2018/2019 Laws of the game

[SamSkywalker]

Football's fate for the World Cup and the upcoming season is sealed, yet we don't know what the precise wording of the new laws will be. However, to whet our appetites, we have a couple of things from the IFAB's press release: VAR is to be enshrined into law, to the surprise of no one, and an additional substitution in extra time has been allowed. Little is known about the fine print of this, and I must admit that I ignore whether the Russia WC will implement this change or not.

I also leave you here the agenda of the 132th AGM.

 

[RobOda]

Out of curiosity; How do us people down the bottom of the footballing ladder raise something for the agenda of IFAB?

 

[WilliamD]

There were some good ideas kicking around about how to end a match last year. Seems not to have made the cut. The last I heard the idea was that after 90 mins + added (decided by the ref) the game would end the next time the ball has gone out of the FoP. I think that’s a very interesting, potentially exciting, and effective way to end a match.

 

[SamSkywalker]

Out of curiosity; How do us people down the bottom of the footballing ladder raise something for the agenda of IFAB?

Well, statutes of the IFAB say that only their members may propose amendments to the lotg. Recall that the members are FAs from England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and FIFA. If you are British, the easiest way seems convincing your FA to raise your points there. If you're not, then you should convince your national FA, and it should convince FIFA.

Or you can submit your thoughts to lawenquiries@theifab.com, and probably David Elleray himself will be happy to answer your queries.

 

[SamSkywalker]

There were some good ideas kicking around about how to end a match last year. Seems not to have made the cut. The last I heard the idea was that after 90 mins + added (decided by the ref) the game would end the next time the ball has gone out of the FoP. I think that’s a very interesting, potentially exciting, and effective way to end a match.

In principle, I don't like the idea. It looks that wasting tame during stoppage time would become a better idea, as no more time would be allowed. Besides, I understand that time must be over at some point, no matter whether a team are able to keep possession endlessly or not.

Just my two pence!

 

[RobOda]

Well, statutes of the IFAB say that only their members may propose amendments to the lotg. Recall that the members are FAs from England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and FIFA. If you are British, the easiest way seems convincing your FA to raise your points there. If you're not, then you should convince your national FA, and it should convince FIFA.

Or you can submit your thoughts to lawenquiries@theifab.com, and probably David Elleray himself will be happy to answer your queries.

Ah right. I wanted to raise them putting exemptions for disability equipment in the laws.

I think at the moment common sense works here, but I've met a few referees that, ah, let's say they're a bit of a stick in the mud at not being a bit flexible on some things. @_@

 

[SamSkywalker]

Ah right. I wanted to raise them putting exemptions for disability equipment in the laws.

I think at the moment common sense works here, but I've met a few referees that, ah, let's say they're a bit of a stick in the mud at not being a bit flexible on some things. @_@

Oh, in order to bring disability changes to the laws you don’t need to go that far. On page 23 of the laws, it clearly says that some disability changes may be made by national FAs, and these FAs may also make further changes (not necessarily on a basis of disability) provided they are granted permission by the IFAB.

So you’d only need to convince your FA, which is far a less complex task

 

[RobOda]

Oh, in order to bring disability changes to the laws you don’t need to go that far. On page 23 of the laws, it clearly says that some disability changes may be made by national FAs, and these FAs may also make further changes (not necessarily on a basis of disability) provided they are granted permission by the IFAB.

So you’d only need to convince your FA, which is far a less complex task

Ah nice. I might bring it up at the society meeting and see if we can do that. Thank you.

 

[SamSkywalker]

Ah nice. I might bring it up at the society meeting and see if we can do that. Thank you.

You’re most welcome!

 

[Peter Grove]

There were some good ideas kicking around about how to end a match last year. Seems not to have made the cut. The last I heard the idea was that after 90 mins + added (decided by the ref) the game would end the next time the ball has gone out of the FoP. I think that’s a very interesting, potentially exciting, and effective way to end a match.

That was just one of the suggestions related to the overall question of timing and time-wasting within the game that form part of the 'Fair Play' initiative. The IFAB set up a separate website for this:

IFAB Fair Play site

If you go to that site you will find the idea you mentioned - plus many, many others. Most of these were not and are not actual proposals for laws amendments and many may never be. I suppose some might eventually lead to actual proposals but others may not.

 

[SamSkywalker]

That was just one of the suggestions related to the overall question of timing and time-wasting within the game that form part of the 'Fair Play' initiative. The IFAB set up a separate website for this:

IFAB Fair Play site

If you go to that site you will find the idea you mentioned - plus many, many others. Most of these were not and are not actual proposals for laws amendments and many may never be. I suppose some might eventually lead to actual proposals but others may not.

Honestly, there are some good ideas, some interesting ideas, and some bad ideas (in my opinion). But it's quite remarkable that the IFAB have stepped out and told the world 'hey, we know you're annoyed by these things, let's see how we sort them out'. To be fair, I'm quite delighted with their work and communicative effort since the 2016/17 great lotg revision.

 

[happy whistler]

Some good ideas to stop time wasting but there is an extra one i think they should have added. If a player takes ball into corner and tries to block opponent from getting to ball an indirect free kick could be awarded for impeding their opponent.

 

[alexgr]

Some good ideas to stop time wasting but there is an extra one i think they should have added. If a player takes ball into corner and tries to block opponent from getting to ball an indirect free kick could be awarded for impeding their opponent.

That's not time wasting, that's running down time. Good luck penalising tactical play.

 

[one]

Some good ideas to stop time wasting but there is an extra one i think they should have added. If a player takes ball into corner and tries to block opponent from getting to ball an indirect free kick could be awarded for impeding their opponent.

How if the defenders pass the ball to each other more than five times in their own half award an IFK for excessive passing

 

[SamSkywalker]

How if the defenders pass the ball to each other more than five times in their own half award an IFK for excessive passing

Please, no!

If the defenders pass the ball to each other more than five times in their own half, then the other side should learn some basics about pressure.

This is not basketball!

 

[one]

Please, no!

If the defenders pass the ball to each other more than five times in their own half, then the other side should learn some basics about pressure.

This is not basketball!

I even used an emoji for you mate I don't know what else I could have done. You are right and same goes for when ball is taken to the corner.

 

[SamSkywalker]

I even used an emoji for you mate I don't know what else I could have done. You are right and same goes for when ball is taken to the corner.

oh sorry, I'm a bit clumsy with humour at this time of the day

I took it at face value and my first reaction was 'but.... WHAT!?' Now I laugh at my own stupidity...

 

[cwyeary]

I'm curious to see what the minor wording change to DOGSO and SPA was. All we know is that it was approved.

 

[RobOda]

You’re most welcome!

Thought I'd post an update:

So, I emailed the IFAB address in the book, and got a response from David Elleray.

I asked for clarification on Law 5 (and ergo: 4) regarding equipment: Specifically the rules on "communication equipment". Basically, I wanted to know if a referee or players could wear hearing aids, or cochlear devices (for hearing impairment), since technically speaking you could argue the Law outright prohibits them, *and* because I've encountered some referees who felt that there were no exceptions allowed on this front.

And the answer from Mr. Elleray, for Law 5 anyway, is that officially within the spirit of the Laws these devices are permitted. (I didn't get an answer on Law 4 though, but that's okay.)

Might be a common sense one, but it's re-assuring to have it in black and white.

 

[SamSkywalker]

Thought I'd post an update:

So, I emailed the IFAB address in the book, and got a response from David Elleray.

I asked for clarification on Law 5 (and ergo: 4) regarding equipment: Specifically the rules on "communication equipment". Basically, I wanted to know if a referee or players could wear hearing aids, or cochlear devices (for hearing impairment), since technically speaking you could argue the Law outright prohibits them, *and* because I've encountered some referees who felt that there were no exceptions allowed on this front.

And the answer from Mr. Elleray, for Law 5 anyway, is that officially within the spirit of the Laws these devices are permitted. (I didn't get an answer on Law 4 though, but that's okay.)

Might be a common sense one, but it's re-assuring to have it in black and white.

Indeed, I think that the letter of the lotg shouldn't ban communication equipment but intercommunication equipment. The difference in wording may seem a nuisance, but I think that's the very difference between a device helping the hard of earing and a device enabling the players communicate with each other.

But still, I think that the common sense thing has been put there to avoid a myriad of law changes here and there.