|
|
Post by Rajiv on Apr 23, 2012 9:59:37 GMT 8
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jun 26, 2012 8:32:22 GMT 8
.... The current review of the use of blades at Khalsa and East Coast will continue until June. .... .... Of course ideally, we should aim to have standard rules and requirements for all our venues, but we do need some degree of variation to allow for the different playing conditions. For example, games at East Coast and Kallang are played off the side padding/wall/fencing, while games at Turf City and Khalsa are played to the side-lines. Nevertheless: More generally: .... I give leeway to newer players, to allow them time to familiarize themselves with the values, principles, standards, rules and system. I also don't want to make it too onerous for regulars to introduce new players. There should be no deterrence to introducing new players. In fact, as stated above, a consistent flow of new players is what has kept GIFFA (and FIOFAFI before that) going. Also, our games are ultimately social, so I am not inclined to have or enforce a lot of technical rules, or severe penalties for breaches of the rules. For those who repeatedly ignore our values, principles, standards and rules, the ultimate sanction is exclusion, either from particular games or completely. The converse of course is that: .... ...., the regulars should make more effort to comply with the rules. .... |
|
|
|
Post by Rainer on Jul 3, 2012 14:20:55 GMT 8
i noticed there have been a few 'incidents' over the past few weeks. often, there is nothing really wrong with that but also, i noticed the games have become a bit rougher. i.e. looking at an old post under this thread it says:
"The following are not allowed during a game:
* sliding tackle
* raising of foot above knee level.
* tackle from behind
* tackle where the sole of the shoe makes contact with an opposing player
* body check
* shoulder charge
* raising of elbow
* outstretched arm
* raising of knee when jumping
* pushing
* holding"
pushing and holding seems to have become 'standard'. even worse, i caught myself sliding the other day and the majority of players were surprised when we decided this is foul play. there are plenty more examples. maybe it's time to restrain ourselves a lil more and give the benefit of the doubt to the team that is calling for foul?
|
|
|
|
Post by Foo Cheong on Jul 3, 2012 14:58:27 GMT 8
Not everyone reads the rules. And most play outdoor (11-a-side) soccer before switching to indoor (some still play both). Naturally they are familiar with what is permitted outdoors. While they may remember one or two of the important indoor rules (no sliding tackle), they are not aware of the other rules e.g. shoulder charge, holding, raising of foot above knee level, stretching out an arm, raising an elbow.
Need some clarification on sliding tackle. There have been sliding tackles into space in an attempt to block the ball/cross. They were not sliding to take the ball off the player's feet which would most likely result in making contact with the player. So is sliding into space permitted?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Jul 4, 2012 16:00:27 GMT 8
..., i noticed the games have become a bit rougher. .... Look Liew often refers to the Sunday game as "robust", most recently in relation to the games on 13 June 2012 and 1 July 2012. I think all our games have become rougher. Every schedule thread includes the following: The Playing Rules & Principles include: .... * [red] The following are not allowed during a game[/red]: * sliding tackle * raising of foot above knee level. * tackle from behind * tackle where the sole of the shoe makes contact with an opposing player * body checks * shoulder charge * raising of elbow * outstretched arm * raising of knee when jumping * pushing * holding * kicking or hacking a player. * tripping a player. If significant contact is made with an opposing player by any of the above, it is a foul (even if the ball is won), with a free kick to the opposing side if committed outside the D and a penalty if committed inside the D. Any player who repeatedly commits such fouls will be suspended. .... In all likelihood, not many players read the rules (although I would hope that those who play regularly will over time become familiar with the system and rules). During our games, we often play advantage, or don't call the foul when it occurs, so the rules aren't reinforced during the game. Although we don't need to get technical with rules, players need to play in the right spirit. If the attitude is "I'll stop my opponent by whatever means possible", rather than focusing on winning or clearing the ball, that is wrong. The responsibilities of team selectors/ captains extend to: * Reminding players, especially those on their team, to play to the rules, especially not to slide or commit other bad tackles. * Playing in the right spirit, and reminding their team mates to do the same. Apart from the the risk of immediate injury to an opponent, the longer term damage caused by overly robust play and bad tackles is two-fold: * Players pick up injuries, and may be unable to play for a while. * Players looking for a more social game may be put off coming back. If games are short of players as a result, they may be cancelled. Players do need to take a longer term perspective of such things. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Sept 30, 2012 21:53:58 GMT 8
Both the Thursday games were cancelled due to heavy rain. It only started raining at both venues (Khalsa and East Coast) about 10 to 20 minutes before 9 pm, the scheduled time for the games. The heavy rain came on quite suddenly. We first started playing on uncovered pitches in July 2010. Since then, most of our weeknight games have been on uncovered pitches at East Coast and Khalsa. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 1, 2012 11:07:15 GMT 8
.... Also, there is a lot of to-ing and fro-ing about the fouling and free kicks, particularly when the game is competitive. Perhaps it can be a rule that the captains make the call and the rest just fall in line. I am assuming of course that the captains will agree! Not trying to suffocate our game with yet more rules but the regulars will know what I am referring to. .... The rules currently provide: .... * As we play without a referee, if a player involved in a passage of play calls a foul, play it back to one of the goalkeepers until it is agreed that is is a foul. If it is disputed, the game continues from the goalkeeper who has possession of the ball. If necessary, the dispute can be resolved later on the message board. Don’t just leave the ball for the opposing side and stop playing. Sometimes, they will continue and score.* The same applies to corners. If it is disputed that it is a corner, then it is a goal kick. * The final word is left to the players involved in the passage of play. Other players not involved in the passage of play can express an opinion, but don’t press it. .... And responsibilities of the team selectors/ captains include: I'm ok with the final say on fouls being with the team selectors/captains instead. |
|
|
|
Post by Desmond on Oct 1, 2012 15:47:17 GMT 8
Good stuff. How about my other question about free kicks? Do we specify how far away the wall has to be? I honestly can't see an advantage at the moment if the wall is allowed as close as it currently is. Your views Rajiv?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rainer on Oct 1, 2012 16:16:44 GMT 8
hmm. this reads all a bit easier as it practically is. i.e. in the foul-case it is most often such that neither player calls 'foul'. the game typically stops and the issue is resolved. but i have also seen that some continue the play and a goal is scored. what to do then? i think captains should generally have more say and act as referee. if one captain calls foul then the game must be stopped and the issue resolved. if neither calls foul then the game continues.
as for free-kicks. my opinion is that it is fine as it is. i.e. in last sat game i would say the wall stood about 2 yards away from the wall. admittedly, that is not much but do we really need to take direct free kicks? in fact, the only free kick goal in the recent history that crosses my mind was taken indirectly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 1, 2012 18:04:33 GMT 8
For the minimum distance of opposing players at free kicks, I think a distance roughly equivalent to that from the centre of the goal to the top of the D would work for all our regular venues. I agree with Rainer that direct free kicks generally don't work in our games. There isn't the range to get the ball over the wall and down, or around the wall, that you get on a much larger 11-a-side pitch.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martijn on Oct 2, 2012 16:12:53 GMT 8
Hi, I think that Desmond was spot-on on these free kicks. In particular last Saturday we had several free kicks (probably at least 4 or 5) which essentially only led to a disadvantage to the team receiving them. I would not want to insinuate that people made technical fouls on purpose, but a 'free kick for the other team' is certainly not a disincentive for making fouls at the moment.
While I enjoyed the game last Saturday, it was clearly physical and to avoid injuries, I personally prefer to disincentivise fouls.
I understand and agree that direct free kicks are not easy, but having said that, all the free kicks taken last Saturday were exactly trying to do that. Even if it is an indirect free kick, we should allow to have much more distance to the ball (let's say 5 steps instead of 2 which I think is in line with Rajiv's suggestion) to make it slightly more appealing.
An alternative is to give one penalty after 3 fouls (on top of the free kick). That is what we used to do on the street when I was growing up. In particular if the two captains are the ones acting as a referee, it could remain civilised.
A third alternative would go the ice hockey route, for instance 5 minutes on the bench for each person committing a second foul. The third alternative would have my preference as it impacts the person committing the foul most directly.
Hope this helps,
While you have not seen a direct free kick successful this is exactly what everyone was trying.
|
|
|
|
Post by Foo Cheong on Oct 2, 2012 16:37:02 GMT 8
I have seen opponents standing less than 1 metre away from corners and kick-ins.
|
|
|
|
Post by Damian on Oct 3, 2012 10:47:57 GMT 8
International Futsal Rules on Free Kicks:-
LAW XIII - Free Kick
· Types: Direct free kicks and indirect free kicks
· Wall: At least 5 meters away until the ball is in play
· Ball in Play: After it has traveled the distance of its own circumference
· Time Limit: Kick must be taken within 4 seconds
· Restriction: Kicker cannot touch the ball again until it has been touched by another player
As for calling fouls, we ought to remember the spirit of the game here and trust each other to have some integrity given that we play without referees. I know this is idealistic but I can name some quite a few players who have shown great integrity in admitting to fouls etc. (as opposed to those who will call to their own advantage at every instance perhaps to gain a slight advantage).
While there will be instances where each side truly believes their own perceptions, if we all play to the spirit of the game, then there will be fewer times when we have to resort to looking to the Captains to resolve the dispute.
|
|
|
|
Post by Foo Cheong on Oct 3, 2012 12:12:35 GMT 8
Not everyone (especially the guest players and newcomers) reads the rules. How how how?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Oct 3, 2012 14:54:32 GMT 8
.... Every schedule thread expressly states: .... I'm not at most games. I hope the regulars can help me out. If you come across breaches of the rules and principles, please remind the player concerned. If the player concerned disagrees that there has been a breach, we can discuss it on the message board. .... .... Feedback about individual players can be given to me by e-mail or the private message feature of the message board. I may not reply to individual messages, but I will bear them in mind. All such messages are confidential. .... If a particular player is independently identified by several players as breaching the rules, especially those relating to safe play, and does not stop even after personal reminders, I will suspend or ban the player. For more serious breaches, there may be an immediate suspension. .... If I believe that a player has been reminded a suffcient number of times about a particular rule, but breaks it again, I have no choice but to give him a final reminder. After that, if he breaks the same rule again, he will be blocked from playing, at least for a period of time. .... The system is there. It is how individual players apply and use it. |
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Nov 16, 2012 18:21:09 GMT 8
As I said before: .... I'm very reluctant to change any regular feature of our games between putting up the schedule thread and the game itself because: * it means more work for me. * players who put their names down for a game on the premises set out in the schedule thread may be unhappy about changes without notice to suit some players or reserve players. The issue has come up twice over the past couple of months: * On Sunday, 9 September 2012 - whether to switch from a covered pitch at Turf City to an uncovered pitch at Turf City to accommodate a couple more players. * On Thursday, 25 October 2012 - playing with 3 teams over 2 hours to accommodate more players. Alternatively, moving the game from Khalsa to Turf City to accommodate a couple more players. On both occasions, no change was made. Generally, I am not keen on any of our regular games being with 3 teams over 2 hours. Anyone keen to have a 2 hour session with 3 teams is welcome to try to organise it under "OPSAGE". Bottom line is that I am very reluctant to change anything about a game after it is put up on the schedule board, and players have started putting their names down for the game. Changing the venue or the time slot (to a different hour or to more hours) is more difficult, as it involves checking with everyone down for the game if they are ok with the change. Although the change proposed on 9 September 2012 was to neighbouring venue at the same time slot, it involved moving to a pitch we hadn't played on before, and from a covered pitch to an uncovered pitch at a time when rain was threatening. In the end, the weather was the main reason we didn't switch. Usually, the only change I will consider is switching from a big pitch to a small pitch at the same venue if we don't have enough players for a game on the big pitch, and provided a small pitch is available. It's happened a couple of times over the past few months: * On Thursday, 28 June 2012, we switched from the big pitch to a small pitch at East Coast. * On Saturday, 4 August 2012, we switched from a big pitch to a small pitch at Turf City. When the issue came up again for East Coast on Monday, 22 October 2012, a couple of players were not keen to switch to a small pitch. In the end, we got enough players for the big pitch. However, where there are not enough players for a big pitch, but enough players willing to switch to a small pitch, then those players can still get a game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Nov 20, 2012 7:43:11 GMT 8
From the report thread for the game on Saturday: .... .... Under "Playing Rules & Principles": .... * We continue to play off the overhead netting. * We can score from anywhere on the pitch. However, if a ball goes in directly off the overhead netting, it is not a goal. .... .... .... .... you said " we can score fm anywhere on the pitch" ? My understanding is you cant score directly fm a kick in fm the lines unless it touches another player. Is that correct? .... ...., we cant score directly from the lines when there is any outside unless it hits someone . Law XVI of Futsal Laws of the Game provides "Cannot score directly from a kick-in.". However: If you go through The Futsal Laws of the Game, you'll find several that are either inapplicable or not applied to our games. By contrast, the ESPZen Rules provide for a roll in (see page 86). Also from our "Playing Rules & Principles": .... We play each game without a referee. The rules are geared towards keeping the game flowing while reducing the risk of injury and are intended to accommodate different styles of play. .... Also, under GIFFA values, principles & standards: .... ..., our games are ultimately social, so I am not inclined to have or enforce a lot of technical rules, .... Therefore, the rules and principles generally are as permissive as possible, constrained mainly by safety considerations. One reason we continue playing off the roof/top netting at Turf City and Kallang even though other leagues/groups may deem it as being out of play. No scoring off the nets was introduced as early as 9 December 2008. Probably because it was thought of as being too flukey. |
|
|
|
Post by Elvin on Nov 20, 2012 9:41:47 GMT 8
Jiv, you are not aswering the question directly. So what rules are we supposed to play to? I am personally against scoring fm a kick in except for a corner. And if you could score directly fm a corner, then you damn well desrve it man!.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Nov 20, 2012 11:23:20 GMT 8
I consider the rule allowing scoring from anywhere to include scoring direct from a kick-in (which is why you raised the query right?), but it is open to discussion. I treat it as the same as a free-kick in that respect.
The other question is whether the goalkeeper can score directly, whether from a re-start after the ball has gone out of play, or when he receives the ball from open play. The question is extended to whether the goalkeeper can score by throwing the ball directly into the opposing goal when he has possession in his hands (bearing in mind that as we don't have a back-pass rule, the goalkeeper can pick up the ball from a back-pass).
Based on the rule as it stands, the answer would be yes, but again, it's open to discussion.
Like I said, my main aim is to keep the rules simple, and the game free flowing.
And unless and until the rule is modified or changed, my understanding is set out above.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rajiv on Nov 30, 2012 21:40:12 GMT 8
The position on blades/studs: .... It was decided as follows some time ago: I will incorporate it into the rules. .... Done. |
|
