New rule changes for 2019-20

Ruled out I believe you mean?

Brent your point is totally valid. Player A shoots into an unguarded goal, no defending players within playing distance, it hits player B on the arm, and they want to rule that out? The action would make zero difference to the outcome. A goal would still be scored, and yet if it hit them and deflects wide they would not award the foul. You cannot have both.
That madness is contradictory to a defender in the same scenario. Where the ball strikes them accidentally why is a penalty not awarded then?

I'm not advocate of the change. But at the very minimum the rule should be the same for both attacking and defending scenarios.

I'm pretty much done with refereeing football because the rules are so out -moded it give the official nothing to manage things with. Truly depressing.

John, it may well be that a penalty WOULD be awarded in that instance.

What, I believe, the rule has been created for is to stop teams conceding a goal via the hand/arm of an opposing player whether accidental or not.

Who's come up with the changes I don't know but it's a bit of a a farce!

VAR is still cutting its teeth but I will hope for the best.

I wonder if it's just to make the ref's life easier?

"A player is about to take a penalty, a lion wanders onto the pitch, it does not, however, encroach in the D. The player scores but is subsequently killed by the lion. Does the goal stand?"

Those were the days when reffing was easy.

Depending on how hungry the lion was the result was based on the last team who still had players alive.

There was one game though, where the lion ate the ref first and it had to be abandonded. (www.scores.com/1934/sc**thorpe-torquay)

And as a ref I won't miss the drop ball, either.

Also on the matter of penalties, wasn't it also being proposed that the ball would be deemed 'dead' once the penalty was struck so that if saved the game would be stopped and the ball presented back to the goalkeeper to restart play. Another stupid idea and again hopefully discarded.

On another issue with rules, why on earth do we still have the rule whereby a player who has needed treatment after a foul is taken off the pitch after treatment and left on the sidelines whilst play is restarted, leaving his side disadvantaged despite being the victims.

I am old school in my attitude to football, and that means that I consider that what we called 'ball to hand', is unjustly punished. It appears to me also that the uncontested 'dropped ball', has been in operation for some time, another retrograde step. I can see nothing wrong with the 'Old Law', requiring the goalkeeper to remain motionless on his line.

Regarding a substituted player, leaving the field of play at the nearest point, I have no objections to this, it enables his replacement to join the fray immediately. If managers/coaches behave in an unacceptable manner, then yellow or red cards are, in my opinion, the order of the day, but what I find [unacceptable' is] if there is a touchline 'fracas' and the offending individual cannot be easily identified, then the senior coach in the technical area, will be the 'default recipient of a card'. I don't see the justice in selecting a 'scapegoat'.

12 men on the pitch, be just like LFC matches every week.

I like the informal nature of giving the ball back to the keeper and putting the injured player off at the nearest point. I'm surprised they've done it.

Also, getting the bloody attacker out of the wall is right too. Trying to block the 'keeper is very much unsporting. Just play the bloody game and let the best team win.

A reitteration of the fact that penalties should only be award if the challenge is deemed a DELIBERATE foul as opposed to the sky special of a "coming together" to justify the outragous tactics used by some of todays stars else we could spend half the afternoon watching replays, Was there intent ? If not then not then no pen

Why does my mind go to Charlie Chaplin wearing Rollerskates on a Threadmill and a certain Mr Salah

I think by what you're saying, stop/start the game for a 90 minutes actual playing time, then we'd all be in the stadium, from first whistle to the last, for about three hours.

That cracked me up. I used to love Shoot! Is it still around?

I am hoping the new era in football and especially VAR is a great opportunity to clean up the sport and make it more about sport I suppose. My big thing on VAR is how it treats the "divers" I would hope the intent although is subjective might curb the industry of wining pens by putting the defenders arms around your own neck before you dive, or leaving the leg hangin etc etc

I am wondering with the Free kick rule freeing up attacking players will we see more "plays" as in American football, 2 or 3 pass choreographed move to get to the goal etc "one from the training ground"

Yes after watching the City Spurs CL I realized the game has changed and no turning back, question will be is it for the better ??

I remember on one of the US stations for whatever reason they used to show time actually played and it was amazing. Sometimes it was on 45 minutes or so. I hate to say it but rugby is still a man's game where you don't stop play if someone's untied shoe lace brushes past your ankle. I would be actual time played was much greater in the 1970s than now.

On your last point yeah it would. The first time I saw an NFL game I was thinking “OK 60 minutes with three short breaks, I should be out of here in 90 minutes.” Three hours later I left and actually heard the final whistle on the radio on the drive home.

On your last point yeah it would. The first time I saw an NFL game I was thinking “OK 60 minutes with three short breaks, I should be out of here in 90 minutes.” Three hours later I left and actually heard the final whistle on the radio on the drive home.

Need to clear up if means ALL incidents will be VAR reviewed or just if a goal or free kick awarded etc.

Like the no attacking players within 1 metre of the wall but how are they going to judge it on a consistent basis. A lot more sprey cans will be needed!

Also players seen removing the sprey should be booked.

In general I like it but a few clearer guidelines and consistency is needed. VAR can be helpfulness but that can still be inconsistent!

1. An attacker deliberately handling the ball in the penalty area should be treated like a defender in the same situ ie; Red Card send off.

2. A player requiring treatment on the pitch should be forced to wait 5 minutes before being allowed to return to the action. This would put an end to time wasting pretend injuries.

The game gets a bad name when a player who gave every indication of being a serious hospital case can suddenly leap into action.

As for my suggestion causing an increase in injuries, I believe we would see less of them.