Dutch Referee Blog - Laws of the Game changes for 2020-2021

Laws of the Game changes for 2020-2021. Some highlights first, then the summary. You can also download the full text pdf. Summary of Laws of the Game changes for 2020-2021 Law 1 – The Field of Play Goalposts and the crossbar may be a combination of the four basic shapes Law 10 – Determining the […]

Continue reading...

 

[Big Cat]

IMHO, IFAB took a wrong turn some years back and there may be no going back. Once upon a time, the Laws were relatively elegant with basic concepts that relied upon the judgment of the referee to implement. For example, in my 70's LOTG, there were 4 reasons for cautions (enter/reenter, PI, dissent, ungentlemanly conduct) and three for send offs (2C, SFP/VC, foul and abusive language). Referees were trusted to apply those with common sense as the game demanded--the key language of the Laws, which was explcit in the Laws was "in the opinion of the referee." With time, the general descriptions became more directives, which required more specifics, which required more exceptions, and so on. Perhaps aided by TV replay, the Game's desire for consistency became extreme, and the elegance of simple Laws has been gradually being replaced by a set of endless specific rules like we see in other sports. I see it as a shame, but I also don't think there is any going back at this stage of evolution.

Excellent synopsis of the last 50 years! Saved me the bother of learning the history of the Laws. Massive thanks

 

[Sheffields Finest]

So, common sense refereeing and a fairly simple LOTG has been replaced with droid box ticking physically fitter referees ultimately confused by the enhanced speed, stupid IFAB edicts, and then to compound everything VAR muddies the water at the top level too. Easy really! Who’d be a ref!

 

[one]

IMHO, IFAB took a wrong turn some years back and there may be no going back. Once upon a time, the Laws were relatively elegant with basic concepts that relied upon the judgment of the referee to implement. For example, in my 70's LOTG, there were 4 reasons for cautions (enter/reenter, PI, dissent, ungentlemanly conduct) and three for send offs (2C, SFP/VC, foul and abusive language). Referees were trusted to apply those with common sense as the game demanded--the key language of the Laws, which was explcit in the Laws was "in the opinion of the referee." With time, the general descriptions became more directives, which required more specifics, which required more exceptions, and so on. Perhaps aided by TV replay, the Game's desire for consistency became extreme, and the elegance of simple Laws has been gradually being replaced by a set of endless specific rules like we see in other sports. I see it as a shame, but I also don't think there is any going back at this stage of evolution.

I attempt to summerise this in a few words. Football changed from a sport to a business for the law makers.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

Football pandered to the TV paymasters... and they all got drunk on the sports rights!

 

[RobOda]

I wouldn't go that far, but I would say it is a good incentive to referees to re-calibrate what "advantage" means.

I think you have more faith in the 'bad' referees changing than I do then!

I imagine it will be an interesting one to discuss at the seminars this year, and to discuss with assessors next season - though when that will be, who knows at this point.

I'm deliberately ignoring the new laws right now until we have confirmation that our season is cancelled, since we're still in the 'postponed' stage, believe it or not! And I don't want to get confused if we're summoned back, though that's incredibly unlikely at this point. >_>

 

[socal lurker]

I think you have more faith in the 'bad' referees changing than I do then!

We can dream!

But seriously, there are referees who are not yet good but are open to improvement and those who are not good but think they are and no more than anyone else. The first group can learn. (And actually, I think on this issue, there are not-bad referees who over-use advantage by not fully processing the value of the free kick--those are the referees most likely to actually take this as an incentive to think about how the apply advantage.)