IFAB Decisions, FIFA Practices and Live Examples from the Tournament
Aydin Tiryaki and Claude (Anthropic) · June 2026
1. Introduction
The 2026 FIFA World Cup has entered the record books as the most expansive tournament in football history. Co-hosted by the United States, Mexico and Canada, the event brought together 48 teams, 104 matches and 16 cities in a scale never seen before at any previous World Cup. Yet beyond the numbers, what truly makes this tournament historic is something else entirely: the sweeping changes made to the official rules and practices of the game.
Some of these changes were approved by IFAB — the International Football Association Board — as permanent amendments to the Laws of the Game, destined to spread across the entire world of football. Others were independent decisions made by FIFA specifically for this tournament. This article examines both categories: what they are, the difference between them, and their first concrete reflections on the pitch.
2. IFAB and FIFA: Two Distinct Authorities in Football
2.1 What Is IFAB?
IFAB — the International Football Association Board — is football’s sole legislative body. It was founded in 1886 by the football associations of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, with the purpose of standardising rules that varied from country to country at the time.
IFAB’s mandate is crystal clear: determining, amending and interpreting the Laws of the Game — football’s 17 fundamental rules — is exclusively IFAB’s prerogative. Regardless of which country, at which level the game is played, every football match in the world — from children’s leagues to the FIFA World Cup final — is played under these 17 laws.
| Founded | 1886 — by England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland |
| Members | 5 members: 4 British FAs + FIFA |
| Voting | Each British FA holds 1 vote, FIFA holds 4 votes — 8 votes total |
| Threshold | 6 of 8 votes required for any rule change (three-quarter majority) |
| Meeting | Annual General Meeting (AGM) held each February or March |
| Effect | Decisions take effect from 1 July each year, binding worldwide |
2.2 What Is FIFA and How Does It Relate to IFAB?
FIFA — the Fédération Internationale de Football Association — was founded in Paris in 1904 and serves as the administrative umbrella organisation of world football. The organisation of 211 member federations, 6 continental confederations and international tournaments including the World Cup all fall under FIFA’s responsibility.
One of FIFA’s earliest decisions upon its founding was to commit to abiding by the Laws of the Game as determined by IFAB. In 1913, FIFA joined IFAB as its fifth member and was granted 4 votes. This structure remains in place today.
The relationship between the two institutions can be summarised as follows: IFAB writes the rules, FIFA organises its tournaments according to those rules. FIFA holds no veto power over IFAB decisions; indeed, Article 7 of the FIFA Statutes explicitly states that all member federations are obliged to play football in compliance with the Laws of the Game as issued by IFAB.
2.3 The Critical Balance: FIFA Cannot Change Rules Unilaterally
While FIFA holds 4 votes in IFAB deliberations, the full 6 votes required for a rule change do not reside with FIFA alone. Consequently, FIFA cannot make any rule change by itself; it requires the support of at least 2 of the British associations. Conversely, the 4 British associations cannot change rules without FIFA’s approval either. This structure is a deliberately constructed system of checks and balances.
In the context of its own tournaments, however, FIFA holds a separate authority: within the framework of IFAB’s Laws, it may introduce additional protocols and practices specific to its own competitions — the World Cup, the Club World Cup and so forth. The mandatory hydration breaks and the full-squad pre-match ceremony fall into this category.
3. IFAB Rule Changes: Spreading Worldwide from the 2026-27 Season
The changes approved at IFAB’s 140th Annual General Meeting (February 2026, Wales) came into force worldwide on 1 July 2026. The FIFA World Cup served as the first major testing ground for these decisions. Below, each rule is examined together with its rationale and its first concrete example from the tournament.
3.1 Goalkeeper Ball Retention: From 6 to 8 Seconds — and Now a Corner Kick
Rule: If a goalkeeper holds the ball in their hands for more than 8 seconds, the opposing team is awarded a corner kick.
Why it was introduced: Under the previous rule, goalkeepers were given 6 seconds, but the sanction for exceeding that limit was an indirect free kick — a punishment that was almost never applied in practice. Under the new arrangement, the time limit is extended to 8 seconds while the sanction is escalated to a corner kick. The referee first gives the goalkeeper a visible warning, then begins a finger-count countdown from 5. If the ball is not released by zero, a corner kick is awarded.
Tournament example: The rule was applied multiple times during the group stage; goalkeepers began releasing the ball noticeably faster. The deterrent effect proved more significant than the frequency of enforcement.
3.2 Five-Second Countdown for Throw-ins and Goal Kicks
Rule: When the referee deems it necessary, a visible 5-second countdown may be initiated for throw-ins and goal kicks. If a throw-in is not taken in time, possession is awarded to the opposing team; if a goal kick is delayed beyond the countdown, the opposing team receives a corner kick.
Why it was introduced: Prolonging throw-ins and goal kicks, especially towards the end of matches, was a widespread time-wasting tactic. This rule gives referees a concrete enforcement tool.
Tournament example: The rule was applied on several occasions, though referees generally remained cautious. The countdown displayed on stadium screens, with supporters clapping along in unison, created a new spectator experience. Analysts note that the rule’s primary impact comes from deterrence rather than enforcement.
3.3 Ten-Second Substitution Rule
Rule: Once the substitution board is shown, the departing player has 10 seconds to leave the pitch via the nearest boundary line. If this window is exceeded, the incoming substitute may not enter until the first stoppage after one minute has elapsed — during which the team plays with ten men.
Why it was introduced: Players walking off the pitch at a leisurely pace, particularly when on the winning side, had long been one of football’s most exasperating sights.
First example before the tournament: The rule was applied for the first time before the tournament kicked off, in the Japan vs Iceland friendly match on 31 May 2026. Icelandic player Kristian Hlynsson exceeded the 10-second window during a substitution in the 84th minute; substitute Isak Thorvaldsson was held on the sideline and Iceland temporarily played with ten men.
3.4 Players Receiving Treatment Must Leave the Pitch for One Minute
Rule: An outfield player who receives medical treatment on the pitch must remain off the field for at least one minute after play restarts. Exceptions apply for goalkeepers, players involved in collisions, those suffering serious injuries, and players about to take a penalty kick.
Why it was introduced: Players going to ground unnecessarily to stop the game and run down the clock — particularly those on the winning side — had become one of the most contentious images in modern football.
Impact on the tournament: This rule generated the most significant behavioural change of the entire tournament. Experts and analysts observed a dramatic reduction in the time players spent on the ground. Since feigning injury now disadvantages the team, players began recovering from their ailments far more swiftly.
3.5 Expanded VAR Powers
Rule: The VAR system gained intervention authority in three new areas: (1) red cards arising from clearly incorrect second yellow cards; (2) mistaken identity in yellow or red card decisions; (3) incorrectly awarded corner kicks — but only in cases where correction can be made immediately without delaying the restart. Additionally, fouls committed before a corner or free kick is taken now fall within VAR’s scope.
Why it was introduced: VAR’s original four intervention categories were not sufficiently comprehensive in practice. Mistaken identity cases and incorrect second yellow cards in particular were leading to serious injustices.
First tournament example — USA vs Paraguay (13 June): In the second half, Dutch referee Danny Makkelie showed USA captain Tim Ream a yellow card for an apparent foul. After the free kick was taken, VAR intervened. The review revealed that Ream had made no contact whatsoever — it was Almiron himself who had gone to ground, simulating a foul. Ream’s yellow card was rescinded and Almiron was booked for simulation. This was the first VAR intervention under the mistaken identity rule in World Cup history.
3.6 Red Card for Covering the Mouth
Rule: A player who covers their mouth with their hand, arm or shirt during a confrontation with an opponent receives a direct red card. Normal conversations between teammates are outside the scope of this rule; it applies exclusively in confrontational contexts.
Why it was introduced: The rule was born from an incident in the 2025-26 UEFA Champions League. Real Madrid’s Vinicius Jr. alleged that Benfica’s Gianluca Prestianni had directed discriminatory abuse at him while covering his mouth. Mouth-covering made it almost impossible both to gather evidence and to reach a disciplinary verdict.
First tournament example — Turkey vs Paraguay (19 June): In first-half stoppage time, Paraguay’s Miguel Almiron covered his mouth with his hand while exchanging words with Turkish right back Mert Muldur. Muldur immediately appealed to Salvadoran referee Ivan Barton, who consulted VAR and showed Almiron a direct red card. This was the first red card issued under this rule in World Cup history.
The incident had a further remarkable dimension: Almiron thus became the first player in the same tournament to fall foul of two separate new rules — first a yellow card under the mistaken identity VAR rule (in the USA match), then a red card for covering his mouth (against Turkey). Paraguay’s coach Alfaro accepted the decision but voiced his concern about the rule’s severity: “I fear football is losing its essence.” A Paraguayan sports commentator launched into a furious on-air tirade against the referee and FIFA president Infantino, after which FIFA cancelled his press accreditation. The match ended 1-0 to ten-man Paraguay, eliminating Turkey from the tournament.
3.7 Red Card for Leaving the Pitch in Protest
Rule: Players who deliberately leave the pitch to protest a refereeing decision are shown a red card. Coaching staff who encourage such walk-offs face the same sanction. If a team causes a match to be abandoned, they forfeit.
Why it was introduced: The rule emerged directly from a dramatic incident at the January 2026 Africa Cup of Nations final. In the Morocco vs Senegal final, the Senegal team walked off the pitch in protest at a penalty awarded against them following a VAR review. They eventually returned and won 1-0 in extra time, but this result was overturned in March 2026, with Morocco declared champions.
Tournament example: The rule exerted a powerful deterrent effect. No team attempted to leave the pitch in protest throughout the tournament.
3.8 Semi-Automated Offside Technology (SAOT)
Technology: A 3D avatar is pre-built for every player. At the moment of a potential offside, all of the player’s limbs and the point of ball contact are analysed within milliseconds, and an instant audio alert is delivered directly to the referee’s ear — without waiting for a lengthy video review.
Why it was introduced: Under conventional VAR reviews, offside decisions could sometimes take several minutes. This technology aims to dramatically reduce decision time while preserving accuracy.
Tournament example: In the Iran vs Belgium match, Mehdi Taremi’s goal was reviewed by VAR. Taremi was found to be offside with his back turned to goal, his backside fractionally over the line. Thanks to SAOT, the decision was delivered in a very short time. Questions arose about the mechanics of the system, but the correctness of the decision itself was not disputed.
4. FIFA’s Tournament-Specific Practices
The following practices do not fall within IFAB’s Laws of the Game. They are protocols determined exclusively by FIFA for its own tournament. Whether they will be extended to league football in the future has yet to be established.
4.1 Mandatory Hydration Breaks
Practice: A mandatory 3-minute hydration break was implemented around the 22nd minute of each half of every match, irrespective of weather conditions, temperature, or whether the venue was indoors or open-air.
Why it was introduced: FIFA cited the demanding climatic conditions of North America and player welfare as its rationale, drawing on experiences from the 2025 Club World Cup. The universal application across all matches, regardless of weather thresholds, was intended to ensure equal conditions for every team.
The hydration breaks nonetheless became the most controversial practice of the tournament. Criticism came from two distinct fronts: some coaches and analysts argued the breaks disrupted the flow of matches and made building momentum more difficult, while some scientists contended that 3 minutes was physiologically insufficient for any meaningful cooling effect. Uruguay manager Marcelo Bielsa was particularly outspoken, stating that the breaks had culturally divided the match into four periods rather than two, damaging the essence of the sport. England manager Thomas Tuchel noted that matches flowed far more naturally without the breaks and that building sustained momentum became harder.
Another dimension of the breaks drew attention: they provided television broadcasters with predictable advertising windows. The US broadcaster Fox Sports aired full-screen commercials during the opening match’s hydration break, returning to coverage approximately 10 seconds after play had already resumed — prompting an immediate viewer backlash. FIFA has signalled its intention to make the breaks a permanent feature, but formal IFAB approval has not yet been secured.
4.2 The Full Squad Pre-Match Ceremony
Practice: For the first time in World Cup history, the full 26-player matchday squad of each team — substitutes included — walked out onto the pitch to sing the national anthem. Players formed a circle around the centre spot facing one another; at any given match, potentially 52 players stood before the cameras simultaneously.
Perhaps the most powerful aspect of this practice is the way it honours substitute players. A player who has been named in the 26-man squad for a tournament but may never get onto the pitch still stands on that turf, in the sound of their national anthem, in front of the cameras. This is a human detail that football culture had long overlooked.
There are no practical obstacles to this arrangement: substitute players simply walk back to the dugout once the anthem concludes — a journey that fits comfortably within the existing protocol of the starting eleven’s team photograph, the coin toss and the handshakes. The difference in attire also eliminates any confusion: the starting eleven wear their match kits while substitutes generally come out in training tops or tracksuits, making it instantly clear who is playing and who is on the bench.
Proposal: Extending this practice to other international tournaments and indeed to league football is a compelling proposal, both for its symbolic value and its logistical simplicity. It will not take long for football federations to ask themselves “why aren’t we doing this?” and find no satisfactory answer.
5. Overall Assessment: Which Will Last?
| Rule / Practice | Source | Worldwide? | Tournament Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Goalkeeper 8 sec — corner kick | IFAB | ✅ Yes (1 Jul 2026) | ★★★ |
| 5-sec countdown (throw-in/goal kick) | IFAB | ✅ Yes | ★★ |
| 10-sec substitution rule | IFAB | ✅ Yes | ★★★ |
| 1 min off pitch after treatment | IFAB | ✅ Yes | ★★★★★ |
| Expanded VAR powers | IFAB | ✅ Yes | ★★★★ |
| Red card for covering mouth | IFAB | ✅ Yes | ★★★★★ |
| Red card for protest walk-off | IFAB | ✅ Yes | ★★★ |
| Semi-automated offside (SAOT) | FIFA technology | ⚠️ Where infrastructure exists | ★★★★ |
| Mandatory hydration breaks | FIFA decision | ❓ Uncertain | ★★★★★ (controversial) |
| Full squad pre-match ceremony | FIFA decision | ❓ Not yet in leagues | ★★★★ (positive) |
6. Conclusion
The 2026 FIFA World Cup once again proved that football is not merely a sport but a global phenomenon. Yet what truly makes this tournament historic is not the players of 48 nations who ran across its pitches, but the fact that the very rules under which those players competed have been fundamentally rewritten.
The changes approved by IFAB, in force worldwide from 1 July 2026, finally provide concrete answers to problems that have plagued football for decades: simulation and feigned injury, endlessly prolonged substitutions, time-wasting at goal kicks, and discriminatory remarks rendered undetectable by the simple act of covering one’s mouth. The responses to these problems are both resolute and measured.
FIFA’s tournament-specific practices occupy more contested territory. The full-squad pre-match ceremony stood out as a quietly powerful gesture placing the human dimension at the heart of football, and was received positively. The mandatory hydration breaks, meanwhile, remain caught on the dividing line between broadcaster interests and genuine player welfare.
In the end, this tournament became a laboratory — one that demonstrated not only how rules are applied, but how the rules themselves can be debated and changed. Football continues to be the world’s most democratic sport, carrying both the rules of the game and the question of who gets to make those rules, together, into every match.
Aydin Tiryaki
Claude (Anthropic)
June 2026 · aydintiryaki.org
| aydintiryaki.org | YouTube | Aydın Tiryaki’nin Yazıları ve Videoları │Articles and Videos by Aydın Tiryaki | Bilgi Merkezi│Knowledge Hub | ░ Virgülüne Dokunmadan │ Verbatim ░ | ░ 2026 FIFA DÜNYA KUPASI: Futbolun Yeni Kuralları ve Sahadaki Yansımaları │2026 FIFA WORLD CUP: Football’s New Rules and Their Reflections on the Pitch ░ 30.06.2026
Aydın Tiryaki 