http://static-3eb8.kxcdn.com/docume...the_Game_2018_19_Law_Changes_explained_EN.pdf As expected, there were no major changes (outside of VAR of course), but there were a couple of interesting notes for us little guys. Law 3: Adds the 4th substitute in extra time as an option that the competition rules can use Law 5: Referees can't wear cameras. There have been a few videos (including MLS All-Star game) where the ref wore a GoPro. I wonder if this will stop that or if the camera is only in reference to VAR using it. Law 7: Drink breaks should not exceed one minute Law 11: Codifies that offside is judged when the ball is first touched (mostly for VAR purposes) Law 12: DFK for "spits at an opponent" is changed to "bites or spits at someone" Law 12: Throwing an object at an opponent, official, or the ball (and makes contact) is a DFK offense that is now separate from deliberate handling and striking. (So yes the famous what if the GK throws his boot at the ball and stops it from crossing the goal line is a PK + red for DOGSO-F) Law 12: Makes clear that a GK can pick the ball up after a save that rebounds from their hands Law 12: If advantage is played on a foul that is DOGSO and the advantage materializes and the goal is NOT scored, a player is allowed to be only cautioned for UB. Law 12: Adds two reasons for a caution to the LOTG - "entering the referee review area" and "excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal'. I'm not holding my breath that we'll see a crack down of this at the World Cup. Law 12: Clarifies that spitting or biting anyone is now a sending off offense and entering the video operation room is also a sending off offense. Law 12: Clarifies the restart when a player/sub/team official commits an offense against their own team outside the field of play. Play should restart with an IDFK on the boundary line closest to the offense. Law 15: Clarifies that players must be standing during a throw-in
Odd how we went from the TV screen signal being an automatic yellow to 'excessive use' being a yellow. It's like IFAB wants to encourage dissent. Some of these small things are actually pretty interesting. That said, the most interesting thing is that VAR-related offences are being codified into the Laws while VAR is still an "experiment." Kind of feels like a fait accompli, doesn't it?
So gesturing for a caution is known (but not explicitly stated) to be a form of dissent and cautionable as such, but now gesturing for video review is cautionable in its own right, but only if "excessive?" Huh.
I wonder for law 15 if flip throws will be considered "not standing" or "running and dragging your feet".
And the slide from elegant simplicity to rules to cover minutia continues . . . thank God IFAB took a stand to stop that rash of throw-ins being taken from kneeling and sitting! It was ruining the game!!
My question is when do they think advantage is “applied”? Upon signal, at the point of no return, when it would be unreasonable to call the play back, or some superfluous middle ground?
For the Law changes, that question is irrelevant. You can blow back as far you as want, after all, ITOTR. They are not clarifying or saying when is the point of no return for blowing back for an advantage. The point of no return for an advantage is still the next time play is restarted. You play advantage and ball goes out for a throw-in. Team takes throw-in. You can not go back and blow for the foul. What they are saying is this. Let's say there is a breakaway and a defender hacks down an attacker through on goal outside of the penalty area. The ball falls to another attacker and he shoots and it is saved for a corner. Under the laws, you are still within your right to go back and whistle for the foul and give the red card. What IFAB is saying, if you decide to stick with the corner kick as the restart, meaning you thought an advantaged materialized, that you can not go back and send the player off for DOGSO. Prior to this addendum, you technically could have gone back and send off the defender for DOGSO even if you determined that advantaged materialized and a goal was not scored. No referee has done that at is it would be absurd, but, technically, you were within your right, within, the Laws to that. IFAB now just explicitily states that you can't. It was always common sense, but now they feel they need to actually put it in writing that you can't do that.
Playing advantage means the referee did not go back to the foul. The concept in the change is that advantage only would have been used if an obvious goal scoring opportunity remained.
Like adding "biting" specifically as a sending off offense. Does IFAB really think there is a kind of biting that is not currently VC? Or is there something I am missing?
That makes more sense. I guess I am just envisioning this being misused as people saying you can’t go back to the foul and give the red once you give them the proverbial bite of the apple.
Next year headbutting will be a separate foul . . . and then the next year they will realize they need to actually make pulling a foul . . .
To be fair, they added it as a DFK foul and changed it "biting or spitting at someone" vs "spitting at an opponent" previously to bring it in line with previous changes where you could commit a DFK offense against a teammate. Adding it as a red card as spitting was just procedural since they make spitting and biting the same DFK foul.
Sorry, don't agree. It was sloppy and illogical. Violently striking a teammate is misconduct and results in a DFK, but is not listed in the fouls* section. So they selected one kind of misconduct and removed the restriction to an opponent, but left the other kinds being outside the fouls section and just governed by the new misconduct that can be a DFK. So now, all but one kind of DFK foul must be committed against an opponent, and some misconduct against a person other than an opponent that is not a "foul" still leads to a DFK. ____ *Of course, the list isn't called fouls . . .
Wait ... how does this apply in the PA? There's no realized advantage on a foul in the PA except a goal scored.
I can imagine some scenario where the GK pulls down an attacker in the PA and the ball falls to another attacker six yards out with an open goal and they put it wide. In that case, I'm not giving the PK and red. In 99% of realistic cases where we have a DOGSO that would be red in the PA, we're pulling it back and pointing to the spot.
Maybe it’s just hard for me to process on a Friday evening, but I completely agree with you here. I don’t understand what they are going for here. Law 12 is now a huge mess (and not just because of this change). If you read it front to back, you’re initially left with the impression that DFKs only occur when an act is against an opponent, though biting and spitting is an explicit exception. Then you get to the IFK section and it reinforces this idea, saying that you give an IFK for any other offense for which play is stopped to give a caution or send off, not mentioned in the Laws. Then only at the end of Law 12, in the section about how to restart play after misconduct and fouls (which seems repetitive—until you find out it’s not) do you get to the language about how actions against teammates and team officials and substitutes resulting in DFKs. It’s horrendously written when you step back and look at it. Adding “or someone” to the part about spitting (and now biting) in initial section is bad, yes. But it’s a symptom of the overall disease.
This is certainly true. With each passing year, it looks more similar to the NFHS rule book which just jumps around everywhere.
Earliest the can be in effect is June 1. That is dependent on if the league is in season when that date passes.
Are you sure about this? The wording in the handling section still have the same language as before defining it as an handling offence. I can't how the fact that it is repeated that it is a DFK re-start changing that.
IFAB made it clear in a circular last fall that throwing an object is not a handling offense. This version of the laws now explicitly states it. http://static-3eb8.kxcdn.com/documents/375/115048_250917_Circular_11_2017_v1.0_EN.pdf