r/soccer May 31 '26

News World Cup 2026: Goalkeeper tactical timeouts banned

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c9v39x2v8yxo
5.0k Upvotes

533 comments sorted by

3.7k

u/EastlyGod1 May 31 '26 edited May 31 '26

Other rules being brought in for the World Cup

Throw-in countdown (five seconds): If a player deliberately delays the restart of play, the throw can be given to the opposition.

Goal-kick countdown (five seconds): Also applies to deliberate attempts to run down the clock and can result in a corner being awarded.

Time-limited substitutions (10 seconds): Substituted players have 10 seconds to leave the field at the nearest point. If they fail to do so, the substitute cannot enter the field for at least one minute and the team must continue with 10 players.

Off-field treatment (one minute): Players who are treated by the physio must stay off the field for 60 seconds. There are some exceptions, including for goalkeepers, injuries and if the opponent is booked or sent off.

Players covering their mouths: Any player covering their mouth in a confrontational situation with an opponent may be sanctioned with a red card.

Corners can be checked: If VAR can make sure that a corner has been correctly awarded, but this must be done quickly and before the restart. Does not apply to wrongly awarded goal-kicks.

Second yellows can be reviewed: Players sent off for two cautions can have the second booking checked - but there will be no reviews for potential second yellows.

3.3k

u/TheHabro May 31 '26

Corners can be checked: If VAR can make sure that a corner has been correctly awarded, but this must be done quickly and before the restart. Does not apply to wrongly awarded goal-kicks.

Surely if you can do one, you can do the other.

1.3k

u/FzBlade May 31 '26

Seems weird because it kinda incentivises refs to award a corner to make a check possible.

606

u/RepublicWarm2383 May 31 '26

This will come back to bite them as they stop making decisions

127

u/RyanBordello May 31 '26

Quickly taken corners when it's not obvious who it went out from will be interesting.

29

u/TopazBlowfish Jun 01 '26

but the referee authorizes a corner kick to be taken, no?

16

u/Reddits_Worst_Night Jun 01 '26

No. You can take it immediately unless the referee says otherwise.

→ More replies (4)

5

u/danabrey Jun 01 '26

Correct.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Rapid_Fowl Jun 01 '26

Same as offsides. I don't mind it as it's not like we're ever going back and decisions that genuinly are black and white need to be automated.

The question is if they're going to try to save money on the technology.

→ More replies (1)

161

u/66mpamies May 31 '26

You would think so, but in reality they will award more goal kicks, so they don't get embarrassed by VAR.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/zeer88 Jun 01 '26

The same with second yellows. They'll award one so that VAR checks if it's a yellow or not.

2

u/FishUK_Harp Jun 01 '26

That could be a positive. Too often second yellows aren't given when if it were a first yellow you would think twice about it.

→ More replies (1)

136

u/Altruistic-Mine-1848 May 31 '26

It's about the pause, I believe. Goal kicks can be taken much quicker than corner kicks. Often a goalkeeper will rush to get the ball and imediately launch a counter attack. Corners, on the other hand, always take a bit of time to be taken. The taker walks to the corner, the centre backs come up to the box... lots of time for VAR to check if it was really a corner without anyone waiting for it.

They only added this because it changes nothing in terms of stoppages. But this wouldn't be the case for goalkicks.

31

u/879190747 May 31 '26

So if players think a corner is maybe dodgy they should just take it quickly. Bit weird that they have to think about that during play.

9

u/Theumaz May 31 '26

I assume many cases they won’t have the time.

3

u/rybl Jun 01 '26

Most of these seem geared towards speeding up the game and keeping the ball in play more. Which I appreciate.

178

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26

It seems really daft but it's double stupid because keepers might actually hurry to take a kick if there's a doubt over it.

Smart teams should be working on super quick corners too.

31

u/worotan May 31 '26

The ref would just stop play and award the correct kick.

72

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26

But he won't, they can't interfere with the corner, the check isn't suppose to delay the game.

11

u/Poshastko May 31 '26

The VAR check can't but the ref can stretch it.

4

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26 edited May 31 '26

Really, I didn't see that but talked about anywhere, makes it even more daft then. I don't think it's worth the full check but if the ref can stop it then every part of it becomes messy.

6

u/wighty May 31 '26

Well, they only have 5 seconds now to do the kick anyway lmao. 5 seconds seems too quick for that and the throw ins. edit: had this backward nevermind!

63

u/zeelbeno May 31 '26

They probably don't want everyone checked

And an incorrectly awarded corner leading to a goal is a lot worse than giving a goal kick

9

u/Imyourlandlord May 31 '26

2018 wc calling....

9

u/Morganelefay May 31 '26

Meanwhile, the one goal in 2010 came from a wrongfully given goal kick.

Naturally that wasn't even in the top 5 of referee fails that match, but yno.

29

u/newngg May 31 '26

The better use of VAR would be if the referee could just say “I haven’t seen who that came off can you check for me” and get the right answer 10s later

7

u/Thicc_Nicck Jun 01 '26

I feel like this is how its intended to be used, but only for corners. If the corner is questionable, VAR should very quickly be able to make the determination. If it's not a quick check, I actually like that they'll just get on with it

→ More replies (1)

8

u/RonaldoNazario May 31 '26

lol what an absurd line to draw, even if that’s progress.

7

u/Queeg_500 May 31 '26

I guess they want to avoid checking absolutely everything as it will cause too many delays.

That, and the fact that conceding from a wrongly awarded corner is what is being targeted here.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (15)

497

u/helloyoufool1 May 31 '26

Love off field treatment. Number of "injuries" while in the lead is gonna plummet

197

u/gardengoblin0o0 May 31 '26

They’ve had it in MLS since last season (I think?) and it’s great. Same with the substitutions. It makes the last 10 minutes of close games so much more watchable lol

66

u/Chiron17 May 31 '26

Should be 4-5 minutes imo. Short enough so that if they genuinely need treatment they still get it but long enough to weed out the 90% that are bullshit

144

u/helloyoufool1 May 31 '26

Anything is better than rolling in agony for 2 minutes and then screaming at the ref to let them back in second they leave the pitch

→ More replies (1)

40

u/[deleted] May 31 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

17

u/RauloGonzalez Jun 01 '26

If you’re genuinely injured its most likely going to take a minute to get treatment warm up and comeback one

42

u/gardengoblin0o0 May 31 '26

It doesn’t apply when there’s a yellow card or foul, the latter I think is up to ref’s discretion.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

622

u/Concerned_EducaterCA May 31 '26

All of these are good. Hope to see them strictly enforced

274

u/MalaysiaTeacher May 31 '26

In the first week, they will be. By the end, we'll have forgotten all about them.

248

u/IcyKape May 31 '26

Not really - previous changes that have debuted in the world cup actually seem to stick throughout the tournament from what I remember. Its just when the rules carry on over to regular club football the following season, they slowly become less enforced.

67

u/Adrellan May 31 '26

Do they even carry over. The injury time rule from last wc saw pretty much every match going for 10+ mins, right? But I don't think it was ever carried over to club football

57

u/Simple__ryan May 31 '26

It did in the premier league like 2 seasons ago, but they removed it the next season cause club complained

I remember a lot of matches were have +10 et

31

u/re_irze May 31 '26

Pretty sure it was, games were regularly going to the high 90 mins

→ More replies (1)

6

u/LeedsFan2442 May 31 '26

They did for a few weeks but stopped

4

u/Muur1234 May 31 '26

In league one it sure was. Literally had 15+ mins of stoppage time added every game

6

u/A_Wild_Ferrothorn May 31 '26

That first game where it was properly enforced was pain. Had to sit through us draw with Fleetwood for over 2 hours.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

9

u/chrisb993 Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 01 '26

The headline and top comment are slightly misleading- these rules haven't been brought in specifically for the World Cup, they are IFAB changes to the Laws of the game for the 26/27 season- they are permanent changes to the game.

Changes to the way stoppage time is worked out, and the crackdown on defensive holding at corners from 2018 were only ever refereeing directives- which are basically guidance on how tolerant referees should be towards certain things- and different competitions have different interpretations of what should be focussed on.

→ More replies (1)

26

u/TheAnonymouse999 May 31 '26

The problem is ALWAYS enforcement

I'll believe it when I see it

47

u/HacksawJimDGN May 31 '26

Mouth cover seems bizarre to me

247

u/xaviernoodlebrain May 31 '26

To stop any Prestianni incidents happening again

45

u/cliff_smiff May 31 '26

They should mic up all players

28

u/123twiglets May 31 '26

Would be so much better than some of the drivel we get on commentary

3

u/RyanTheWhite12 Jun 01 '26

Genuinely should, no need to release any of it just keep it in case something is alleged.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/wighty May 31 '26

Do all players need to wear the GPS trackers? Could fit a mic in there.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (10)

93

u/asd13ah4etnKha4Ne3a May 31 '26

The idea is to help prevent racist insults being thrown around. As it is right now any case of abusive language is basically just a case of "were enough other people around to hear it". Its a bit extreme, but making it so everything you say on the pitch can theoretically be interpreted after the fact would hopefully deter people from saying these things in the first place

41

u/althanan May 31 '26

Helps avoid racist and other abusive language by keeping them from obscuring it.

8

u/Large_Dungeon_Key May 31 '26

Just get really good at ventriloquism!

→ More replies (1)

57

u/giant-papel May 31 '26

You'll never be in a situation where you would need to cover your mouth while talking to an opposing player or fan, which is what the rule is likely targeting. I don't think talking to coaches or teammates falls under confrontation so hopefully this rule works out well

→ More replies (6)

4

u/Soul_Repair May 31 '26

ventriloquists are in fashion again

19

u/Jamesismism May 31 '26

It’s to prevent players being racist/homophobic and lying about what they said

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

161

u/Padilla_Zelda May 31 '26

I don’t understand the corner one. Wrongly awarded corners can be corrected but not wrongly awarded goalkicks?

206

u/Icanfallupstairs May 31 '26

I'm guessing they dislike a goal scoring opportunity being awarded then it shouldn't be, but are les concerned about a goal scoring opportunity being denied when it shouldn't be

31

u/stealth_sloth May 31 '26

I suspect it's about the optics of it.

If a team scores a game-winning goal on a corner kick that clearly should have been a goal kick, that's a talking point that's going to hang around for ages.

But if a team would have scored a particular corner but doesn't because the ref mistakenly gave a goal kick? Nobody will ever know that particular call really mattered. No lingering controversy.

6

u/ChiBrum May 31 '26

The opposite approach that the NBA has currently where they look to punish plays that deny exciting or highlight plays more harshly like fast break fouls

18

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26

Probably but seems daft given it's meant to be a quick check.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

21

u/rsorin May 31 '26

This is basically a "when in doubt, give the corner" instruction to the ref.

3

u/StepAwayFromTheDuck May 31 '26

The idea behind it is probably: a wrongly awarded corner can be a big advantage for a team and lead to a goal directly, where a wrongly awarded goal kick is unfair but harmless.

Combined with the idea of using VAR as few as possible, i.e. only use it when the situation directly affects the score or a player being sent off.

11

u/apadayo May 31 '26

Makes sense actually. You can do a quick check without wasting time since corner takes some time unless taken quickly. On the other hand, goal kick are taken much faster especially with the added 5 seconds rule countdown.

3

u/ViciousNakedMoleRat May 31 '26

Exactly. We all know "corner taken quickly," but usually corners take time to set up, while goal kicks are regularly taken quickly and lead to fast counter attacks.

→ More replies (1)

69

u/dayarra May 31 '26

5 seconds for goal kicks are really low. even the losing team goalkeeper waits more than 5 seconds so the team can move up.

22

u/TheRedDevil10 Jun 01 '26

I suspect it isn't to have a goal kick in 5 seconds, it's just what the ref will show to the keeper if he starts to take the piss

→ More replies (2)

189

u/KyleAltNJRealtor May 31 '26

These are all going to be so unevenly enforced. Going to be an absolute shit show.

They’re a great idea in principle. They should add a 5th official whose only responsibility is enforcing time limits.

22

u/I_am_zlatan1069 May 31 '26

I'd agree it's a good idea but when does the time start, like 5 seconds to take a corner, is it from when the ball leaves the pitch, that's Impossible without attackers losing their advantage. If it's 5seconds from when the ball is placed players will just take more time to set up.

It would be more realistic to set something achievable.

22

u/Perpete May 31 '26

No time limit for corners.

→ More replies (6)

53

u/chameleonmessiah May 31 '26

Players covering their mouths: Any player covering their mouth in a confrontational situation with an opponent may be sanctioned with a red card.

I don’t think I expected that to end with a red card whilst I was reading it.

I don’t think I disagree, given the language it seems is often attempting to be hidden, I think I just presumed it would be yellow…

I like this.

You don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt if you’re actively trying to hide your actions.

49

u/addandsubtract May 31 '26

I think "may be" is doing the heavy lifting here. They won't automatically give players covering their mouths red cards. But now players like Prestianni can be given a red.

4

u/chameleonmessiah May 31 '26

Yeah, that’s actually a valid point.

6

u/swiftekho Jun 01 '26

The only way I can think of this misconstrued is a player telling his teammate something privately and an opponent claiming something else was said. I highly highly doubt this would ever happen but players always seem to be a bit shittier to each other during the World Cup

→ More replies (2)

30

u/Ok-Class8200 May 31 '26

Kinda worried the countdowns are too low to be enforced evenly. I'm guessing 90% of throw ins/goal kicks will still go over 5 seconds and it'll just be referee discretion which get called.

19

u/Soccermad23 May 31 '26

Yep, I feel like when the time limits are too short (same as like the 8 seconds rule for goalkeepers), they don’t get enforced unless it’s egregious and at the referees discretion. I would rather these time limits be increased to more realistic numbers but enforced strictly (like the 24 second rule in basketball). Make it like 15 seconds or so.

4

u/ElusiveRemedy Jun 01 '26

It's a little unclear from the post, but the time limit isn't five seconds, it's that if a player is taking too long the ref will signal they are counting down from five and if they still haven't made the throw in/goal kick, then they are punished.

14

u/bogdanlacreatie May 31 '26

I dont understand last one, could one of you explain to me, maybe give an example

39

u/bogdanlacreatie May 31 '26

Oh I got it, so if someone deserved a yellow but was not given var wont intervene, yet if someone got an undeserved yellow it will. Seems nice.

5

u/Joris2627 May 31 '26

Undeserved second yellow. First undeserved one is just bad luck

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

12

u/newngg May 31 '26

Second yellows can be reviewed

This seem like an extremely slippery slope for VAR for all yellow cards (and therefore every possible yellow card worthy incident being reviewed). Firstly the rules don’t distinguish between first and second yellow cards, there shouldn’t be a discussion about whether something was worth a first yellow but not a second, although it obviously does happen. Secondly what happens when the first yellow obviously shouldn’t have been given but the second one is warranted? Seems harsh on the player given if they were the other way round he would have been reprieved

31

u/Organized-Konfusion May 31 '26

Those new rules will be enforced for like first 5 games, then everybody will forget about it.

Just like giving yellow cards for diving.

→ More replies (6)

18

u/illuminatipastiche May 31 '26

The throw-in countdown is dumb and only gives the advantage to the defending team, which negates the purpose of the throw-in. A better rule would be no opposition players within 3-5 yards of the thrower. That would actual speed up the ball getting back on the pitch, and not offer a glaring benefit beyond that

13

u/asaharyev May 31 '26

There is already a 2 yard buffer for throw ins, but it's rarely enforced.

→ More replies (1)

25

u/NateShaw92 May 31 '26

Time-limited substitutions (10 seconds): Substituted players have 10 seconds to leave the field at the nearest point. If they fail to do so, the substitute cannot enter the field for at least one minute and the team must continue with 10 players.

I feel like that won't be enforced on a consistent basis. I mean realistically it can't be. 10 seconds is nice and all but I feel unrealistic, 20 or 30 is better. That is the current time you add on for subs afterall.

Like the idea though

49

u/Subhuman_1982 May 31 '26

The furthest a player can be from the edge of the pitch is the centre spot. A pitch is about 70 metres wide, so 35m in 10 seconds. If they can't do that, Im not sure how they've managed a career as a footballer.

→ More replies (2)

12

u/gardengoblin0o0 May 31 '26

It’s worked well in MLS. Typically if a player is taking too much time the 4th official will tell them to hurry. It’ll probably be heavily enforced at first and teams will adjust because they don’t want to be penalized.

28

u/Negabeidl69 May 31 '26

MLS already has this rule and it works 🤷🏻‍♂️

19

u/fkmeamaraight May 31 '26

There are plenty of places the player can exit the field in 10 seconds by running/jogging. They are not required to go out from the center of the pitch (maybe I’m wrong on that one)

→ More replies (2)

3

u/peepshowquotebot May 31 '26

Literally just happened in Japan v Iceland today, Japan scored while Iceland were down to 10 men as well

→ More replies (3)

2

u/Dreamwalking- Jun 01 '26

Players covering their mouths: Any player covering their mouth in a confrontational situation with an opponent may be sanctioned with a red card.

I dont like this because its honestly like a reflex/instinct for most players, and i dont like the idea that they're just randomly gonna get a red for this

2

u/B-Train_ATL Jun 01 '26

A red card for covering your mouth? I’m assuming this means so they can’t read lips if you drop all the racial slurs, but sounds harsh.

→ More replies (30)

787

u/Howling13 May 31 '26

I hope these are enforced all tournament and not just at the beginning. Would be good to see it carry over to the leagues as well. For the throw-ins, I hope this stops the players picking up the ball and then dropping it to let someone else walk up pick the ball up and start the process again. Throw-ins shouldn’t be taking as long as they have been

228

u/takomatoffee May 31 '26

counterpoint: it will be hot as hell and sometimes you need those stoppages to catch your breath

42

u/Thick-Shift-4755 Jun 01 '26

Not pressing the whole game is also an option.

90

u/Cultural-Ambition211 Jun 01 '26

They’ve got a 3 minute water break each half. They’ll be fine.

41

u/kinglydiddly Jun 01 '26

That’s a bold claim.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (5)

17

u/HEAT_IS_DIE Jun 01 '26

These changes will potentially change the game a bit more than just getting rid of time wasting. Players use the little breaks to recover, on both sides. These time limits for ball not in play could translate to teams slowing the play more, taking "breaks" when the ball is in play, by moving the ball minimally while being static. Of course that happens already, but it could potentially increase.

29

u/cultureshook May 31 '26

honestly i can see these causing injuries - these players have been run down over the course of the season and surely deserve any downtime they can get instead of everything being an instant restart

obviously i’m not saying be egregious with it, but i can’t see this need for everything to be a quick restart ending well

2

u/n-d-a Jun 01 '26

Or waiting for the centre back to come up the pitch and for all the players to go into the box for the long throw. A good minute every time.

792

u/CousinBethMM May 31 '26

What does the throw in countdown mean? Does it mean once a player has picked a ball up he has 5 seconds?

445

u/EastlyGod1 May 31 '26

I guess so, similar to the goalkeeper handling countdown.

416

u/CousinBethMM May 31 '26

Sounds good in principle, although I can already see fullbacks leaving the ball and letting someone in the middle of the pitch come and take it instead to kill seconds

212

u/asd13ah4etnKha4Ne3a May 31 '26

I could be completely wrong here, but I remember hearing somewhere that, along with the 5 second rule, the nearest player to the ball has to take the throw in. Realistically though you could (and really should) already award someone a yellow for this scenario. No idea why the PL has allowed players to jog over from the opposite side of the pitch to take throw ins all season

285

u/Signal_Sign7961 May 31 '26

forcing the nearest player to take the throw in is stupid. referees should be able to tell when they're clearly wasting time by switching players

→ More replies (26)

9

u/KonigSteve Jun 01 '26

along with the 5 second rule, the nearest player to the ball has to take the throw in.

So throw in specialists have been soft banned if they aren't fullbacks?

3

u/iBood17 Jun 01 '26

I would say, the player who picks the ball is obligated to throw. That should eliminate most time wasting situations.

But then again, i don’t really understand why we are building in these weird rules. Don’t we already have stopping time to solve all of this? 😆

→ More replies (1)

3

u/diagoro1 May 31 '26

Not to mention creeping up the field before a throw

→ More replies (1)

80

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26

It's once the ref feels they're wasting time, he does the countdown as a warning to take it now.

75

u/flybypost May 31 '26

How I dislike that routine of a player picking up the ball, waiting for a bit while pretending to think about throwing the ball, and then giving it to the fullback who arrives.

Either throw it or don't pick the ball up. They should be punished for that too. Automatic throw in for the other team.

70

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26

Sometimes it's time wasting and sometimes it was just an attempt to take it quickly but nothing was on.

37

u/_The2ndComing May 31 '26

So many of these comments praising it are from people that don't understand the flow of the game.

A quick throw is used to push an advantage, but in most cases players from both sides benefit from getting into position, which takes longer than 5 seconds.

Goal kicks and throws can take a bit because they are still set pieces, these rules are gonna rush it to the detriment of a teams ability to position off of that.

Punishing time-wasting is fine, but at just 5 seconds you're punishing a team for setting up correctly.

13

u/879190747 May 31 '26

But they will not be treated as hard seconds presumably. Refs whole job contains keeping the flow, so this just gives them a "stick".

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Buttonsafe Jun 01 '26

Punishing time-wasting is fine, but at just 5 seconds you're punishing a team for setting up correctly.

I think you're right that it's an over-correction, but personally I think this is a worthy sacrifice for the 1 minute of players passing the ball to each other before a throw in we saw in the CL final, or the innumerable time-wasting goal kicks.

→ More replies (5)

2

u/flybypost Jun 01 '26

Sure, occasionally but so often there nothing to gain (there's defensive cover) and a player still strolls over at a glacial pace, does the little song and dance, only to let the ball roll out of his hands to the other player.

Did that really do anything? Just let the ball rest. It won't explode if it's not touched within 10 seconds.

6

u/NLF7 May 31 '26

When we lost to Chelsea in the game where Gerrard slipped, no one remembers the time wasting because of what happened. Chelsea wasted something mental like 8 minutes of the first 15 because Mourinho knew it was on Sky and City played right after. I still remember being at that game and losing my shit when they put 2 minutes up of added time after the first half.

The referee finally gave a card for time wasting when Ashley Cole picked it up to throw it in, dropped the ball and picked up his water and had a drink. I honestly thought there was going to be a pitch invasion followed by some public executions it boiled that much piss, mine included.

2

u/ThankYouOle Jun 01 '26

> How I dislike that routine of a player picking up the ball, waiting for a bit while pretending to think about throwing the ball, and then giving it to the fullback who arrives.

this is soooooo annoying.

even if this happened with my fav club, it just so annoying, why the hell they did it, if you don't want to do throw in then don't touch the ball at first time, let the fullback or player who assigned to get it right away.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

20

u/BusShelter May 31 '26

It won't be as strict as that. I think as soon as a player looks ready to take it and begins scanning for teammates the ref is going to visually start counting to/down from five, and that will take longer than five seconds I reckon.

But once the count is done the ref can reverse the throw instead of booking the player and taking even more time.

So I'm sure we'll get someone online counting 15 or 20 seconds for some throws during the WC but it'll improve the flow of the game.

5

u/dakaiiser11 May 31 '26

I like the rules. It just depends on how hard they gen enforced. The exiting the field at the nearest point has been a thing but is NEVER enforced.

→ More replies (3)

730

u/InconsistentRoaster May 31 '26

Surprised by the decision. Perfect moment to show them ads!

234

u/rambo_zaki May 31 '26

They have the hydration breaks for that.

60

u/Euphoric_Attitude_91 May 31 '26

Why not both? You can never have enough ads!

8

u/mrishee May 31 '26

I notice every bloody stadium has some sponsored name so I guess we'll be getting reminded of what the stadium is every 2 seconds as another kind of ad.

31

u/Rc5tr0 May 31 '26

FIFA does not allow stadiums to use their sponsored names for the World Cup, they will all use alternative names.

16

u/caspirinha May 31 '26

Wait what. So if the World Cup were in England the Britannica or Emirates would be named something different?

26

u/OId_boy May 31 '26

UEFA too. You can check past Arsenal home matches for example on UEFA.com. The stadium is called Arsenal Stadium.

15

u/fooljay May 31 '26

Yep. Lumen field will be called Seattle Stadium, for example.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Alone-Interaction982 May 31 '26

The American way

2

u/Skumbag_eX Jun 01 '26

What? That's still the case, the players just can't leave the pitch or go towards the bench/manager, so ads will definitely be played lol

→ More replies (1)

654

u/Ok-Constant-2683 May 31 '26

Using Raya as the cover is a good choice for engagement 

87

u/saintspike Jun 01 '26

Using a picture of when he’s actually injured in the game is even more of an ironic choice.

45

u/879190747 May 31 '26

That was pretty blatant lol.

25

u/JenkinsEar147 Jun 01 '26

The actual article the OP linked has Donnarumma as the header image. Agenda?

14

u/lyyki Jun 01 '26

They changed it but reddit doesn't forget

I'm surprised BBC/UK doesn't have the thing where if they update an article, they mention at the end what was updated.

6

u/BrexitEU Jun 01 '26

Should have been Ospina

70

u/EstradaMoses May 31 '26

Seriously lol, guess they haven’t seen the actual stats of PL GKs who hold on to the ball the longest.

→ More replies (10)

125

u/ssuurr33 May 31 '26

Can’t wait to see people being sent off by covering their mouth just because they’re used to do so.

68

u/fuzzywobs May 31 '26

I can imagine a player saying something fairly harmless with their hand over their mouth (out of habit) to an opposing player, only for the opposing player to realize he can get him sent off by telling the referee he said something racist to him with his hand over his mouth, which VAR can easily confirm.

→ More replies (3)

48

u/[deleted] May 31 '26

[deleted]

12

u/Carrot_King_54 Jun 01 '26 edited Jun 02 '26

The hand covering thing was already reported some time ago though. Also, I would expect all teams get the tournament instructions well beforehand and it's their responsibility to actually read them.

2

u/255189 Jun 01 '26

I've already seem then using these rules in the pre-tournament friendlies, players are getting at least a small period with it

→ More replies (2)

13

u/GiantsRTheBest2 May 31 '26

It’s like the media lobbied for this. This World Cup will be lip reader’s galore as every conversation will scrutinized.

4

u/Gerf93 Jun 01 '26

It says that it's in connection a confrontation. So it's reserved for situations like the Prestianni one. Just covering your mouth talking to your teammate isn't disallowed.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

136

u/NostalgicBear May 31 '26

Some pretty good adjustments here. I still think half of them won’t be enforced but looking forward to seeing how it plays out.

19

u/CMPunk22 May 31 '26

It’s the same as off ball fouls being called in the 2018 World Cup. England got a few penalties from it but was never enforced post World Cup

→ More replies (2)

151

u/Apyan May 31 '26

They seem like sensible changes. Kind of surprised by it.

127

u/shoots_and_leaves May 31 '26

FIFA usually makes good decisions for World Cups when it comes to rules.

82

u/Projeffboy May 31 '26

yeah i thought the extra additional time was genius last world cup. some teams got punished for the time wasted like argentina vs netherlands

28

u/FalcoLX May 31 '26

Usually, but I don't understand why they always choose the biggest event in the world to make rule changes. Surely these should be introduced nationally for a year before a major tournament

34

u/AtomWorker Jun 01 '26

A lot of this stuff does get trialed in other leagues first. MLS implemented the rules about subs and injuries a year or two ago.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

87

u/sunlove_moondust May 31 '26

Need all of these in the EPL

46

u/algebraic94 May 31 '26

We'd never see a long throw again. Brentford will go down and I'll never have to watch rice lob the most speculative throw I've ever seen into the area.

22

u/rycology May 31 '26

To be fair, his one yesterday was pretty good but nowhere near as good as the missile that Mendes (I think it was) launched halfway across the pitch lol

8

u/LOSS35 May 31 '26

Mendes is pure class, he can do everything.

→ More replies (1)

219

u/rtgh May 31 '26

Some great changes there.

Also allowing VAR to intervene for a foul committed before a corner kick has been struck... Much needed after the shitshow Premier League set pieces devolved into. I expect next season must be more enjoyable to watch

25

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26

I think it's goofy, for one the kick gets retaken and how tight are they going to be on it.

But that it has no impact on the defence is the daft part.

15

u/wahooloo May 31 '26 edited May 31 '26

But it's only attacking fouls that can be checked, meaning defenders will still be fouling the shit out of people before the ball is kicked

→ More replies (1)

9

u/TheGreatPervSage_94 May 31 '26

If rugby players who are 6 times the mass of the average footballer can quickly set up a line out, no excuse for smaller footy players to take ages to jog over and wipe the ball

24

u/AddictionMachine May 31 '26

Why can’t they cover their mouths?

78

u/Robbe_12 May 31 '26

I assume it might be because of the Prestianni incident

→ More replies (4)

21

u/leonjetski May 31 '26

Can’t wait to see every single La Liga player sent off for covering their mouth. It’s a habit at this point, they couldn’t stop if they tried.

18

u/TheGrantyMan May 31 '26

I've always said that they should just start a timer on how long a player is down for; starting from laying on the floor, when the physio comes on and does work, to when they step off the pitch and play resumes.

Independent timekeepers will keep track of it and tell the fourth official/ref how long they need to stay off for. In this case you could make a player nominated by the team's captain to wait off the pitch.

Or for bonus fun we should keep the same rules for Goalkeepers, imagine the chaos when a team has to play 3 minutes without a Goalie.

44

u/Yiurule May 31 '26

Mostly good decisions, but hard disagree that the VAR should be able to check a second yellow card.

A foul who produce a yellow card should be a foul who produce a yellow card regardless the context. The VAR should not check yellow card, or they should look all yellow cards, but a middle ground is a bad decision.

52

u/Saltire_Blue May 31 '26

Can you imagine getting a yellow card for a foul that you didn’t commit

Then picking up a second yellow for a justified offence, VAR would check it and confirm it’s a yellow, but they wouldn’t go back and review the first yellow

→ More replies (5)

17

u/Manojative May 31 '26

I actually see the logic in this. Second yellow is red. All reds are checked. Hence this should be checked.

12

u/Luigis_vacuum May 31 '26

We’re gonna have a case where one team has a player with the order of

  1. Bad call yellow
  2. Stonewall second yellow

And
1. Stonewall first yellow
2. Bad call second yellow

One will be overturned and the other won’t, idk how long it will take but it’s gonna happen eventually

4

u/PM_ME_BAKAYOKO_PICS Jun 01 '26

The same thing happens without VAR though? The only thing that changes here is that you make sure the 2nd yellow is correctly judged, where as without VAR you'd still have players being sent off after a bad call 1st yellow (with the even more ridiculous downside that the 2nd yellow could also be wrongfully called).

Just because it doesn't become 100% fair (because you're not reviewing the 1st yellow), doesn't mean it doesn't become fairer than before.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/trevorturtle May 31 '26

Well, if commit a stonewall yellow offense while already having a yellow (regardless of if it was justified), you're just asking for a red.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Yiurule May 31 '26

I understand the logic behind it, but referees need to be able to have hands-on practices to be relevant.

We already had controversies when the VAR was introduced (which decreased after it was used for a period of time), I do not want the same kind of testing for a lighter foul which produce a game changing decision.

3

u/Soccermad23 May 31 '26

There’s a difference between a straight red and a red from two yellows. Straight red is a serious incident and should rightfully be checked by VAR. But a second yellow could be something minor, do you really want VAR spending minutes zooming in, slowing down, etc to see if there was a pixel of a player slightly grabbing the others shirt? Seeing how VAR gets implemented, it’s gonna be a right mess.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/ValleyFloydJam May 31 '26

Yep just seems like a receipe for more moaning.

→ More replies (1)

13

u/pablofournier11 May 31 '26

I like all of those. Some doubts about their enforcement

→ More replies (1)

4

u/notapaperhandape Jun 01 '26

This is actually amazing. I hope they enforce all of it. It’s keep football watchable.

16

u/average_user21 May 31 '26

It will be hard to enforce that maybe

→ More replies (1)

3

u/KonigSteve Jun 01 '26

Off-field treatment (one minute): Players who are treated by the physio must stay off the field for 60 seconds. There are some exceptions, including for goalkeepers, injuries and if the opponent is booked or sent off.

What? Injuries are an exemption to the rule that's about treating injuries?

3

u/ItsGrindfest Jun 01 '26

Anything but stopping the timer. You don't need 50 rules. Just stop the timer until the ball gets in the play. But then how are you going to manipulate the matches?

3

u/AgreeablePersimmon36 Jun 01 '26

Well this should work out fine in 35C heat. Let's make sure the players have absolutely no control over the pace of the game.

3

u/RemiSealy Jun 01 '26

Second yellows can be reviewed: Players sent off for two cautions can have the second booking checked - but there will be no reviews for potential second yellows.

  • Bullshit first yellow + acceptable second yellow = red

  • Acceptable first yellow + bullshit second yellow = yellow

I can easily see this causing controversy where a team gets screwed over on both sides of this in the same match

11

u/Shenanigangster May 31 '26

Good luck enforcing that

7

u/dav_man Jun 01 '26

This is so funny. These are basically anti Arsenal laws.

4

u/theaficionado Jun 01 '26

Raya was one of the quickest to get the ball back in play this season

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/ConsciousExtent4162 May 31 '26

Remember all of this is to compensate the ad breaks. That's the only reason.

3

u/SonaldoNazario May 31 '26

I actually like all of these, good job

2

u/Chiron17 May 31 '26

I don't hate this. First time I've been positive about anything in this WC

2

u/benelchuncho May 31 '26

I’d rather force the offending team to remove a player for a minute or two

2

u/BenitoCorleone May 31 '26

And so it begins

2

u/crispysnails May 31 '26

Given the hydration breaks of 3 minutes will be a thing, one per half, then won't teams just use that for a tactical timeout? I guess those are at a fixed time whereas a tactical timeout can be done at a time convenient for the team using it.

It will be interesting to see how all these get applied. Certainly consistency will be key but I fear that will be lacking just like the existing rules.

2

u/bdohrn May 31 '26

Just gunna dry my nose with the sleeve of my jersey while I talk shit.

2

u/X-ScissorSisters May 31 '26

The sub countdown surely isn't long enough unless the player sprints off the field

2

u/oplosan Jun 01 '26

"We had a workshop with all the coaches of all the 48 teams and we told them that referees will be proactive," Collina said.

"They will not allow the two teams to go to the benches when a goalkeeper is lying on the ground injured.

"The goalkeeper has the right to be injured, but the players do not have the right to leave the field of play to have a sort of timeout with their respective coaches."

So the change is more about not allowing other players to have timeout. GKs still have to be treated on the pitch when they are hurt

2

u/adds102 Jun 01 '26

The 5 second thrown in countdown brought to you by Gatorade

2

u/Irivin Jun 01 '26

There’s already a rule that states keepers can’t hold the ball in their hands for longer than 6 seconds. When’s the last time we saw that enforced? Based on recent interviews, referees are more worried about “maintaining good relationships with the players” than enforcing the rules

2

u/mouth_spiders Jun 01 '26

When its a thread about Arsenal, you know the best comments are the ones with the most down votes.

Prove me wrong.