The Ref Stop

IFAB Law Changes for 2025/26

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Peter Grove said:
The law amendment states that, "There is no disciplinary action unless the goalkeeper repeatedly commits the offence."

It doesn't specify exactly what constitutes "repeatedly" but if the PL has decided that it should be for the second occurrence, then I guess that's up to them.

Based on the trials, according to multiple reports there were only four offences in total, in hundreds of games, so it seems unlikely there were ever any repeat offences within the same game.
Click to expand...
It’s a bit of stupidity in the Laws (akin to cautioning for PK offenses by GKs, but I digress). The caution isn’t going to change GK behavior at all. It is giving the opponent the FK in the PA that GKs are going to are about. But we put this pointless noise into the Laws for no good reason.
 
The Ref Stop
I think Collina is now trying to confuse matters. For me we blow at 8 or not at all. Unhelpful:

Countdown for goalkeepers​

A new plan to speed up the game will be implemented at the Club World Cup and the European Under-21 Championship, in which referees will only allow goalkeepers eight seconds to release the ball.

After three seconds, the referee will raise their hand in the air and count down from five to notify the goalkeeper he has to release. If he fails, the attacking side will be awarded a corner.

Collina said it will largely be a preventative measure and that a corner was awarded twice in 160 games when it was trialled in South America.

"The referees should be flexible," he said. "If a goalkeeper has the ball for 8.1 seconds it is not necessarily a corner.

"But we have had a lot of instances of goalkeepers keeping the ball for 25 seconds. There is nothing entertaining about that."

www.bbc.co.uk

Club World Cup: Fifa to trial accelerated offside technology at tournament

Club World Cup officials will use an accelerated offside technology that will tell them to stop the game immediately if a player is offside.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
Kent Ref said:
I think Collina is now trying to confuse matters. For me we blow at 8 or not at all. Unhelpful:

Countdown for goalkeepers​

A new plan to speed up the game will be implemented at the Club World Cup and the European Under-21 Championship, in which referees will only allow goalkeepers eight seconds to release the ball.

After three seconds, the referee will raise their hand in the air and count down from five to notify the goalkeeper he has to release. If he fails, the attacking side will be awarded a corner.

Collina said it will largely be a preventative measure and that a corner was awarded twice in 160 games when it was trialled in South America.

"The referees should be flexible," he said. "If a goalkeeper has the ball for 8.1 seconds it is not necessarily a corner.

"But we have had a lot of instances of goalkeepers keeping the ball for 25 seconds. There is nothing entertaining about that."

www.bbc.co.uk

Club World Cup: Fifa to trial accelerated offside technology at tournament

Club World Cup officials will use an accelerated offside technology that will tell them to stop the game immediately if a player is offside.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree. There reason we are where we are now is that some authority said at some stage


"The referees should be flexible, If a goalkeeper has the ball for 6.1 seconds it is not necessarily a free kick" after the 6 seconds law was introduced.

On another note, I am fairly confident after a few years that this law has established and is working, the restart will change to IFK from the place the offence took place, as it should.
 
Kent Ref said:
I think Collina is now trying to confuse matters. For me we blow at 8 or not at all. Unhelpful:

Countdown for goalkeepers​

A new plan to speed up the game will be implemented at the Club World Cup and the European Under-21 Championship, in which referees will only allow goalkeepers eight seconds to release the ball.

After three seconds, the referee will raise their hand in the air and count down from five to notify the goalkeeper he has to release. If he fails, the attacking side will be awarded a corner.

Collina said it will largely be a preventative measure and that a corner was awarded twice in 160 games when it was trialled in South America.

"The referees should be flexible," he said. "If a goalkeeper has the ball for 8.1 seconds it is not necessarily a corner.

"But we have had a lot of instances of goalkeepers keeping the ball for 25 seconds. There is nothing entertaining about that."

www.bbc.co.uk

Club World Cup: Fifa to trial accelerated offside technology at tournament

Club World Cup officials will use an accelerated offside technology that will tell them to stop the game immediately if a player is offside.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
It's because they dont actually want the officials to punish this. Im certain a lot of these law changes are just done to justify a salary for certain people.

If flexibility allows 8.1 seconds, what about 8.2/3/4 and so on?

I know there are laws out there that can have their application stretched a tad, but when something is as black & white as this one, I dont see any reason why it shouldn't be dealt with consistently and correctly.
 
Runner Ref said:
It's because they dont actually want the officials to punish this. Im certain a lot of these law changes are just done to justify a salary for certain people.

If flexibility allows 8.1 seconds, what about 8.2/3/4 and so on?

I know there are laws out there that can have their application stretched a tad, but when something is as black & white as this one, I dont see any reason why it shouldn't be dealt with consistently and correctly.
Click to expand...
Like the previous 6 seconds was applied "flexibly"?

This is farcical. Don't bring in a new LOTG and then say "don't apply it".

Stupid.
 
one said:
On another note, I am fairly confident after a few years that this law has established and is working, the restart will change to IFK from the place the offence took place, as it should.
Click to expand...
Hard disagree.
The restart was changed to make it more likely to be punished and because the IDFK didn't seem like a punishment befitting the crime (and absolutely correctly in my opinion)

Don't disagree that it could be one of those things that phases out into being equally as unpunished as it is currently if we're not careful, but can't even see why they would revert to IDFK restart.
 
I think that you're overstating the strictness with which this should be applied.

There are always many moving parts to game and time management, that will necessitate some flexibility in the time.

What we do have is now a clear countdown from 5 which gives us flex in the 3s before we start visually counting.

Example: GK catches a ball and then with no need falls to the floor. This will be a strict application moment.

Example: striker is Fing around trying to prevent/interfere with GK from releasing, I'm not about to start rewarding the attacker for being a prat and so the 3s is going to get flexed or I'm going to just bang out and idfk to get rid of him.

Furthermore there are lots of times we as referees actively slow the game down..this is a fact. Such as taking time over a sub, or free kick being taken when the game temperature is high. This is another opportunity, where appropriate, that we can hold a little discretion on the 3 seconds. Of course when the 5 goes up, that's when players know they have to get it going. You as the referee are in control.

This is the beauty of the visual count, now, rather than shouting this time keeper or similar and everyone can see you not applying 6s, you throw up the 5s and everyone knows we're getting going.

Anyone who isn't thinking about how this can be used positively and only thinking 8s and it's a corner has got the spirit of this change all wrong imo
 
JamesL said:
Anyone who isn't thinking about how this can be used positively and only thinking 8s and it's a corner has got the spirit of this change all wrong imo
Click to expand...
This is the biggest issue, the spirit. The spirit is something that tends to be exclusively used within refereeing and IFAB.

Fans want the game moving, which is what this change should be helping with. Fans dont want to have to sit through goalkeepers taking 20+ seconds to release the ball. Much like they dont want tinsee referees warning players at every corner. But refereeing is now so obsessed with managing things, they forget this. The irony is, it's believed that managing all of this with the above examples is seen as a positive, when it really isn't.
 
Runner Ref said:
This is the biggest issue, the spirit. The spirit is something that tends to be exclusively used within refereeing and IFAB.

Fans want the game moving, which is what this change should be helping with. Fans dont want to have to sit through goalkeepers taking 20+ seconds to release the ball. Much like they dont want tinsee referees warning players at every corner. But refereeing is now so obsessed with managing things, they forget this. The irony is, it's believed that managing all of this with the above examples is seen as a positive, when it really isn't.
Click to expand...
We're not worlds apart on this.

The change will get the game moving much faster than it is now. Although I expect teams will (try to) take more time when the ball is dead to compensate.

I think the issue, especially with the optics is the publicised time limit. But it has to have one. So if we were at @Kent Ref 's 28 seconds and we drive that to 9s or 10s or 11s that's still signifantly faster and infinitely better then complete ignorance to the law.

Its possible we might get through a few iterations of the wording here as the effect of the law change is realised such as the 2 examples I noted no longer being problematic.
 
RefereeX said:
Hard disagree.
The restart was changed to make it more likely to be punished and because the IDFK didn't seem like a punishment befitting the crime (and absolutely correctly in my opinion)

Don't disagree that it could be one of those things that phases out into being equally as unpunished as it is currently if we're not careful, but can't even see why they would revert to IDFK restart.
Click to expand...
Not too dissimilar to 'backpass' or control with hand after release in terms of punishment fitting the crime or how often it is given because the punishment is harsh.

The point is, when it stops happening or at least becomes very rare because the norm is for player/keepers not to risk it, then being consistent is more beneficial than the rare harsh punishment. Anyway, it's moot point for now.
 
one said:
Not too dissimilar to 'backpass' or control with hand after release in terms of punishment fitting the crime or how often it is given because the punishment is harsh.

The point is, when it stops happening or at least becomes very rare because the norm is for player/keepers not to risk it, then being consistent is more beneficial than the rare harsh punishment. Anyway, it's moot point for now.
Click to expand...
Not sure that I agree that the punishment for a 'backpass' is not befitting of the crime. A backpass can deny an OGSO or SPA, or in the very least affect an potential attack. These situations at the very least deserve an IDFK IMO. But as you say, moot point for now.
 
I don’t really see what the issue is with this. We’re counting it on fingers rather than using a watch, so there’s going to be an element of estimation. If the speed limit was 8mph you wouldn’t expect to be prosecuted for going 8.1 mph. If he’d said ignore it if they get to 10 or even 9 seconds I’d be concerned, but what I’d guess they don’t want penalising is where a keeper releases it almost simultaneously with the referee reaching 8 seconds. In that case he might have released it on 8 seconds, 7.9 seconds or 8.1 seconds, it makes next to no difference.
 
RustyRef said:
I don’t really see what the issue is with this. We’re counting it on fingers rather than using a watch, so there’s going to be an element of estimation. If the speed limit was 8mph you wouldn’t expect to be prosecuted for going 8.1 mph. If he’d said ignore it if they get to 10 or even 9 seconds I’d be concerned, but what I’d guess they don’t want penalising is where a keeper releases it almost simultaneously with the referee reaching 8 seconds. In that case he might have released it on 8 seconds, 7.9 seconds or 8.1 seconds, it makes next to no difference.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. Notwithstanding the external factors that also affect the time counting.
I think the issue we'll see is people will focus in on the time of 8s as opposed to the spirit which is get the game continuing as quickly as practically possible.
 
JamesL said:
Exactly this. Notwithstanding the external factors that also affect the time counting.
I think the issue we'll see is people will focus in on the time of 8s as opposed to the spirit which is get the game continuing as quickly as practically possible.
Click to expand...
. . . and a lot of referees will "forget to start the physical count", or will count slowly, and we will be back where we started, sadly . . .
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
. . . and a lot of referees will "forget to start the physical count", or will count slowly, and we will be back where we started, sadly . . .
Click to expand...
Which is kind of my point; either do it or dont. But dont do a half arsed attempt.

Goalkeepers had to get used yo no longer being able to pick up a backpass. I'm sure they can adapt to not holding onto the ball forever.

My main concern (think it was mentioned esrlier) is teams then running the clock down for restarts to counter act this. They're going to need to be on top of that for this to work.
 
Last edited:
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
. . . and a lot of referees will "forget to start the physical count", or will count slowly, and we will be back where we started, sadly . . .
Click to expand...
I don't see how we can get back to as bad as we started. As I said earlier, even when stretched, we will still be in a far better place and achieving what this change is setting out to do.
 
Runner Ref said:
Goalkeepers had to get used yo no longer being able to pick up a backpass. I'm sure they can adapt to not holding onto the ball forever.
Click to expand...
That’s probably a good example though of where change is good. A lot of people said that law change would ruin the game, but is was probably the best thing that ever happened to football as it made games much more attacking.

People generally don’t like change, I’m sometimes one of those people when the change seems to make little sense, but I really think this one will improve the game for the better.
 
RustyRef said:
That’s probably a good example though of where change is good. A lot of people said that law change would ruin the game, but is was probably the best thing that ever happened to football as it made games much more attacking.

People generally don’t like change, I’m sometimes one of those people when the change seems to make little sense, but I really think this one will improve the game for the better.
Click to expand...
And we're in agreement there. My point is, it has to be enforced, otherwise its pointless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top