Rule Change Proposal: Injure a player and spend time on the touchline

By: Bob | August 14th, 2007

It often seems like an inordinate amount of time is spent discussion how the rules of soccer could be changed, while in reality the sport remains largely the way it has always been. That doesn’t make the unimplemented proposals any less interesting. The brainchild of the newest suggested rule change is Keith Hackett who oversees the referees in England.

Hackett is proposing that players who commit an egregious foul that lead to an opponent being taken off the pitch due to injury should also be sent to the touchline until the opponent returns.

The new law could not be implemented in the Premier League before next season, although it could conceivably be used at Euro 2008. It would not apply to all fouls; the offence must be deemed worthy of a yellow card before the perpetrator is ordered to stay off until the injured party returns.

“It’s wrong that the opponent who committed the foul challenge remains on the pitch and his team stays at 11, yet the team who has been offended against go down to 10 for a period while the player is treated,” said Hackett, the chief executive of the Professional Game Match Officials, yesterday.

“If it is an injury that demands touchline treatment, he [the injured player] comes off and the offender comes off. When he is fit, or a substitute is ready, he [the offender] can come back on. It is an area which the PFA, LMA and ourselves have discussed on our technical committee.

Hackett has a point about the fairness of playing a man up, but is this really a pressing matter? Most players who are injured either come right back on the pitch after a few seconds or they are quickly substituted out. It doesn’t seem like the advantage of playing a man up is really much of an advantage. How often do teams actually score while a man up due to injury? And what happens if a team milks an injury so that an opponent is forced to stand on the touchline for a long time?

What do you think? Is this a good proposal or is it unnecessary?

Some Related Stories:

Category: English Premier League, World Football

« Hooray! Champions League Third Qualifying Round is here | Home | The State of the Superliga at the Semifinals »

The Offside RSS Feeds

nigel bray

can some one please injure Kieth hacket. Does he actually watch football. Ronaldo (UTD) and drogba will never be off the floor
Infectioner

This rule is quite interesting but it's not perfect in my opinion. I can think of two situations where this rule will be abused to the max.

a) A key player tackled a mediocre player from the opposition. The mediocre player could fake his injury so the key player will be removed from the play, which would be a great advantage even if it's just for a while. Imagine removing Terry after he tackled Ali Dia! @.@

b) What if it's goalkeeper who injures a player? An empty goal!
Juan Carlos Sol

the game needs to be left as it is, if anything it should be just like it was invented
Sam

Oh yeah, I hadn't thought of the malicious strategies involved. I guess that wouldn't work after all.
Ian

I'm against it. It just doesn't seem necessary. As you say, goals are rarely, if ever, scored with an injury advantage. I don't see it happening.
KFad

I'm with Yevy. A player who goes down should not be allowed to re-enter for at least 5 minutes. Those carted off on a stretcher should need more than the magic water to revive them. They should be forced to stay off for 10 minutes. If you couldn't walk off the field, how can you be ready to play as soon as you reach the touchline?

It's a very American prospective on the game. Americans hate divers. We embrace hard-nosed players such as Brian McBride who wipe the blood off and come back for more.

It might make the game rougher, but it would strongly discourage diving and time wasting.
Karl

I concur with jk and Yevy.

The rule would be unnecessary and be abused to no end. Mandating players receiving treatment on the pitch having to leave before they can play again was first implemented to stop such abuses. This rule would be a step backwards.
Yevy

I agree with jk that this rule, while logical, would be exploited to no end. It would encourage mediocre players to simulate injuries when challenged by key opposition players in an effort to get them off the pitch and create an advantage for their team.

A rule I'd like to see tried out is forcing an injured player to stay on the touchline for at least as long as it took him to get off the field after the play was stopped so he could get treatment. Nothing bugs me more than seeing someone play dead for several minutes, get stretchered off, and come back to life as soon as he's off the pitch.
jk

This would be able to be brought in until next season as it would need to go through FIFA, so earliest really is the Euro's.

I dont really like the idea to be honest. It's open to abuse and problems. If a player goes off injured how long does the offending player have to stay off?

Id rather see something like in Rugby where if a player has a blood injury they can bring a sub on for that duration. MAybe limit them to one a half or something.
Shane

I think players should start to toughen up and stay on the pitch after a tackle. Most "injuries" are just knocks and will go away in a few seconds. Why put your team at risk by sitting out cause you failed to draw a card from a weak tackle. Thats what Wegner was mad about at the beginning of last season when his player kicked the ball out for a stop of play. It got old and ridiculous in the WC 06 and made a very bad impression on American viewers who were tuning in out of curiosity.
Sam

Sounds like a good idea to me. Forget the penalty box or anything like that, but this is a logical and rational idea.