculous to add 5 minutes in a time wasting orgy, of which 3 are being killed by someone having a cramp.

The 5min ban sounds interesting, but only in combination with time stopping. Otherways there would be even more time wasting.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
Stopping the clock will lead to the introduction of TV time-outs. It's an obvious money grab. Be careful what you wish for.
Click to expand...

I had thought that. It's moving towards the American model that nobody wants.
 
LilyWhiteSpur said:
While I get the idea behind it, does it not take away some of the essence of football, the extra time winner the extra time equaliser? That bit of the game that keeps you clinging on for hope. I'm probably in the minority but, there is much more to football and why its so popular than just the football itself.
Click to expand...
Could do it like Rugby where the game only ends when the ball goes dead. You could still have extra time goals then.
 
Brwned said:
It is just an observable fact that the ball is in play for around 30 mins as is. It wouldn’t reduce the amount of time in a game to cater to shorter attention spans.
Click to expand...
I know, I feel like an old man scared of change but I just love sitting down for a game knowing I have 90 minutes to forget any other shite that's going on. If time wasting isn't a thing any more then 30 minutes could end up going by with very little stoppage time. Maybe they should try 40 minutes first, I'd just hate if it ended up making the games shorter.

The throw in makes sense if you have to pass the ball along the floor, otherwise it's just loads of corners from different positions
 
I'm not completely against fixed halves with clock stoppages, but would broadcasters be able to work it considering the matches would no longer have a set time. You'd imagine there'd be quite a difference in match lengths.
 
17Larsson said:
This is my first reaction.


I actually think they understimate the younger generations attention span. Surely nobody wants shorter F1 races or shorter games? I know people are saying the ball is only in play for 30 minutes a half but I don't like the idea
Click to expand...

The half would still last around 45 mins in real time, the breaks in play are unavoidable, the game clock is 30. All this is doing is getting more accurate timing and not benefiting those who waste time.

The biggest problem is probably games lasting too long as real injuries and other incidents do occur and being very accurate could mean some games last far too long even with a game clock of 30mins.
 
feck off. 30 minutes a half screams of being about profit margins. These leeches need to get out of our sport.
 
I'm in

I'd also change the offside rule to the Wenger rule
 
They're trying to Americanize the game, which should come as a surprise to no one as 3 of the biggest clubs in English football (United, Liverpool and Arsenal) happen to be owned by Americans. This wreaks of their influence.
 
swissgenius said:
Unlimited subs is unfair, would just increase the advantage of the greater squads / richer teams.

Stopping the clock is a thing that is long overdue. So ridiculous to add 5 minutes in a time wasting orgy, of which 3 are being killed by someone having a cramp.

The 5min ban sounds interesting, but only in combination with time stopping. Otherways there would be even more time wasting.
Click to expand...

But at the same time reward more tactically astute managers who might counter act their lack of resources with clever game management and keeping their players fresh.

Italy had a lot less to bring on than England in the Euros final, but were the ones who used their subs cleverly.
 
The clock stopping is a good suggestion in my opinion. Throw ins with feet though :lol: Basically a fecking set piece, players will consistently be playing for them, would get boring as feck. Unlimited subs is clearly also a crap idea.

Look at the F1 yesterday with the sprint, all exciting but then when it actually happens it’s a load of shit.
 
Random Task said:
Unlimited subs will be the new way to waste time. You can guarantee that rule will be exploited to the fullest.
Click to expand...

Why? If the clock stops when the balls out of play (i.e. during a sub) how does that waste time?
 
Skills said:
But at the same time reward more tactically astute managers who might counter act their lack of resources with clever game management and keeping their players fresh.

Italy had a lot less to bring on than England in the Euros final, but were the ones who used their subs cleverly.
Click to expand...

Unlimited subs also reward the tactically inept by allowing them to interrupt the flow of the game and ultimately waste time. The potential for exploitation in these rules is worrying to say the least.
 
Might not waste time, but it’s the classic tactic of slowing the game down against a better team away from home. Managers like Dyche and Mourinho will milk it
 
Skills said:
Why? If the clock stops when the balls out of play (i.e. during a sub) how does that waste time?
Click to expand...

It interrupts the flow of the game. Every time a team begins building momentum, just make a sub. It will negatively impact the game, I'm sure of it.
 
dinostar77 said:
What is it with sports currently? F1 and now football tinkering with what works just to try to make their sports appeal to a younger generation who have the attention span of a goldfish and alienate their core audience.
Click to expand...

I remember reading there is a falling viewing figure among the younger fans in football, hence FIFA considering the change. In F1, it's pretty simple, not many new fans and falling viewing figures for a while now, so you either accept it or try to make the change to bring in new audience.
 
30 minutes halves with the clock stopping during stoppages is really good and should have been implemented for a very long time.

The others are meh, the outs to be played by feed is stupid.
 
Random Task said:
I noticed, but I'm not entirely confident it will work out that way. Stretching sides will no longer be possible, as the unlimited subs rule will allow them to take a player off for a few mins and then bring them back on fully rested.

Not seeing any real benefit to the bigger sides, besides being able to make full use of their bloated squads. Then again, what's the need for a large squad when you can permanently rest your top players a few mins and then bring them back on?
Click to expand...
Unlimited subs is a farce, tales away all tactical elements from the game.
Can get behind 5 subs, and the 30 minute Half's though.
 
dinostar77 said:
What is it with sports currently? F1 and now football tinkering with what works just to try to make their sports appeal to a younger generation who have the attention span of a goldfish and alienate their core audience.
Click to expand...
Old man yells at clouds.
 
Random Task said:
But surely, reducing each half to 30 minutes will significantly lower goal-scoring as a whole, thus favouring defensive/low block teams? Instead of having to hold out for 90 minutes, they only have to hold out for 60. The time-wasting potential of unlimited subs only contributes to that.

I can't say for sure, but those at FIFA may not have thought this through.
Click to expand...
The clock would stop so you would actually get more football.
 
Random Task said:
Unlimited subs also reward the tactically inept by allowing them to interrupt the flow of the game and ultimately waste time. The potential for exploitation in these rules is worrying to say the least.
Click to expand...

True, but I always found the commotion around subs to be stupid. Like why does the game stop for a sub to be completed? To me the stoppage should only be to tell the ref which players are being subbed, then the game resumes and it's down to the team making the sub to get their player subbed on/off without disadvantaging themself.

None of these long pisstaking walks players take to get on/off the pitch. If a team ends up with more than 11 players on the field at any time, the incriminating player should get an automatic yellow.
 
LilyWhiteSpur said:
While I get the idea behind it, does it not take away some of the essence of football, the extra time winner the extra time equaliser? That bit of the game that keeps you clinging on for hope. I'm probably in the minority but, there is much more to football and why its so popular than just the football itself.
Click to expand...

Those are exciting because you know its the last few seconds of the game. You'll still have that with this newly proposed system.

I'd be interested to see a few trial games with the time keeping change. Should have a pretty big impact on timewasting.

As for subs, I'd prefer less rather than more.
 
crossy1686 said:
Those changes don't sound that bad to be honest, except for the yellow card one, that's a massive advantage to the opposition.

Also, try making the halves 40 minutes before jumping right down to 30.

The clock should stop when the ball goes out of play like it does in Rugby.
Click to expand...
40 minutes per half playing time would probably be far too high for players and lead to increase in injuries and fatigue.

At the moment, the average playing time is less than 30 mins per half.
 
Clock stopping when the ball goes out is a great idea IMO. Means you get a consistent guaranteed hour of actual football every match. Better still, don't blow the final whistle until after the ball next goes out of play. The drama of lumping everyone forward for a corner knowing that it's the last chance to equalise would be even greater.
 
Stopping the clock is a good idea, but it would take ages to complete a 45 minute half.
 
LilyWhiteSpur said:
While I get the idea behind it, does it not take away some of the essence of football, the extra time winner the extra time equaliser? That bit of the game that keeps you clinging on for hope. I'm probably in the minority but, there is much more to football and why its so popular than just the football itself.
Click to expand...
Not sure if you watch rugby union, but it definitely has the same drama as football. After the siren goes, you're effectively in last play, and the game keeps going if the defending team fouls etc. The drama is immense.
 
Random Task said:
Unlimited subs will be the new way to waste time. You can guarantee that rule will be exploited to the fullest.
Click to expand...

How can you waste time with it when the clock has stopped while you're making them?
 
Unlimited subs does sound very American though. Not only would teams use it to break the flow of the game killing the accurate time given to the team trying to win you could get teams bringing on specialist players on and off, it could end up rotating around like American Football.
 
kouroux said:
Not sure what to think about it. I don't recognize football anymore
https://www.insidesport.co/what-are...fa-are-considering-that-has-got-fans-furious/

30 minutes a half.
The game clock stops when the ball goes out of play.
Unlimited subs.
Throw-ins played with feet.
5 minute suspension for a yellow card.
Click to expand...
I like the clock stopping when it goes out of play.

I would have concerns about 5 minute suspensions for yellow cards. It will lead to controversy due to the varying opinions of whether it was a yellow card or not. A problem we already have with referees and VAR interpreting situations differently. You could end up with situations where a team gets 2 harsh yellow cards and playing with 9 men for 5 minutes is quite substantial. Especially if the clock is stopped for going out of play as well. I just feel we’ll just end up with further controversy.
 
redshaw said:
Unlimited subs does sound very American though. Not only would teams use it to break the flow of the game killing the accurate time given to the team trying to win you could get teams bringing on specialist players on and off, it could end up rotating around like American Football.
Click to expand...
I really don’t like the idea of unlimited subs. Especially if it means a sub can come back on. We’ll just end up with situations where star players are coming off frequently and only thrown back on if needed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.