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 Outcome of a Match Yellow cards (YCs) and warnings are not carried forward into kicks from the penalty mark (KFPM) See also changes to Law 14 relating to KFPM Law 11 – Offside Deliberate handball by a defending player is considered ‘deliberate play’ for offside Law 12 – Fouls and Misconduct Handball the boundary between the shoulder and the arm is defined as the bottom of the armpit (see the diagram on p. 14) ‘accidental’ handball by an attacking player (or team-mate) is only penalised if it occurs ‘immediately’ before a goal or clear goal-scoring opportunity A goalkeeper can receive a YC or be sent off (RC) for ‘illegally’ touching the ball a second time after a restart (e.g. goal kick, free kick etc.) even if the touch is with the hand/arm Any offence (not only a foul) which ‘interferes with or stops a promising attack’ should result in a YC A player who fails to respect the 4m required distance at a dropped ball should receive a YC If the referee plays advantage or allows a ‘quick’ free kick for an offence which ‘interfered with or stopped a promising attack’, the YC is not issued Law 14 – The Penalty Kick An offence by the goalkeeper is not penalised if a penalty kick misses the goal or rebounds from the goal (without a touch from the goalkeeper) unless the offence clearly affected the kicker The goalkeeper is warned for the first offence; it is a YC for any further offence(s) The kicker is penalised if the goalkeeper and the kicker offend at exactly the same time VAR protocol Only one ‘TV signal’ is required for a VAR-only review Glossary A definition of the offence of holding has been included A player’s position at a restart is the position of the feet or any part of the body which is touching the ground (except as outlined in Law 11 – Offside)
Or, instead of a random hosting site, go to the source: https://theifab.com/backend/library/doc/laws-of-the-game-202021-changes-and-clarifications-english
For subjective decisions, e.g. intensity of a foul challenge, interference at offside, handball considerations, an ‘on-field review’ (OFR) is appropriate • Reorganising the text emphasises that ‘on-field reviews’ (OFRs) are expected when the incident/decision is non-factual. So they removed the word often from in front of appropriate. Gee I wonder who that is aimed at...
The IFAB somehow never fails to surprise me and they keep finding new and inventive ways to justify their bloated salaries and posh meetings in expensive European hotels. So just to get this straight. We went from almost never ordering retakes on goal keepers for encroachment to ordering them more frequently but having to give a mandatory caution, but as a result of the mandatory caution referees almost never gave the retake until VAR got involved. Instead of doing a mea culpa and saying the mandatory caution was wrong, they split the difference and a goal keeper now gets a free pass on the first penalty saved in the match, but not on the second. So essentially we are back to where we were from the beginning which is a goal keeper never receiving a caution for encroachment due to pure statistically probability. How often does a goal keeper face two penalties in the same game and how often does a goal keeper save two penalties in the same game? So since warnings and yellow cards are not carried over into kicks from the mark, theoretically, a goal keeper can encroach on two penalty kicks in the "same" match without receiving a caution. I really don't understand why goal keepers can receive misconduct for illegally touching the ball a second time, but not field players? But then why not be able to receive misconduct for touching it via an illegal back pass? The illegal second touch is much rarer and not as impactful on a game where an illegal back pass is more common and can genuinely deny a team an obvious goal scoring opportunity. The handling update is a law change due purely to VAR.
So, this is what I thought it was. Pretty hilarious, honestly. I think we're going to need a refresher on the purgatory between the final whistle and the start of KFPM. Because a "second yellow" might not be a second yellow any more... Okay. This has been a question before so I suppose the clarification is useful. So, top of the arm/shoulder can be deliberately used to play the ball. In other words, IFAB realized it totally screwed up and dozens (hundreds?) of goals were wrongly and controversially ruled out at the professional level this past year via VAR around the world. Completely throwing out the window the idea that goalkeepers can never get sent off for handling in their own penalty area. It's understandable, given the change the restarts within the PA. But this is one of those secondary effects that no one initially saw. This one is interesting. In the rare case where I've seen something like this occur, the offending player usually also blasts the ball away or otherwise does something to delay the restart. THAT was usually the justification for a caution, because you couldn't just caution for the illegal second touch. Now you can. So, if someone does this and blasts the ball away... does IFAB expect the red card? Thought this was obvious, but guess it did need to be written down. Same. Seemed obvious, but sure, write it down. So now we're both codifying common sense AND putting the referee on the hook for "clearly affected." HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. No, seriously. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. In theory, this makes sense. In practice, I can see this being a disaster for referees who try to apply it. Lot of editing for something that was seemingly obvious already. Fine. Does anyone understand what this means? A player's position AT a restart? Is it supposed to be "FOR" a restart? I'm really struggling to understand what this is. It seems either really really mundane or extremely important (particularly regarding PK vs. DFK decisions).
Didn't even think of that. So can a player on a caution come up to you immediately after the final whistle and start dissenting and receive a caution and not get sent off because it's part of the KFTM? When does the KFTM portion of the match start? From the coin toss? When the first kick is taken? When the first player taking the kick is walking up to the penalty spot? It seems like the whole point of this rewrite was so goal keepers can't sent off in KFTM and thus be suspended for the next match. Since cautions received in KFTM are not part of the 90-120 minutes prior does that mean they don't carry over to the next match for accumulation purposes?
Honestly, the use of the word "expected" here gives EPL the license it needs to keep doing what it was doing. The VAR Handbook is closer to being forceful/clear that they are essentially required for such decisions.
So they left the weird goal kick/lift/back to hands in purgatory. They didn't address it either way and left the last directive in place. I would have thought they would have cleaned that up.
I don't think that's what it means. I think this was to get rid of the oddity that in certain contexts where the second touch could be SPA, a GK could be cautioned if he touched the ball with a foot, but not if he touched the ball with his hands. I've only glanced at the changes, but I thought the definition of where the arm starts for handling was striking. It is different from what we have been taught (at least in the US), and harder to judge. Top vs. side is a sharp line. But now the side is OK down to the bottom of the arm pit. We're going to have to decide how far down the arm the ball is in live action. (And even with VAR, how clear is that really going to be?) I was relieved that they got rid of the "usually" "not usually" nonsense. And the restructure resolved the question of whether those were intended as explanations of deliberate or additional ways to offend. (Which was more of an angels-dancing-on-the-head-of-a-pin discussion than a practical one anyway.)
Perhaps aimed at encroachment? So, for example, leaning over the PA line on a PK is not encroachment? A solution in search of a problem, or trying to be clear what VAR would look at it if had to?
It sounds like they're specifying that people "leaning" into the penalty area are fine on a penalty kick, or leaning off the goal line during an indirect is ok. That would also mean that an attacker 1m from a wall could also reach out to the wall. I'm sure it's more important in the first case, especially if players are screaming "he's not on the line! look how much he's leaning towards me!" Makes sense, most of the time it'll be a non-issue.
Yes. Yes. Wait, they did? I didn't read it closely and only went by the summary. Wow, that's a pretty big change. Think of all the hours wasted prepping for and executing instruction on that, only to be tossed away after one year.
This makes sense except for the caveat about "(except as outlined in Law 11 - offside)." Unless it's trying to say that the standards for Law 11 trump this when we are judging offside for an attacking free kick or similar restart? So, you can lean into the penalty area and not be encroaching on a penalty kick because you are in the exact same position as your opponent, with your toes on the line. But leaning into the penalty area still counts as offside. There had to be a better way to write this. There also didn't seem to be anyone in the world who I met that didn't already think this was the case.
So in Law 11, they clarified that a deliberate handball by a defender is a play---so does that mean the non-deliberate hand ball offenses (and I think the restructure makes clear that those are in addition to, not a subset of deliberate), do not remove the OS restrictions?
Technically you have the arm above the shoulders and arm in an unnatural position type of offenses that are separated from the deliberate category but doesn't only apply to attackers.
"VAR protocol and handbook updates 4. Procedures – Check Amended text • If the ‘check’ indicates a probable ‘clear and obvious error’ or ‘serious missed incident’, the VAR will communicate this information to the referee, who will then decide whether or not to initiate a ‘review’. Explanation Reference to the final decision is removed, as the VAR is permitted to give advice to the referee about the decision but the referee always makes the final decision."
"Changes to Practical Guidelines for Match Officials Penalty kick (p.212) Amended text If the goalkeeper blatantly moves off the goal line before the ball is kicked and prevents a goal from being scored, the AR should indicate the encroachment according to the pre-match instructions from the referee." Change The AR "must raise the flag" has been removed.
Oh. That's what @socal lurker meant when he said this re-write makes it clear the non-deliberate ones are in addition to and not a subset, I gather? Great. So for determining offside, the way this is written the referee team doesn't just need to determine if there was a handball offence--they need to determine what type of handball offence. Spectacular. I mean, I can't imagine this was anything other than a mistake. A vestige of the days when "deliberate handling" was the only way it could be an offence.
Saw this. This seemed practical to me. I wonder if there will ever be a point where the pre-match instructions for VAR matches include "don't come in off the touchline for penalties." There really is no point anymore, to be honest.
You would think that will happen. We saw it in UEFA competitions with AARs where ARs didn't come in off the touchline on penalty kicks. The million dollar question is how far away are we from getting rid of ARs period? Or at least removing the responsibility of offside in VAR competitions? I guess you'll always need them for throw-in and other boundary related decisions.
Yeah, this is the one that made me think, "Wait, what? Really?" An entire new set of skills will be taught to a new generation of shoulder specialists.