Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: All change in the eyes of the law

  1. #1

    All change in the eyes of the law

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39157887

    Looks like video referees, sin bins, rolling substitutes, and different penalty shootout formats are being introduced.

    The Football Association wants to test a video assistant referee system from next season's FA Cup third round.
    The announcement came at the annual meeting of the International Football Association Board (Ifab) on Friday.
    Ifab is also reviewing the order of penalty shootouts, as there is a "clear advantage" to going first.
    It also confirmed that clubs will be allowed to use a fourth substitute during extra time from the quarter-finals of this season's FA Cup.
    Proposals for sin-bins for yellow-card offences and rolling substitutions at lower levels of football, to be introduced from June, were also approved at the Wembley meeting.

    It is a move to "encourage more people to take part" in youth and amateur leagues.
    Ifab is made up of world governing body Fifa and the four British home associations - the FAs of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - and is responsible for deciding on law changes.

    Friday's meeting, which was chaired by Football Association chief executive Martin Glenn, also agreed a strategy to improve player behaviour. That could lead to captains being the only players permitted to speak to referees about "major incidents".

    An FA Cup first

    The FA Cup quarter-finals will take place from 11-13 March, including Manchester United's Monday night trip to Premier League leaders Chelsea.
    The trial of a fourth substitute in extra time is a first in England, though the format was used at last year's Copa America and the Rio Olympics.
    Glenn said the rule change will bring "extra intrigue and interest" to the ties.
    "From a technical point of view, it will be interesting to see how managers use the chance to make an additional substitution in such high-profile games and the impact it has on the final result," he added.

    2018 World Cup the target

    Fifa president Gianni Infantino attended Friday's meeting and said the aim is for video assistant referees to be used at the World Cup in Russia next year.
    He confirmed the technology will be used at this June's Confederations Cup and May's Under-20 World Cup.
    Video assistant referees will review "match-changing" situations before informing the on-field official.
    Video replays were first used at international level during a friendly between Italy and France in September and then again during an friendly between Italy and Germany in November.

    The system has been tested in six other countries, including in the third-tier United Soccer League in America and the Dutch Cup.
    Its first use in a Fifa competition was during December's Club World Cup.
    Glenn said it would be too early for the technology to be used at August's Community Shield. He added it was a question of "when, not if" the system is introduced to English football.

    Tennis-style tie-breakers

    Ifab is considering changing penalty shootouts, citing the example of a tennis tie-break to combat the "statistically proven advantage" of the team that goes first.

    Teams alternate in shootouts, but Ifab says research shows the first team taking kicks has a 60% chance of winning.
    It is seeking trials in the lower levels of football that would see one team take the first penalty, then the teams alternate two kicks at a time.
    "We believe that approach could remove that statistical bias and this is something that we will now look to trial," said Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan.

  2. #2
    bit confused about some of that.

    I thought captains were already supposed to be the only person to approach the ref about serious matters?

    does going first in penalty shootouts really provide 'statistically proven' advantages? the figure it gives is 60% of teams going first then go on to win. that doesn't tell me there is an obvious advantage.

    if I flip a coin 100 times it wont be a 50/50 between heads and tails. there will, most likely be an advantage to one side or the other.

  3. #3
    60% is quite a big difference isn't it? Sounds natural to me. Penalties are lot about pressure and it's way easier to be the first shooter than the second as the first shooter most likely scores putting pressure on the second shooter.

    It surprises me when I see team opting to go second.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by IamMelGibson View Post
    60% is quite a big difference isn't it? Sounds natural to me. Penalties are lot about pressure and it's way easier to be the first shooter than the second as the first shooter most likely scores putting pressure on the second shooter.

    It surprises me when I see team opting to go second.
    I don't think 60% is that big of a swing in what is generally a 50/50 coin toss type scenario.

    you can make arguments for going first or second being the most pressure. all it really comes down to is the player on the day and how they handle pressure.

    for example, if you go second and the opponent before you misses, there is less pressure to score as all you're doing is bringing yourself level with them should you miss. if you did score, however, there would be even more pressure on the next player from the other team to score since his mate missed and he's behind.

  5. #5
    But what are the chances for the first player to score? The pressure is almost every time bigger on the second shooter and often goes on untill the end. Same argument was used in Spain a few years ago when Barcelona and Real Madrid were even or at least almost even on points. Real Madrid were gutted that Barcelona played first every weekend. 60% seems a lot on a sample size that big. For example people always talk about boxing and red being better than blue but it's something like 52%.

  6. #6
    The 60% stat is not exactly a big difference. It could be nothing to do with who goes first and is an arbitary number that only represents the actual result. Further testing over many other leagues needs doing, if it wasn't taken from worldwide football anyways.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by IamMelGibson View Post
    But what are the chances for the first player to score? The pressure is almost every time bigger on the second shooter and often goes on untill the end. Same argument was used in Spain a few years ago when Barcelona and Real Madrid were even or at least almost even on points. Real Madrid were gutted that Barcelona played first every weekend. 60% seems a lot on a sample size that big. For example people always talk about boxing and red being better than blue but it's something like 52%.
    how big was the sample size? I may have missed it but I didn't see the size of the data. the thing is, if you studied it you could also probably conclude something along the lines of 'the team in red win 60% of penalty shootouts so there is an advantage to wearing red when taking a penalty".

    the conclusion is false but the premise is true.

  8. #8
    I tought that 60% was from a huge sample size. What i mean by boxing is that when you take a huge sample size of 50/50 it's just a few % difference.

  9. #9
    I think the league needs to make some changes for sure ,to reflect the increase in the players athleticism ,quicker and speed . And it also needs to take into consideration the highly competitive nature of football in our leagues.
    But i see no mention of any mid season breaks for teams , shuffling schedules to accommodate teams in the deeper stages of the Champions league .

  10. #10
    We've seen video referees brought in in some areas of the game, and maybe later we'll have 'challenges' for each team, maybe 1 in each half and keep that 1 challenge if the decision went their way in the review. Really happy to see that they aim to get the video ref in time for the World Cup in Russia.

    We've seen some water breaks introduced in the International Champions Cup due to the heat. As communicating from manager to on-field players can be difficult, they could even consider the water breaks again, or even time-outs - though I guess that would create a un-needed break, unless for player health restoration.

    Finally, it's been suggested that we do away with extra time. If two teams can't outscore each other in 90 minutes, then why do we need an extra and needless 30 minutes to decide the game? 90 minutes is enough.

    There was talk about changing the half length to 30 minutes while stopping the clock when the ball goes out of play. Anyone keen on this idea?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •