Jump to content
CFCnet 23/24 awards - voting OPEN! ×

New Premier League rules


Recommended Posts

With a new season upon us, it means new rules within the league that players, coaches and us fans need to try and get our heads around. Below are a few links that explain the new rules for those that are interested and also, this can serve as a point of references for when the usual debates about whether it was or wasn’t a penalty arise on the forums!

https://www.bt.com/sport/football/premier-league/premier-league-rule-changes

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12931160/rule-changes-for-new-football-season-officials-to-crackdown-on-dissent-be-more-lenient-on-physical-challenges-and-add-on-wasted-time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They always madly enforce these new rules early in the season so expect Liverpool to foul at will , the referees to ignore it and book and send off our players for complaining.

Three weeks in and all the new changes will be ignored unless it's us .

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Referees will now be obliged to specifically time how long the game is stopped before the re-start for game interruptions, such as a goal, a substitution, injury, or preparations for a free-kick.

So my suspicions have been correct all along. They have clearly never done this, and 'injury time' has always been a complete joke that allows refs to cheat teams they don't like, either by denying time they should be given or by adding on unwarranted time to allow teams to score. I was aware that the time it takes for throw-ins, corners and restarts after goals was not generally counted towards 'stoppage time', but I thought that refs were required to add on the time lost to injuries and free kicks, which - in any sane world - would require them to actually time such stoppages. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/08/2023 at 11:16, Backbiter said:

So my suspicions have been correct all along. They have clearly never done this, and 'injury time' has always been a complete joke that allows refs to cheat teams they don't like, either by denying time they should be given or by adding on unwarranted time to allow teams to score. I was aware that the time it takes for throw-ins, corners and restarts after goals was not generally counted towards 'stoppage time', but I thought that refs were required to add on the time lost to injuries and free kicks, which - in any sane world - would require them to actually time such stoppages. 

I watched Sunderland vs Ipswich yesterday (the Ref was generally really bad), but one thing I noticed is that when the 13 mins of injury time was awarded, Sunderland were 2-1 down and knew that they could then time-waste in order to prolong the game further in search of the equaliser. 

Lets see how long it takes someone like.... Man Utd or Saint Jurgen to REALLY exploit that little loophole....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bert19 said:

I watched Sunderland vs Ipswich yesterday (the Ref was generally really bad), but one thing I noticed is that when the 13 mins of injury time was awarded, Sunderland were 2-1 down and knew that they could then time-waste in order to prolong the game further in search of the equaliser. 

Lets see how long it takes someone like.... Man Utd or Saint Jurgen to REALLY exploit that little loophole....

 

But the game lasted for 90+14 so the northerners didn't get much out of their tactic 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, asvaberg said:

But the game lasted for 90+14 so the northerners didn't get much out of their tactic 🙂

No, but you can see a side looking for a goal against a tiring backline doing something like.... starting a melee that results in a red card and 2-3 minutes more being added on.  

I suspect it won't be long until it happens either.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bert19 said:

No, but you can see a side looking for a goal against a tiring backline doing something like.... starting a melee that results in a red card and 2-3 minutes more being added on.  

I suspect it won't be long until it happens either.

According to my sources, the second yellow (and red) was given to Hume in the 72nd minute. Is this not correct?

I don't want to be picky, and in no way argumenting. Just curiosity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, asvaberg said:

According to my sources, the second yellow (and red) was given to Hume in the 72nd minute. Is this not correct?

I don't want to be picky, and in no way argumenting. Just curiosity

Yeh-  that sounds about right for the red.  Ref should also have given Ipswich a penalty just after they went 2-0 up.  It was an obvious one, he was stood 5m away and then turned away so he didn't have to face the attacker after he refused it.  His lack of performance actually turned an easy win for Ipswich into a long, hard grind for them. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/08/2023 at 10:37, Mark Kelly said:

They always madly enforce these new rules early in the season so expect Liverpool to foul at will , the referees to ignore it and book and send off our players for complaining.

Three weeks in and all the new changes will be ignored unless it's us .

It will be an absolute sh*t show, with some blatant fouls not being given, whilst a load of players get sent off for minor infringements.

They will sit down about 6 weeks into the new season, discuss where they are going wrong, and effectively revert back to how it is now. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how much time Newcastle will waste this season, they were the kings of time wasting last season.  My pet hates are players going down with imaginary injuries and rolling around, and these stupid stoppage time substitutions which have no effect on the game other than just to kill time, subs in stoppage time should be banned, and if a player gets injured, tough, play the remainder of the game with 10 or less men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Sciatika said:

I get the impression that half the game will be in stoppage time. Not sure what the broadcast media will make of that. 

Spare a thought for those who travel away to an 8pm Sunday fixture which Sky have scheduled  (whilst at the same time claiming to care about the impact on the environment of thousands of fans having to use cars because no trains are running). 

 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, blueandproud said:

I wonder how much time Newcastle will waste this season, they were the kings of time wasting last season.  My pet hates are players going down with imaginary injuries and rolling around, and these stupid stoppage time substitutions which have no effect on the game other than just to kill time, subs in stoppage time should be banned, and if a player gets injured, tough, play the remainder of the game with 10 or less men.

If time-keeping was done properly, transparently and professionally by the officials, teams wouldn't benefit by time-wasting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sciatika said:

I get the impression that half the game will be in stoppage time. Not sure what the broadcast media will make of that. 

Not sure what the rules are, however would not be surprised to see teams doing tactical substitutions e.g. closing out games closer to the 90th minute rather than 80th minute 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DannyLB said:

Did I miss this? Where are you getting this from?

IFAB have implemented a rule change whereby players will be booked and an indirect free-kick awarded if a player: “initiates a deliberate trick for the ball to be passed (including from a free kick or goal kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands; the goalkeeper is penalised if responsible for initiating the deliberate trick.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Bones said:

IFAB have implemented a rule change whereby players will be booked and an indirect free-kick awarded if a player: “initiates a deliberate trick for the ball to be passed (including from a free kick or goal kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands; the goalkeeper is penalised if responsible for initiating the deliberate trick.”

 

Why are they so worried about this ?

Has anyone in the history of the game ever thought a game was ruined because a player chested the ball back to the keeper?

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Bones said:

IFAB have implemented a rule change whereby players will be booked and an indirect free-kick awarded if a player: “initiates a deliberate trick for the ball to be passed (including from a free kick or goal kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands; the goalkeeper is penalised if responsible for initiating the deliberate trick.”

 

Here are the actual rules to which you refer, I can't see any mention of this in the changes section...

https://downloads.theifab.com/downloads/laws-of-the-game-2023-24?l=en

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Bones said:

IFAB have implemented a rule change whereby players will be booked and an indirect free-kick awarded if a player: “initiates a deliberate trick for the ball to be passed (including from a free kick or goal kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands; the goalkeeper is penalised if responsible for initiating the deliberate trick.”

 

I'm not sure it actually means you can't head or chest the ball back to the keeper. The rule as quoted here "whether or not the keeper touches it with their hands" suggests you can't even pass back to the keeper

It is something to do with causing a deception to "circumvent the Law" whatever that means. Not sure what it actually means but I don't think it means the ball can't be passed back to the keeper anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lump Of Celery said:

I'm not sure it actually means you can't head or chest the ball back to the keeper. The rule as quoted here "whether or not the keeper touches it with their hands" suggests you can't even pass back to the keeper

It is something to do with causing a deception to "circumvent the Law" whatever that means. Not sure what it actually means but I don't think it means the ball can't be passed back to the keeper anymore

It means you can't flick it up and then head it back to the keeper. If the other team puts in a cross, defenders can still chest or head it to their keeper.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chiswickblue said:

It means you can't flick it up and then head it back to the keeper. If the other team puts in a cross, defenders can still chest or head it to their keeper.

Yes I just found a random Facebook video with some comments saying that. Also seems the change came in a couple of years ago anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Bones said:

IFAB have implemented a rule change whereby players will be booked and an indirect free-kick awarded if a player: “initiates a deliberate trick for the ball to be passed (including from a free kick or goal kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands; the goalkeeper is penalised if responsible for initiating the deliberate trick.”

 

published 2 years ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, chiswickblue said:

It means you can't flick it up and then head it back to the keeper. If the other team puts in a cross, defenders can still chest or head it to their keeper.

what about the diving header when the ball is rolling along the floor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...