Jump to content

Recommended Posts

New laws

 

The International Football Association Board (IFAB) has published changes to the laws of the game for the 2016/17 season, the most notable altering sending-off and cautionable offences inside the penalty area.

 

The previous 'triple-punishment' rule meant that a player who denied a goal-scoring opportunity was automatically red-carded and handed a suspension, as well as giving away a penalty.

 

However, the law has now changed so that players committing accidental fouls, that deny a goal-scoring opportunity, are not automatically sent-off, but cautioned instead.

 

Players will still be sent-off for holding, pulling or pushing, not playing the ball or having no possibility to play the ball, serious foul play, violent conduct or deliberate handball.

 

Referees' powers have also been extended so that they can send-off a player before kick-off, from the official's pre-match pitch inspection onwards.

 

Announced on Thursday, the new laws also state the ball will also be able to move in any direction from kick-off, rather than only move forward.

 

Players who are injured by a challenge punishable by a yellow or red card can now have quick treatment on the field, rather than having to leave, which previously gave the offending team temporary numerical advantage.

 

IFAB announced last month their intentions to change the laws following a comprehensive, 18-month review, led by former English Premier League referee David Elleray.

 

The IFAB unanimously approved the revision, which they identified as a 'once in a generation' opportunity to address anomalies and inconsistences in the laws.

 

The IFAB, the game's law-making body, also approved a two-year trial period of video technology to assist referees, to be used in four cases: to determine if a goal has been scored, red cards, penalties and mistaken identity.

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36043808

 

West Ham's rent for the Olympic Stadium is £2.5m per year (halved to £1.25m if relegated).  It's been previously suggested that the tax-payer bill for running the stadium is £1.4m-£2.5m per year.

 

Disgrace.

 

Whole deal is a farce.

 

The taxper will also provide...

 

...or procure all necessary ticket checkers, turnstile operators. stewards within the Island and the Park, security personnel within the Island and the Park, ambulance and other medical personnel, staff for outlets, staff for restaurants and other public catering outlets, cleaning and maintenance staff and other personnel of suitable qualification and training, in sufficient numbers

 

Fucking hell  :suicide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36043808

 

West Ham's rent for the Olympic Stadium is £2.5m per year (halved to £1.25m if relegated).  It's been previously suggested that the tax-payer bill for running the stadium is £1.4m-£2.5m per year.

 

Disgrace.

 

Whole deal is a farce.

 

The taxper will also provide...

 

...or procure all necessary ticket checkers, turnstile operators. stewards within the Island and the Park, security personnel within the Island and the Park, ambulance and other medical personnel, staff for outlets, staff for restaurants and other public catering outlets, cleaning and maintenance staff and other personnel of suitable qualification and training, in sufficient numbers

 

Fucking hell  :suicide:

and west ham are contributing only 15m to the conversion cost of 272m. This is a disgrace of a deal they'd probably be as well off leaving it a white elephant as this basically giving the stadium to west ham

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36043808

 

West Ham's rent for the Olympic Stadium is £2.5m per year (halved to £1.25m if relegated).  It's been previously suggested that the tax-payer bill for running the stadium is £1.4m-£2.5m per year.

 

Disgrace.

 

That's an absolutely shocking arrangement :lol:.

 

Who 'negotiated' that?

Bungle Boris wasn't it. Giving Tory donors Sullivan and Gold a nice parting gift.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FIFA.com ‏@FIFAcom 

#Rio2016 draw (men's)

Group A

Brazil

South Africa

Iraq

Denmark

 

Group B

Sweden

Colombia

Nigeria

Japan

 

Group C

Fiji

Korea Republic

Mexico

Germany

 

Group D

Honduras

Algeria

Portugal

Argentina

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36043808

 

West Ham's rent for the Olympic Stadium is £2.5m per year (halved to £1.25m if relegated).  It's been previously suggested that the tax-payer bill for running the stadium is £1.4m-£2.5m per year.

 

Disgrace.

 

Whole deal is a farce.

 

Just read that should they negotiate naming rights for the stadium, the first £4m will go to the taxpayer but anything else is a 50:50 split.

 

Still though, if they win the Champions League, they have to pay £1m.  Bit harsh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FIFA.com ‏@FIFAcom 

#Rio2016 draw (men's)

Group A

Brazil

South Africa

Iraq

Denmark

 

Group B

Sweden

Colombia

Nigeria

Japan

 

Group C

Fiji

Korea Republic

Mexico

Germany

 

Group D

Honduras

Algeria

Portugal

Argentina

 

What's this? ???

Link to post
Share on other sites

FIFA.com ‏@FIFAcom 

#Rio2016 draw (men's)

Group A

Brazil

South Africa

Iraq

Denmark

 

Group B

Sweden

Colombia

Nigeria

Japan

 

Group C

Fiji

Korea Republic

Mexico

Germany

 

Group D

Honduras

Algeria

Portugal

Argentina

 

What's this? ???

 

Mens Olympic football.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FIFA.com ‏@FIFAcom 

#Rio2016 draw (men's)

Group A

Brazil

South Africa

Iraq

Denmark

 

Group B

Sweden

Colombia

Nigeria

Japan

 

Group C

Fiji

Korea Republic

Mexico

Germany

 

Group D

Honduras

Algeria

Portugal

Argentina

 

What's this? ???

 

Mens Olympic football.

 

I JUST CAN'T WAIT FOR THIS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the box I'd agree with that but you could still make a genuine attempt at the ball, foul the man denying a clear shot, and only end up conceding a free-kick with 11 men.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest neesy111

In the box I'd agree with that but you could still make a genuine attempt at the ball, foul the man denying a clear shot, and only end up conceding a free-kick with 11 men.

 

Does that come under accidental?  I don't think so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the box I'd agree with that but you could still make a genuine attempt at the ball, foul the man denying a clear shot, and only end up conceding a free-kick with 11 men.

 

Does that come under accidental?  I don't think so.

 

:lol:

 

ON is being my pet hate tonight Neesy... :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...