Football’s lawmakers will decide this weekend whether the IFAB one-minute injury rule becomes part of the global Laws of the Game — a move that could reshape how matches are managed at every level.
The proposal, driven by FIFA and presented at the annual general meeting of the International Football Association Board (IFAB), would require any outfield player who receives on-field treatment to remain off the pitch for at least 60 seconds before returning.
The objective is blunt: reduce time-wasting and protect match rhythm.
At present, the Laws of the Game do not mandate a fixed absence period. Domestic leagues have interpreted the issue individually. The Premier League introduced a 30-second waiting period at the start of the 2023–24 season. FIFA, however, argues that the measure has not gone far enough.
When flow became the battleground
During trials at the Arab Cup in December, treated players were required to remain off for two minutes. According to FIFA’s referees’ chief Pierluigi Collina, the experiment was designed to restore tempo and discourage players from exaggerating contact to disrupt momentum.
Two minutes proved controversial.
At a January meeting, IFAB members agreed that clarity was necessary but signalled resistance to what many viewed as an excessive punishment. The one-minute compromise now tabled reflects that internal pushback.
The system logic is straightforward. If treatment carries a guaranteed cost, players are less likely to simulate injury to halt play. But enforcement introduces risk.
The unintended 10-man problem
Clubs fear the IFAB one-minute injury rule could create moments of competitive imbalance. Last season, Manchester United expressed frustration after Matthijs de Ligt was forced off with a head cut, only for Brentford to score from a corner while he was still sidelined under the existing 30-second rule.
Extending the absence to 60 seconds increases the probability that teams concede while temporarily reduced to 10 players.
Critics argue that genuine injuries could be penalised alongside simulated ones. Referees would also face heightened scrutiny if goals follow enforced absences.
The proposal does include exemptions. If the opposing player receives a yellow or red card for the incident, the injured player may remain on the field. Goalkeepers are fully exempt, and a designated penalty taker would also be allowed to stay on.
A wider clampdown on the clock
The injury proposal is part of a broader time-management crackdown.
Following positive feedback on the eight-second restriction for goalkeepers holding the ball, countdown-style limits are expected for goal-kicks and throw-ins. Failure to restart within the allotted time would result in possession being handed to the opposition.
Substitutions could also face stricter enforcement. A departing player would have 10 seconds to leave the field. If they fail to do so, the replacement would be barred from entering, forcing the team to continue with 10 players until the next stoppage, provided at least 60 seconds have passed.
IFAB is also poised to allow video assistant referees to review wrongly awarded second yellow cards — a notable expansion of VAR authority. Competitions may further be granted the option to use VAR for corner decisions.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Premier League is expected to receive permission to trial Arsène Wenger’s proposed daylight offside law, another indication that lawmakers are prepared to test structural reforms in pursuit of a faster game.
The tactical timeout — when a goalkeeper goes down to allow coaching instructions — remains unresolved. Advisory panels have debated the practice extensively, but no consensus has emerged.
The IFAB one-minute injury rule is not merely about players lying down. It represents a wider recalibration of how football values time, rhythm, and competitive fairness.
If approved, the change would embed deterrence into the rulebook itself — shifting the burden from referee discretion to structural consequence.
That shift could alter behaviour across leagues worldwide.
This is IDNN. Independent. Digital. Uncompromising.