Penalties one is obviously the biggest and imagine will have the biggest impact. Not sure whether i agree or disagree with it, i guess if the keeper has done well enough to save it it's quite harsh when they then score the reboudn

I like all those except the rebounds on pens one. Whoever came up with that needs a smack across the chops.

Those are some pretty big changes

Penalty one will come up a lot IMO as there in theory will be plenty more pens with VAR

3 is a good one, not sure why 4 is necessary. Why shouldn’t teams be able to put whoever they want in the wall?

Yeah I'd imagine 4 will be quite hard to enforce. Sometimes defending players stand in a position where you wouldn't be able to definitely state if they are a part of the 'wall' or not, e.g. at the end of the wall but looking more ready to track a runner than block the shot. Would an attacker be able to stand next to them or not?

No attacking players in a wall is a joke, players should be allowed to stand where they want provided they are the required distance from the ball. Nonsensical new rule.

"Oi! Gaffa!"

" Wind your neck in!"

"You know you're already on a yellow!"

Some of those are daft.

What happened to the rule of no subs in stoppage time? That's the one I was looking forward to most.

Also - not enough being done to address blatant time wasting of fake injuries.

Bring in Australian rules !

Number four is a little confusing. It sounds like your attacking players cant be on the wall but its actually referring to opposition players.

Penalty rebounds make sense i guess. The free 12 yard shot is reward for the foul and shouldnt be anything more than that with a potential rebound goal.

Theres always arguements and pushing when the wall is being lined up with attacking players getting in the way. I imagine that has been doing refs heads in for ages. I can kind of see that one.

The rebounds from pens is a joke though. So if a keeper saves one and pushes it into the field of play are we supposed to stop and pick the ball up and throw it back to him to restart the game?

2 and 3 are great

I dont get the accidental handball goal being disallowed. Should either stand or given a penalty.

yeah 1 and 4 are

thought 5 was already a thing tbh lol

4 really is the worst one of the lot.

comment by Eric_the_king (SE85) (U21241)
posted 22 minutes ago
I like all those except the rebounds on pens one. Whoever came up with that needs a smack across the chops.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Isn't it Marco van Basten who is responsible for rules changes to make football more attractive?

Attacking players in the wall are only there to obstruct an opposition player - so that's probably why the rule has been looked at.

Number four is a little confusing. It sounds like your attacking players cant be on the wall but its actually referring to opposition players.

--------------------------------------
Well, that's a good change then for the defending team.

Could they not just use VAR to rule out a rebound goal from a pen, if an another attacking player was in the box before contact was made? Or have the pen retaken if the defender has made their way into the box before the kick was taken who then managed to clear the ball.
I suppose maybe the latter could be harder because when would you stop the play, potentially could have implications on the other team if they broke away and scored. You’d need someone in VAR to specially watch the players outside the box and tell the ref straight away to stop it.

It seems a shame to stop it as it takes some of the drama out the game. But it is unfair if an attacker or defender has an advantage of getting to the rebound

The rebounds from pens is a joke though. So if a keeper saves one and pushes it into the field of play are we supposed to stop and pick the ball up and throw it back to him to restart the game?
--------------------------------
I imagine it will be a goal kick if its stopped. No will be challenging the ball anyway. It will change the way keepers stop penalties. Now they can just stomp it away without any risk

comment by Lurker - "We did it on derby day" (U21432)
posted 5 minutes ago
Some of those are daft.

What happened to the rule of no subs in stoppage time? That's the one I was looking forward to most.

Also - not enough being done to address blatant time wasting of fake injuries.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Two minutes for treating an ankle knock? Two and a half, if there's blood? Four minutes for a head injury?

The real reason we have these ceaseless amendments is our obsession with legislating every single aspect of the game.

We're basically writing referees out of a job.

comment by Michael Edwards FC {Proud owner of the 5 000 000th comment} (U2720)
posted 6 minutes ago
4 really is the worst one of the lot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why?

1. Winds me up when people talk of ‘deliberate handball’. Very, very few are. Should be the rule already.

2. Why give an advantage to a penalised team?

3. Addresses the effect and not the cause. Referees should do more to prevent time-wasting, and just add on more stoppage times. Players will still walk off slowly, completely pointless rule.

4. What constitutes a wall? 1 player? 2 players? What about 3 separate walls of 2 players? Not thought through.

5. Fine.

Must be a bunch of idiots on this IFAB panel, come up with a load of nonsense.

The other team committed a foul though...basically broke the rules of the game. They deserve to be obstructed.

"Hey man...I know I tried to break your ankle but please can you not obstruct me. Trying to defend here"