2020-21 Law Changes
- Thread starter AlexF
- Start date
Phew, something to read on your next day off....... or maybe today!!
They're getting rid of the "usually"s in handball.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
I was surprised by the diagram of the arm. In the US the teaching has been side versus top (like the seam on a dress shirt). Making the side permissible down to the level of the bottom of the arm pit seems much more difficult to judge, especially for those of us limited to real time.
And GKs get a warning on PKs before a caution, too.
I only did a quick look, but seemed more good than bad on first take.
And GKs get a warning on PKs before a caution, too.
I only did a quick look, but seemed more good than bad on first take.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Hmmmm . . . Law 11 now is clear that a deliberate handball is a play for purposes of the gaining an advantage part of Law 11. And the re-framing of handball offense in Law 12 makes mroe clear that deliberate handling is an offense, and that there are additional offenses that are not deliberate. So does a non-deliberate handball offense reset?
I'm assuming that the new HB law would now allow the Declan Rice HB v SUFC.....I can still see the look on David Moyes little face when it was ruled out!! Worth the admission alone!!!
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
Whoops missed that bit
one
RefChat Addict
But this is only a mention of it in this document. The change is not going into the LOTG (at least it doesn't look like it is) which is pretty much as good/bad as not having it because we already had that in a circular. So if in say 5 years time somebody does this, all we have to go by is a law change document released 5 years ago or a circular 6 years ago.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
one
RefChat Addict
And the prerequisite for all of those ways would have been for the members of IFAB to agree on it which seems to be the problem in this case.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
No more advantage SPA YC is the big one for refs I think.
No need for reference to interfering with a promising attack now.
one
RefChat Addict
But the law specifically includes free kicks as part of USB. Unless the law is changed, the clarification would directly contradict the law.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
one
RefChat Addict
Agreed and even stranger that they are calling it a clarification. A clarification is something that is covered in law but it is not clear. The clarification is to explain that this is what the existing law intends without changing the law. If it looks like a duck....
This is is a whole new law change disguised under a clarification. A big law change which they don't want to commit to because of the precedent it would set. Retaking a restart after the ball is legally in play but you don't want punish the offence commited.
Or put in other words, done once it is not an offence but they shouldn't do it. Second time you can still not punish even if they know they shouldn't do it. But if they do it many times (persistently) then it becomes an offence. Say what?