A&H

2023/24 Law Changes

The Referee Store
george.g said:
Believe these will be the law changes?


KFTPM becoming penalties is an interesting one, but a change I like.
Click to expand...
Meh. It’s just bringing fan-speak into the Laws—same as handball. They aren’t penalties, as no offense occurred to be penalized, and hand ball is used for a sport played against a wall. Next year do we see “last man”in the Laws? Yeah, and get off my lawn!
 
Is law 3 now saying the goal stands if the extra person from the team that scores doesn't interfere?

That would b absurd so assuming I've misread it.
 
bester said:
Is law 3 now saying the goal stands if the extra person from the team that scores doesn't interfere?

That would b absurd so assuming I've misread it.
Click to expand...
It's a response to the goals in the later stages of the WC where subs had started to run onto the field in celebration a second or two early.

They're right to say people don't want goals disallowed for that, but it's not a particularly well-thought through statement unsurprisingly. "Interference" in this context is obviously very different to "interference" in an offside context, which means we now have a keyword in the law that means two different things in different contexts, which is pretty poor drafting.
 
GraemeS said:
It's a response to the goals in the later stages of the WC where subs had started to run onto the field in celebration a second or two early.

They're right to say people don't want goals disallowed for that, but it's not a particularly well-thought through statement unsurprisingly. "Interference" in this context is obviously very different to "interference" in an offside context, which means we now have a keyword in the law that means two different things in different contexts, which is pretty poor drafting.
Click to expand...
Please excuse me a minute whilst I resuscitate myself from the shock 🫨
 
At the pro level it probably works just fine. At grass roots, where subs are less well controlled, it isn't very helpful for the situation where there are actually 12 players on the field and we try to decide who the extra player is and whether that player interfered.
 
A very typical narrow focus change from IFAB to 'fix' an incident that has happened in a big game that addresses that very situation but creates many other problems. It's not the first time they have done this.
 
one said:
A very typical narrow focus change from IFAB to 'fix' an incident that has happened in a big game that addresses that very situation but creates many other problems. It's not the first time they have done this.
Click to expand...
Argh! So daft. Seems like they have not thought through at all.

Grassroots matches here all rolling (unsupervised) subs. So, a team has 13 on the field and scores. You turn around, realise… and now allow the goal?

Insane. Is “interfering with play” explained anywhere else than law 11? How liberal an interpretation can we apply here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top