Law Changes from July 2024

[Kent Ref]

You previously mentioned a defender getting involved. If a defender gets involved but a goal is scored, then you allow the goal.

Yes, that's a goal.

The rewrite will stop me having penalties being retaken for attacking team encroachment. Even though i always shout "don't go in the area before the ball is kicked" before pens attackers seem to transgress a lot more than defenders in YOUTH football.

 

[JamesL]

"don't go in the area before the ball is kicked"

Pedantry alert but strictly speaking this means they can go into the penalty arc. I know it's not what you mean but to avoid confusion I usually do a walk around the edge, get players to step off the lines (as they must remain outside) and point to the penalty arc as the area that the must remain outside of.

 

[socal lurker]

My instructions in youth games is “remember the whistle is for the kicker not for you. You have to wait until the ball is kicked.” I can’t remember having to retake a PK for outfield player encroachment. (I’. Not looking for trifling encroachment.)

 

[Mr Dean]

Anyone know if IFAB have published the wording of the law changes? They normally have a document outlining the text changes.

 

[JamesL]

Anyone know if IFAB have published the wording of the law changes? They normally have a document outlining the text changes.

Not yet. Usually published on IFAB's site when they are sent out.

 

[bloovee]

So does that imply that the 8 second rule is actually to be enforced?

Will it start when Pickford catches the ball, or when he stands up after falling on the ground with it?

It perhaps means more hoof ball, rather than GKs looking for a "to-feet" pass out.

 

[RefereeX]

So does that imply that the 8 second rule is actually to be enforced?

Will it start when Pickford catches the ball, or when he stands up after falling on the ground with it?

It perhaps means more hoof ball, rather than GKs looking for a "to-feet" pass out.

It's only a trial to be conducted somewhere. I find it very unlikely it will make it's way in to law.

 

[Gabriel]

The IFAB have now put the actual trial text for all three of these on their website (full protocols etc). I'm liking the look of them. They have introduced 2/3 new signals as well to help manage some of them.

 

[Mr Dean]

This captain-only thing is needlessly complicated. I was under the assumption that the trial would involve only captains being allowed to approach the referee from the very start of the match to the end. I can't imagine a referee using this new captain-only zone signal until it's already too late.

 

[Gabriel]

This captain-only thing is needlessly complicated. I was under the assumption that the trial would involve only captains being allowed to approach the referee from the very start of the match to the end. I can't imagine a referee using this new captain-only zone signal until it's already too late.

I agree with this bit tbh. It should just have been that, but it's better than nothing. If it's trialled at grassroots, I'd imagine a lot will use it after awarding penalties or late goals etc.

 

[one]

GOOD: "shinguards – these must be made of a suitable material and be of an appropriate size to provide reasonable protection and be covered by the socks. "
Now everyone can agrees size is important.

BAD: "Players are responsible for the size and suitability of their shinguards"
What does this mean for the referee? Are player not responsible for any other compulsory equipment? So if a player wears a different color undershirt they can tell the referee I'm only responsible for the shinpad but I'm not responsible for the color of undershirt?

So is a player doesn't wear a shinpad large enough, can I tell them " you are responsible to make sure your shinpads are large enough to provide reasonable protection. You haven't fulfilled you responsibility so I'm mot letting you play"

 

[ASM]

So is a player doesn't wear a shinpad large enough, can I tell them " you are responsible to make sure your shinpads are large enough to provide reasonable protection. You haven't fulfilled you responsibility so I'm mot letting you play"

No, not as far as I can see. Whilst we’re responsible for ensuring the application of the laws, Law 4 will now specifically removes the responsibility for judgement of of size/suitability of shin pads from the referee. As long as the player has some, that’s it for us officially from next season.

 

[one]

Law 4 will now specifically removes the responsibility for judgement of of size/suitability of shin pads from the referee.

This is your interpretation of "Players are responsible for the size and suitability of their shinguards". It clearly doesn't say referees are not responsible for the judgement or enforcing it. It just says players are responsible for it's size and stability. They are also responsible for wearing socks for example.

That's why I referred to it as BAD wording. It is open to interpretation.

 

[socal lurker]

This is your interpretation of "Players are responsible for the size and suitability of their shinguards". It clearly doesn't say referees are not responsible for the judgement or enforcing it. It just says players are responsible for it's size and stability. They are also responsible for wearing socks for example.

That's why I referred to it as BAD wording. It is open to interpretation.

While I understand your objection to IFABs choice of words (so surprising to see ), I don’t think there is any ambiguity of what they mean. And I would bet when they roll out the explanations, it will be express that the purpose is to not have refs evaluating the adequacy.

 

[JamesL]

Going to be some temporary dismissal carnage with the changes there.
Hopefully most will keep in the loop.

 

[Gabriel]

Going to be some temporary dismissal carnage with the changes there.
Hopefully most will keep in the loop.

If it is persistently punished it will decrease in frequency very quickly. Then that won't be something we have to worry about.

 

[WiisardNic]

This captain-only thing is needlessly complicated. I was under the assumption that the trial would involve only captains being allowed to approach the referee from the very start of the match to the end. I can't imagine a referee using this new captain-only zone signal until it's already too late.

I mean... I've just been doing it as personal preference since I started. Although I basically initiate it once I start having problems with other players coming up, I just let the captain know. I pretty much treat it like a Rugby match with how I talk to players after that.
Granted, this is in grassroots Australia, so... probably a little culturally different over here.

 

[DJIC]

This was a discarded damaged shin pad which amused me, size compared to a £2 coin. Currently Academy players believe these give them adequate protection?

 

[lincs22]

This was a discarded damaged shin pad which amused me, size compared to a £2 coin. Currently Academy players believe these give them adequate protection?

They don’t think about the future, they think what is trendy and the stars are wearing. They think the club will look after them if they are injured

 

[NoFoulsAllowed]

This was a discarded damaged shin pad which amused me, size compared to a £2 coin. Currently Academy players believe these give them adequate protection?

It honestly is the clubs, parents and players responsibility to ensure the players wear something sensible.

Half the new boots are paper thin and if you get stood on you may as well be in socks.