Connect with us

rules

As soccer evolves, so must the rules: 5 changes to consider

Recently, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) approved the permanent adoption of the use of five substitutes, giving top-level competitions the option to allow up to five subs in a match (restricted to three substitution windows, plus halftime). This was a temporary rule change adopted in 2020 as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, but it proved to be a successful and popular amendment to the laws of the game, enhancing player safety and giving teams more flexibility to make moves during a match.

Soccer certainly isn’t the same game it was when it was first played in the 19th century. It has grown and evolved with the times, just like every sport has. Over time the players change, the strategy changes, and sometimes, the rules must change as well to improve both the integrity and quality of the game.

But has it done enough, or perhaps too much?

Another relatively recent addition to the sport is VAR (video assistant referee) and Goal Line Technology, intended to make sure results aren’t affected unjustly by incorrect or missed calls. As noble as these technological efforts have been, they are certainly not perfect and can cause just as much controversy as before, but some of that comes down to the rules of the game themselves – rules that leave a lot of human subjectivity in the process, and thus are subject to error.

So, let’s take a look at five other rule changes that could help improve the sport. Some are major changes, some are tweaks, but all of these could potentially enhance and elevate the game.

Rule 1) Extra Time – Eliminate Shootouts

Though they have provided much drama and excitement (especially for neutrals), it’s tough to argue that the penalty shootout from the spot is a fair way to decide the winner of a match – especially when you consider that the method is only used to break a tie in knockout situations, which by definition are high-stakes games. Imagine working for an entire season, a career, even a lifetime in many cases, to have a chance at winning a major trophy as a player or coach (or a fan), only to lose in what amounts to an almost random skills contest. No other sport allows something like a championship game to be decided in such a frankly ridiculous manner.

A solution that has a bit more balanced odds between the keeper and shooter is the hockey-style shootout, used by the NASL in the 1970s and by MLS in its early years, where the shooter has 5 seconds to dribble in from 35 yards out and get a shot off, with the keeper allowed to come off their line and defend. Personally I think this style of shootout is much more entertaining, and more fair, but it still amounts to a sort of All-Star game skills display, not suitable to decide the winner of a game, season, or in the most extreme case, a World Cup. This type of penalty shot does have its place (more on that later), but it’s not to decide a winner of a game.

Rule Change:
The best way to break a tie in an elimination game has been tried before by FIFA, and is still used by NCAA college soccer in the USA: Golden Goal.

It’s a simple rule. If teams are tied after 90 minutes, you keep playing, and the next goal wins. You play the same traditional two 15-minute periods of extra time, but if anyone scores, the game is immediately over. If still tied after the extra 30 minutes, you go to a shootout. But we want to get rid of shootouts, so here’s where this can be tweaked and improved:

#1 – For the first two 15-minute periods, play the “silver goal” variation. This means if someone scores, the game isn’t immediately over, but if the period ends and the score isn’t even, then a winner is declared. This prevents an unlucky or otherwise fluke goal early in extra time from outright deciding things, giving each team a fair chance.

#2 – After 30 minutes if you’re still tied, don’t go to a shootout. Instead, then move to golden goal, next goal wins, for 15 minute periods until somebody scores. This is the way playoff hockey works – the game goes on, just as it did the entire season, with normal rules, until someone scores. And it can lead to some incredibly suspenseful and unforgettable moments. Yes, players will get tired, but with an expanded substitute option (perhaps the sub rules could be extended further in these extra time situations), it’s entirely manageable. Imagine the scenes if a cup final or promotion playoff were decided in the 156th minute, or even later?

Rule 2: While We’re At It, Let’s Get Rid Of Spot Kicks Entirely

The non-shootout penalty kick from the spot during normal game play has been a source of controversial moments for as long as it has existed. Even with the help of VAR, many PK calls are still hotly debated, and not once has a penalty kick really accurately replicated the opportunity taken away by the foul from the defending side. Has an attacking player ever been fouled, while standing still on the penalty spot, with no defenders around him and the keeper standing on his goal line? Of course not. So why on Earth do we award what is an almost automatic goal for things like soft fouls at the edge of the 18 yard box, or random handballs in a crowded cluster of players?

Rule Change:
2.1 – Award a direct free kick from the spot of the foul, just like any other area on the field. This would take much of the pressure off the officials when making foul calls in the box, produce far less controversy while still giving a scoring chance to the team that was fouled, and more closely replicate the opportunity that was nullified by the infringement. And it would definitely produce some interesting moments and memorable goals. You could enforce a maximum number of players in a wall in these situations, so you can’t simply pack the goal line, and also somewhat accurately replicate the scenario before the foul was committed. You could even use VAR to determine how many defenders were between the ball and the goal when the infraction occurred, as the limit for the wall, but this may be a step too far.

2.2 –  There is one scenario where a true one-on-one penalty shot is justified – when an attacker is on a breakaway, with only the goalkeeper in front of him and gets taken down illegally before getting a shot off. In that case, this is where our friend the NASL/hockey penalty shot comes in. It gives the attacker the near-exact chance he had before the foul, and is not a guessing game spot kick.

This is the only rule suggestion that would require modifying the field markings, as you’d no longer have a need for the penalty spot in the box. You could move it to 35 yards out, or perhaps more interestingly get rid of it completely and on NASL penalty shots have the shooter start from the spot of the foul.

Rule 3: Handball Adjustment

This one ties in somewhat to the previous rule, as nobody really cares about a handball if it’s not inside the 18-yard box. But if it is, we all become CSI detectives breaking down every frame of video on the replay to argue over the intent of the player, where the hand was, could they have gotten it out of the way, etc.

But if we get rid of spot kicks and instead award regular free kicks for fouls in the box as suggested above, a handball call becomes significantly less impactful, so therefore we can simplify the rule a bit.

Rule Change:
If a ball hits any non-goalkeeper hand (let’s define a hand as anywhere on the arm below the elbow), anywhere, at any time, for any reason, it’s a handball and a free kick to the other team. Doesn’t matter if your hand is behind your back, or what your intent was. Ball hitting hand equals handball.

This simplification takes a lot of the subjectivity out of the call, which makes things easier on the fly for refs, as well as for any calls under VAR scrutiny.

Rule 4: The Sin Bin

I’m stealing this one from rugby, but it’s actually a rule that has been approved by the IFAB for optional use in the youth, veterans, disability and grassroots variations of the game.

We’ve all seen plenty of sending offs that were questionable, for fouls that probably shouldn’t have warranted the nuclear option of a red card. The sharp escalation from “hey don’t do that again” to “you’re out of the match and your team has to play one man down the rest of the way… oh and by the way you’re suspended for the next game too” in the soccer justice system doesn’t leave much room for referees to work with.

Rule Change:
Adopt temporary dismissals, or “sin bins”, at every level of the game. Think of it basically as a “yellow card+” or “orange card”, in between a yellow and a red. If given a temporary dismal, the player in question is sent off, but only for 10 minutes, at which point they can come back on. So it puts their team at a disadvantage, but not a catastrophic one, and is more of a fair punishment for certain offenses that are worse than a yellow but that don’t quite warrant a full sending off and suspension (but under the current rules there is no other choice for). In fact, it would be decent punishment for a run-of-the-mill second yellow card as well, with a third then resulting in the traditional sending off.

I’ve had experience with this rule first hand at the adult amateur level in the USA, and it really is a positive addition to the game.

Rule 5: Offside

Saving this one for last – it’s a simple change with a big effect, and another one that ties in with making VAR smoother and easier to operate (and making it less necessary in the first place).

The current offside rule states that:

A player is in an offside position if:

  • any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
  • any part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent

The whole thing ought to be flipped around and streamlined.

Rule Change:
Soccer’s offside rule basically works as “if any part of the player is offside, the player is offside”. But it should work in reverse, like hockey’s offside, which is “if any part of the player is onside, the player is onside”.

So let’s revise the official rule to:

A player is in an offside position if:

  • The entirety of the body (including hands and arms) is clearly and obviously within the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) and
  • The entirety of the body is clearly and obviously nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the entirety of the second-last opponent

This effectively means that you can “tag up” and remain onside even if just the tip of your boot or a pinky finger is in line with any part of that second to last defender. And we’re including the entire body, because not counting hands and arms as in the current rule just adds unnecessary complexity. If a hand/arm is relevant enough to stop play when the ball touches it, it’s relevant enough to include with the rest of the body when it comes to offside.

The intent, effect, and spirit of the rule remains exactly the same as the existing rule. You can’t be ahead of the ball and that second-last defender before the ball is played. This just changes how we measure it. This change gives the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player, but isn’t that how it should be? Nobody wants to see goals or attacking chances called back. Nobody wants to see play constantly interrupted by a linesman’s flag. Free-flowing, attacking soccer with more scoring chances is a much better product. This helps promote that.

The “clearly and obviously” qualifier helps 1) in VAR situations and 2) making VAR less necessary in the first place. Unless somebody is blatantly offside with a good amount of daylight between them and the second-last opponent, the flag should stay down more often, and if there is a review, without clear visual evidence to the contrary, if there is any chance part of the player is onside, they are onside and reviews should be quicker.

So that’s it. None of these would be earth shattering changes. We’re not talking about making the clock count down, adding time outs, getting rid of draws, increasing the goal size, adding 3-point shots or anything wacky that might have come out of an early 90s MLS brainstorming session. This would simply be massaging the existing rules into something that would dial back the opportunity for controversy, and make the game more enjoyable and fair.

Do you like any of these suggestions? Any ideas of your own? Hit us with your best rule changes in the comments!

200+ Channels With Sports & News
  • Starting price: $33/mo. for fubo Latino Package
  • Watch Premier League, World Cup, Euro 2024 & more
  • Includes NBC, USA, FOX, ESPN, CBSSN & more
Live & On Demand TV Streaming
  • Price: $69.99/mo. for Entertainment package
  • Watch World Cup, Euro 2024 & MLS
  • Includes ESPN, ESPN2, FS1 + local channels
Many Sports & ESPN Originals
  • Price: $6.99/mo. (or get ESPN+, Hulu & Disney+ for $13.99/mo.)
  • Features Bundesliga, LaLiga, Championship, & more
  • Also includes daily ESPN FC news & highlights show
2,000+ soccer games per year
  • Price: $4.99/mo
  • Features Champions League, Serie A, Europa League & NWSL
  • Includes CBS, Star Trek & CBS Sports HQ
175 Premier League Games & PL TV
  • Starting price: $4.99/mo. for Peacock Premium
  • Watch 175 exclusive EPL games per season
  • Includes Premier League TV channel plus movies, TV shows & more
23 Comments

23 Comments

  1. raksiam

    June 22, 2022 at 9:30 pm

    your handball idea is just going to result in attackers trying to flick the ball off the hand of his opponent from close range to win PKs (or dangerous freekicks if you succeed in elminating PKs)

    I think most of these ideas are solutions searching for a problem

  2. Andy

    June 21, 2022 at 5:04 pm

    I am so tired of seeing players get an advantage by cheating up the line on throw-ins. I saw a goal scored because a player ran at least 10 yards up the line and throwing it to a running player. I would make a rule that you can back up as far as you want, but if you go even a yard upline and throw it, the throw goes to the other team.
    My other suggestion would require redrawing the lines, but maybe “round-off” the corners of the 18 yard box so a foul in the corner of the box which is nowhere near the goal would not result in a penalty. I think some of the article’s penalty changes would be more practical.

  3. Yespage

    June 21, 2022 at 9:42 am

    PK’s are awful! But the reality is the players are also human and can only play at a high level for so long. I think the “golden goal” worse name ever, let’s go with “sudden death”, is a much better idea for Extra Time. 30 minutes, first to score wins or go to PKs.

    The “Sin Bin” is an interesting idea as it’d finally allow refs to be a bit more liberal with overly aggressive players, without the fear of changing the tide permanently in a game. However, there would be a huge adjustment to such a change for the refs.

    Handball rule is fine, and while it feels offside is an overly harsh metric, black and white makes the most sense.

  4. Ra

    June 21, 2022 at 8:05 am

    An amateurish article. Probably a click bait. Let’s hear how the new Libertadores rights are shaping instead. If you prefer hockey rules, go watch it instead. The handball proposal seems more like kids playing tag.
    As an example – somehow the writer argues that a pinky finger would be enough to be unequivocally onside, and that would constitute the body not being clear and obviously nearer to the other goal. Pinky in = onside, pinky out = offside? I am not going to tell what to do with this pinky finger.

    “The entirety of the body is clearly and obviously nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the entirety of the second-last opponent
    This effectively means that you can “tag up” and remain onside even if just the tip of your boot or a pinky finger is in line with any part of that second to last defender.”

  5. Mick

    June 21, 2022 at 3:33 am

    Excellent article worthy of serious discussion. Another rule that needs changing is when a fouled player is injured and is forced to leave the field before returning … yet the perpetrator of the foul gets to stay on.

  6. Paul

    June 20, 2022 at 11:54 am

    Love the guys who call this article trash without constructive criticism.

    Have heard of PKs variation before the ET. Then the winner of that has to only tie to win AET. It keeps PK drama but decided on the field.

  7. Dale P.

    June 20, 2022 at 8:41 am

    One thing to keep in mind is that making rule changes just for the sake of making changes is dumb. Continuity in a sport is kind of nice.

  8. cmasia

    June 19, 2022 at 8:37 pm

    Change #1: Switch to a “rugby Clock”. A player gets injured, the clock stops. .This will eliminate most of the time wasting by guys hit with sniper fire, yet magically revive after 3 minutes at death’s door. STOP THE CLOCK.
    A substitution is made is made, the clock stops. Eliminates the arbitrary number of added minutes.

    2) Only captains can address the referee. Watching 6 guys surround the ref is really irritating – and fruitless.

  9. Bob

    June 19, 2022 at 10:08 am

    I agree with the offside but I believe pens are part of the game and getting rid of them would create more controversy on numerous plays. I’m ok with the sin bin but only for certain types of “offenses”, i.e. dissent, time killing, fake injuries, etc.
    As far as extra time my proposal would be as follows: after the 1st 10 minutes of extra time each team must remove 2 players and continue with 9; after another 10 minutes 2 more players must be taken off. This would create more space but also make for interesting tactical decisions (does an attacker or a defender come off). If there is still no score than we go to penalty kicks but that should be rare since there should be more chances to score.

  10. Gary Levitt

    June 19, 2022 at 8:39 am

    Well done piece. I am good with some changes, not good with others. 1) Extra time changes – yes, agree. The penalty kick is not the way to end an important match. The substitution rule will need to be analyzed as a vast amount of minutes played (120+), especially in high temperatures, is dangerous for the players and can result in poor play.
    2) Do not get rid of spot kicks all together – A deliberate hand ball, taking down a player going in on goal, a goalkeeper taking out an attacker on a clear breakaway – these types of fouls should give the attacking team a positive situation to convert. These types of fouls should still result in a penalty kick.
    3) Handballs – agree that a handball is a handball. I will stay with it being a bit objective in that a player whose hand/arm is in a normal position does not result in a handball foul; a hand/arm in an unnatural position away from the body results in a foul.
    4) Sin Bin – I sort of like this but for two reasons only: 1) dissent and simulation. Players protesting every call, delaying the match by surrounding the referee, and simulating being fouled should be shown a yellow AND your team plays a man down for ten minutes. With that said, when a team is a man down for ten minutes, they will simply park the bus, causing the game to slow down and less wide open. So, be aware that the Sin Bin has drawbacks — but something must be done with dissent and simulation as it is ruining the game.
    5) Offside rule – completely agree. Anything to limit the VAR delays.

  11. Lee Gaucher

    June 18, 2022 at 7:20 pm

    Alternate title for this piece: Five ideas to ruin soccer even more than we already have

    I’ll never understand this argument about penalty kicks not being a fair way to decide a match. Both teams know the rules going in, no? That’s all the fairness they need. As for the “silver goal,” didn’t UEFA try it and decided to revert to the old/current format? It was ditched for a reason.

  12. Dan

    June 18, 2022 at 7:13 pm

    If you really want to spice up soccer, eliminate the offside rule entirely, The fast break in basketball is one of the most exciting plays, and the same with the long pass in football. But it’s illegal in soccer to run behind a slow defender. What a stupid rule.

    • Roberto

      June 18, 2022 at 7:16 pm

      It is okay to run past a slow defender.

    • Dale P.

      June 20, 2022 at 8:45 am

      If there were no offside rule, the defenders wouldn’t be standing in a line 20-30 yards out from goal. There’d always be 1 or 2 back by the keeper. You wouldn’t be able to get past them for a fast break.

      It’s like the offside rule in American gridiron and line rules in ice hockey. It keeps the flow of action going. Otherwise players would simply park themselves at various places all over the field.

  13. JP

    June 18, 2022 at 4:06 pm

    No to most of these except offside. Caveat that “playable” part of the body still applies, that way an attacker couldn’t simply extend an arm/hand back to technically get into an inside position.

    Would like to see the Golden Goal return, make extra time sudden death. But if still tied after the extra 30 minutes it still goes to penalties.

    Replacing spot kicks with direct free kicks brings up a host of other problems that @Mercator already outlined. As a compromise, maybe change so the spot kick takes place at the location of the foul…but that might lead to more penalties taken at the edge of the box or very close to the keeper (spot kick might be difficult to convert at very close range given limited angles). So all in all, don’t change it.

  14. Jasinho

    June 18, 2022 at 2:06 pm

    A real good Idea I’ve heard discussed many years ago but never materialized:

    The Kick-in instead of the Throw-in.
    The idea is self explanatory, basically a free kick after the ball went out of bounds.

    Also, eliminate yellow cards for self-shirt removal. Because that never made sense except to appease the pc crowd.

  15. dave

    June 18, 2022 at 1:50 pm

    Hockey-style delayed penalties and sin bins for soccer would be wild
    .
    I like your idea on in-game penalty kicks but agree with @Mercator on drawbacks. A PK is too often a reward far out of line with the infraction. But your proposed rule may change arguing to “did that deny a clear opportunity”. VAR could still be controversial
    .
    I would prefer line calls to be made by technology. Sensors and high-speed cameras can determine ball in/out, goal/no-goal (already implemented), onside/offside (supposedly being piloted). Set a standard, program the technology, identical for all, nothing to complain about to on-field refs. Top leagues only since it is a large capital expense

  16. Tony

    June 18, 2022 at 12:02 pm

    What a load of rubbish . Why not make the goal 100 feet wide and 30 feet tall and use a beach ball ……………..

  17. Mercator

    June 18, 2022 at 10:21 am

    Interesting and I completely agree with the offside rule but the others have some drawbacks. Pens are peak drama – perhaps not the fairest method but mentally there is nothing like pens. This is where boys become men. After decades of watching the game I still can’t decide if pens are luck or skill. Also keeps the game within a reasonable time frame, I don’t want to watch a 5 hour knockout match with Mourinho. PK’s are important as well – if its a direct free kick and not a pen I’m telling every player to wack someone like Messi every time they get in the box. At a certain point the closer you are to the net the HARDER it is to score a spot kick and I’d rather have Messi take a spot kick with a wall of 8 in the box than have the ball at his feet in the same position. The game should encourage free play, particularly close to goal, and not create situations where its to the defender’s advantage to foul.

    • Aram

      June 18, 2022 at 12:40 pm

      But if the defenders whack at an attacker they are still subject to yellows and getting sent off after a few blows. So this direct free kick idea actually helps the game get called more fairly because currently refs often swallow their whistle for fouls in the box because they know the reward is so high

      • Mercator

        June 18, 2022 at 7:16 pm

        Maybe it helps cowardly refs but a yellow is nothing, of course you wack him and take the yellow. Remember what Chiellini did to Saka back at the Euros? He got turned basically on the half line and was happy to pull him down and take the yellow before getting beat. A good player in the box with ball at feet? You wack them and take the yellow. Defenders should have to be more cautious near goal, it gives the talented and creative players the space to do what we all enjoy most about the game. I do agree its a bit of an issue with the handball rule – extremely harsh for some of these accidental handballs, but still not a reason to get rid of pens I think.

        Also, no one wants to say it but the element of subjectivity and unfairness is part of what makes the game great. If the refs got every call right, if everything was fair, if the better team always won… what would be argue and get upset about?

    • dave

      June 18, 2022 at 2:04 pm

      @Mercator, I agree soccer needs a rule to prevent 5-hour games. The Mourinho issue and also fatigue. Most sports with multiple overtimes have liberal substitution. For example, playoff hockey teams often have 4 attacking lines and 3 defending lines. Each player is on the ice ~30% of the time and they still look gassed if it goes to the second overtime. I cannot imagine being a midfielder during a 300-minute soccer game

  18. jason

    June 18, 2022 at 9:14 am

    What I like is 1) Sin bins for certain fouls…just like hockey 2) This will never happen but to make offsides the way they have it on hockey would be cool

    I noticed a commonality of what I suggest..ha ha.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

More in rules

Translate »