I'm always a bit amazed how these things do (not) trickle down in an orderly fashion. I came across this last week. Note the English version of the document published on September 24th: http://theifab.com/document/circulars The first interesting thing is that it's an IFAB Circular (and not FIFA branded). That seems consistent with the push by Elleray to reclaim full authority over the Laws. The second thing is that this document took immediate effect on September 25th, yet I haven't heard anything about it from USSF or PRO. I understand that it's very difficult to make a change like this to the masses (so understand USSF not saying anything and just waiting until the next LOTG are published), but you would think PRO would need to communicate this to relevant officials. As far as the content of the document goes, most of it can be described as some housekeeping clarifications. But Page 3 is fascinating to me. First, the Law 11 clarification--prompted by VAR--is going to have real-world effects in professional matches AND is something that television broadcasters need to know immediately. Also, it's the exact opposite of how I thought the IFAB would rule on something like this. It's saying the initial part of the final "touch" is the snapshot, rather than the millisecond when the ball leaves the foot and is no longer in contact. Doesn't effect how we call the match at all (aside from serving in a VAR role), but it could be huge next year in Russia. The Law 12 changes/clarifications are also interesting.
This confirms an answer that Elleray gave in another group I frequent. The keeper can and should be cautioned or sent off for throwing an object at the ball even when it would occur in the PA. This essentially means throwing objects is an offense outside the normal 10 DFK offenses. Something I had suspected and proposed in the other group but really wanted to see written confirmation for.
The USSF posted this circular Sept 27 on their box.com site for instructors. Just FYI. https://ussoccer.app.box.com/s/ruqcsf0671k1bcf6dzwf/file/230472808142
This is another in the broadening examples of how IFAB has been moving the LOTG from a set of general principles to more and more narrow dictates for specific circumstances (baseball and pointyball, here we come!). But thank goodness they addressed this one! That epidemic of GK's throwing things at the ball will finally come to an end! And so important to warrant a mid-year response! George Orwell would be proud of this "clarification," which is at odds with the language of Law 12. (Prior to this "clarification," I don't think there was any conceivable way under the LOTG to tease a PK out of throwing an object at the ball by the GK. I think it was still fairly easily seen as USB, though I believe some argued (on here?) that since it was a species of handling, the exculpatory language for GK prevented any call against the keeper.)
I agree. But I also like that they actually did address this. Because if you were he unfortunate Referee that had this situation you would have had to explain why the keeper gets no card and there was no PK awarded. We all know the extension of the hand principle and there in lied the loophole for the keeper, that said I don’t think anyone would have walked away from that situation feeling good with the lack of equitable punishment for the keeper.
It's one of those weird ones that was originally address in the Q&A back in 2006, and the answer given then just doesn't sit quite right with the 16-17 Law rewrite. I'm glad that they clarified, and equally glad that they simplified the results with such incidents. It's one of those things that obviously happened somewhere, else the question would never have been raised...
I suppose prior to this clarification, it would have been up to the individual referee to correctly determine that the act was unsporting. Restart would have been an IFK where the thrown object struck the ball, I suppose.
And told us how? Sorry if I missed their announcement but this has been a gripe of mine for a while. The whole trickle down of information it too haphazard in my opinion and never gets everywhere it needs to go and certainly not consistently if at all. (not directed at all to @sulfur - thank you for posting the link!)
Actually, it has been official policy since 2015 that the IFAB has authority for all publications related to the Laws of the Game and FIFA has stopped issuing laws-related circulars since that time. IFAB Circular no. 1 dated May 1, 2015 stated as follows: It seems to me this was a major part of the overall rationale for making the IFAB into a permanent organisation and an independent legal entity with its own statutes, internal structures and headquarters in the first place, rather than some kind of personal action by David Elleray.
When did the IFAB hire Elleray? Allow me to amend or clarify my point: the purpose of David Elleray's employment at IFAB is to execute exactly what you write above. So Elleray is the personification of the IFAB's efforts to reclaim full authority over the Laws (and he appears to relish the task). I did not mean to imply it was some sort of unsanctioned personal crusade by Elleray.
Just to point out - While USSF matches are being played now under the 2017-18 LOTG this circular modifies, PRO assigned matches are not. Current MLS/USL/NASL/NWSL seasons are 16-17 version
I'm not sure but I don't think it could have been before 2015 since prior to that as far as I'm aware, the IFAB was not a discrete organisation with a permanent presence, just an ad hoc body that used to convene twice (or occasionally three times) a year for their AGM and business meetings. I do know that as late as mid-2014, he was still with the FA. In November 2014 he was mentioned as being one of the 15 members of an IFAB Technical Advisory Panel (though with no special role, as far as I can tell) and on their website, the IFAB says they selected him in 2016 to rewrite the Laws of the Game. The earliest reference I can find to him being styled as IFAB Technical Director is a press release on the IFAB website dated May 2016. So based on the various pieces of information I can glean, my guess is that they hired him some time in 2016 (and after they had already declared themselves the sole body responsible for laws-related matters).
Honestly, the BEST reason I can think of for MLS ever moving to a fall to spring schedule is to not have two sets of Laws to think about in the second half of every season.