FIFA are considering new football rules

[Iker Quesadillas]

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.

Then why bother, then.

 

[Chief123]

Unlimited subs will be the new way to waste time. You can guarantee that rule will be exploited to the fullest.

You can’t really “waste” time with it. But yes you could break up play but then you could do that anyway by just feigning injuries.

 

[Chief123]

Then why bother, then.

So that it’s fair and equal all game. At the moment the playing time is just an average across the board. But individual games suffer at times due to play acting and time wasting which doesn’t get added on at the end fairly.

 

[duffer]

Then why bother, then.

To stop time wasting and make the game more interesting. If the cheaters don't benefit from time wasting, they won't waste time and bore the tits off of everyone.

I personally would rather not watch 2 players from whatever team is winning go down with "cramp" in the last 5 mins of every game.

 

[swissgenius]

Stopping the clock is a good idea, but it would take ages to complete a 45 minute half.

That's why a half would be 30 mins

 

[ivaldo]

Is there a problem in the game we’re not aware of? Too much tinkering.

Yes. Time wasting is an established tactic that is encouraged under the current rules. If a team wants to run down the club, they should need to do it with the ball in play.

Not a fan of the unlimited subs or the yellow card sin bin though. I agree some bookable offenses, such as dissent, should come with a sin bin style penalty, but having a player binned for mistiming an honest challenge against a tricky winner doesn't seem right.

 

[Deery]

Hate all those ideas leave the game alone..

 

[Shane88]

Shocked at the support for 30 minute halves here.

They can rectify a lot of time-wasting issues by telling refs to not be such absolute cowards.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

• Stop clock and 30 minutes halves - yes
• Take throw-ins with feet - maybe, but not if it allows crosses into the box
• Unlimited subs - no
• Sin bins - no
  
  My bonus suggestion: 0 points for 0-0 draws.

 

[duffer]

Shocked at the support for 30 minute halves here.

They can rectify a lot of time-wasting issues by telling refs to not be such absolute cowards.

Indeed.

They could completely fix pretty much every issue I have with football refs were not so shit.

 

[ivaldo]

Stopping the clock will lead to the introduction of TV time-outs. It's an obvious money grab. Be careful what you wish for.

There isn't anything that would stop them introducing them now.

 

[Deery]

Shocked at the support for 30 minute halves here.

They can rectify a lot of time-wasting issues by telling refs to not be such absolute cowards.

The game would hardly get time to flow then the ref would be blowing his whistle for halftime.

 

[saivet]

I understand the time wasting sentiment but I've always felt that time wasting is largely done to kill the momentum or pace of a game. It will help things be more consistent and I'd be interested to see the trials but I don't think it's a great idea that should be implemented just yet.

 

[Skills]

Anyone else think you shouldn't be able to make subs during throw ins?

To me a throw-in should be a quick restart of the game not a full stoppage.

 

[sun_tzu]

Was it Wenger who suggested it years ago? Throw ins are a bit rubbish, but kick ins would surely lead to teams just hoofing it into the box from any kick in in the opposition half.

I think you would have a lot of teams tactically playing for kick ins as well... I.e. rather than taking on a defender to get a cross just boot it at him and get a kick in

 

[do.ob]

The introduction of a stop clock is long overdue, nearly every game contains time wasting these days, 30 minute halves is just a consequence of that, since that's the net play time currently anyway.

Unlimited subs sounds a bit extreme, but I've been liking 5 subs more than 3 and I believe it's better for young players, so maybe keep the 5 or make it 3 regular subs and 2-3 for u21 players.

Throw ins played with feet sounds a bit random as a change.

5 minute suspension for all yellow cards sounds too harsh, but I think it would make sense to have something like that for tactical fouling, as a (first) yellow card doesn't weigh up against ruining a promising (counter-) attack.

Anyone else think you shouldn't be able to make subs during throw ins?

To me a throw-in should be a quick restart of the game not a full stoppage.

In some games you could go 10 minutes without being able to make a change.

 

[FireballXL5]

I'm all for stopping the clock like they do in rugby, but the rest is pure bollocks.

 

[Jacob]

30 minutes a half - I guess this would encourage more urgent and entertaining football
The game clock stops when the ball goes out of play - definitely in favour of this. Not only out of play but also when the ball is dead, e.g. run ups on corners and freekicks.
Unlimited subs. - wtf
Throw-ins played with feet - could get behind this if it means players will be more inclined to keep the ball alive (due to the set piece risk)
5 minute suspension for a yellow card - hmm this would make the game a lot softer, which is not good

 

[Skills]

I think you would have a lot of teams tactically playing for kick ins as well... I.e. rather than taking on a defender to get a cross just boot it at him and get a kick in

5 a-side rules - 1 step only?

No minimum 10 yard clearance?

 

[SirAF]

That's why a half would be 30 mins

Exactly!

 

[saivet]

If this did come in, I wonder at grass roots level, whether they would stick to 45 minutes? I can certainly imagine refs forgetting to stop or resume the clock.

 

[sparx99]

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.

The ball is often only in play for 65mins so 30mins half’s with the clock stopping wouldn’t be much change. It would ensure time wasting isn’t a thing though (or could only be done through possession which is skilful). That’s going to improve the spectacle.

 

[Skills]

In some games you could go 10 minutes without being able to make a change.

But is that a problem? Let the ref control the stoppages for injury subs.

 

[GazTheLegend]

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.

I like the changes. People moaned endlessly about the back pass changes but look how much they improved football. If you're standing still you're moving backwards.

 

[Trequarista10]

Re unlimited subs - there's a few interprations of this. If it remains, once subbed off can't be subbed on again, then it's essentially just an increase to however many number of subs are on the bench... 6 outfield subs for PL... Which isn't a huge change.

However this changes by each tournament rules, so I assume it could mean rolling subs, players being subbed off and on again multiple times in a match. This would be an ENORMOUS change and would lead to specialists - a player being subbed on just to take free kicks, or a goalkeeper just to save a penalty, or Fellaini being subbed on just to attack a corner. This would be awful IMO and would be damaging to the game.

 

[kouroux]

I like the changes. People moaned endlessly about the back pass changes but look how much they improved football. If you're standing still you're moving backwards.

You must be a huge fan of VAR then

 

[Random Task]

You can’t really “waste” time with it. But yes you could break up play but then you could do that anyway by just feigning injuries.

Yeah, I didn't word that point very well.

But yes, certain managers will certainly exploit this ruling to their benefit. The constant interchanging of players will be mind-numbingly frustrating after a while.

 

[duffer]

5 a-side rules - 1 step only?

No minimum 10 yard clearance?

Whenever someone stands really close to me in 5-a-side to block a "kick in" I am taking, I tell them I am going to blast it as hard as I can at their bollocks. I feign a massive kick and then gently pass to a team mate as they are clutching their nuts, eye's closed, expecting the pain that doesn't come. It never fails, even if you do it to the same person multiple times.

 

[sparx99]

Oh fantastic more changes.

Put the rules back to how they where in 1995 and then leave them alone.

All these changes are ruining football

Football has improved through rule changes. The back pass rule for example. They won’t always get it right but I do think we need to be open minded before we dismiss new ideas like this. Try it in pre-season friendlies and see what it looks like.

 

[Okey]

I remember they tried the 'kick in' in place of throws at the FIFA age group tournaments in the 90s. Never got any traction, suggesting it wasn't popular. I wonder if there's any evidence of renewed appeal. The stopped clock is long overdue. Didn't even Fergie advocate it back in the day?

 

[Random Task]

Re unlimited subs - there are a few interpretations of this. If it remains, once subbed off can't be subbed on again, then it's essentially just an increase to however many subs are on the bench... 6 outfield subs for PL... Which isn't a huge change.

However this changes by each tournament rule, so I assume it could mean rolling subs, players being subbed off and on again multiple times in a match. This would be an ENORMOUS change and would lead to specialists - a player being subbed on just to take free kicks, or a goalkeeper to save a penalty, or Fellaini being subbed on just to attack a corner. This would be awful IMO and would be damaging to the game.

Yes, that would help remove the issue of endlessly interchanging the same players, but heavily rewards the richer clubs who inevitably have deeper squads, furthering the gap between the likes of City and Stoke, for example.

 

[do.ob]

But is that a problem? Let the ref control the stoppages for injury subs.

So half the people will fake injuries to make the sub happen?

 

[Cloud7]

Unlimited subs is a bad idea. Five subs is good enough.

Stopping the clock when the ball goes out of play is great. Time wasting is so annoying.

 

[Skills]

So half the people will fake injuries to make the sub happen?

Sure sounds good. Any player going off during an injury time out, can't be subbed back on.

I should get hired by FIFA - i have a solution for everything.

 

[Big Ben Foster]

There isn't anything that would stop them introducing them now.

The fact that the clock doesn't currently stop surely would?

 

[kouroux]

Yes, that would help remove the issue of endlessly interchanging the same players, but heavily rewards the richer clubs who inevitably have deeper squads, furthering the gap between the likes of City and Stoke, for example.

There ain't a football rule that's making that gap smaller

 

[saivet]

Could do it like Rugby where the game only ends when the ball goes dead. You could still have extra time goals then.

Surely that would just encourage fouls or hoofing the ball out of play for the winning team?

 

[2 man midfield]

I like the clock stopping when the ball goes out of play one, been wanting this for years. The others I could do without though.

 

[duffer]

The fact that the clock doesn't currently stop surely would?

If the clock is ticking or not for 90 seconds while a player pretends to have cramp won't make a difference to whether or not they go to adverts.

The point of the proposed change is to stop the timewasting.

 

[saivet]

Wonder how it would work with VAR. If a ref misses a blatant penalty and play continues for a couple of minutes. When the penalty is given, do we get the 2mins back?