By Martin Graham
Bill Shankly once famously said that football is “a simple game made complicated by people who should know better.” The legendary Liverpool manager, who led the club between 1959 and 1974, worked in an era far removed from today’s environment of social media, constant analysis and the introduction of video assistant referees.
If Shankly were still around in the modern game, he might have an even stronger view. Many supporters now struggle to understand certain decisions during matches, particularly when it comes to handball interpretations, offside rulings and the use of VAR.
Few regulations cause as much debate as the handball law. The rule has been altered repeatedly in recent years, leaving players, coaches and fans unsure about what should or should not be punished.
Former England striker Alan Shearer openly criticised the situation when speaking to BBC Sport. He said he dislikes the current handball rule and believes it has been badly handled. According to Shearer, officials now consider multiple factors such as whether the action was deliberate, the distance between players and whether an arm position is natural or unnatural.
The law also contains a controversial clause regarding accidental attacking handball, which automatically disallows a goal. This creates a situation where a striker can be penalised for something a defender might escape without punishment.
Statistics show that the Premier League actually awards fewer penalties on average than the other major European leagues. However, that does not mean the rule itself works well.
Some people believe handball was redefined because of VAR, but the timeline shows the opposite. The International Football Association Board (IFAB) began reviewing the handball law in 2014, two years before VAR trials started.
Those revisions introduced several different conditions for judging handball incidents. Once VAR arrived, referees could analyse incidents more closely, which made it easier to identify technical infringements and resulted in a surge of penalties.
VAR therefore exposed weaknesses in the updated rule. Since then, the law has been adjusted repeatedly in attempts to make it clearer.
Many supporters would prefer the earlier approach where referees simply judged whether the contact seemed intentional. Yet returning to that simplicity is unlikely. Any revision would still require a precise definition, which could create new interpretation problems.
Offside interpretations remain controversial
Another topic that frequently sparks debate is the interpretation of offside when a player influences an opponent without touching the ball.
A notable example occurred on 9 November when Virgil van Dijk had a goal disallowed during Liverpool’s 3-0 defeat by Manchester City. Andrew Robertson ducked under the ball, and officials ruled that his movement affected goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma.
The decision led to criticism from supporters who felt the offside rule had become overly complicated. However, this principle has existed in football’s laws for more than a century.
The 1903–04 edition of the laws already stated that a player must not “in any way whatever interfere with an opponent or the play.” Without such wording, attackers could position themselves near defenders or goalkeepers and intentionally distract them while remaining technically uninvolved in the play.
Although the regulation can produce controversial decisions, removing it could create new tactical loopholes. Given the increasing use of gamesmanship in modern football, lawmakers are unlikely to abandon the rule.
Deliberate play and changing disciplinary rules
Another complex concept is the idea of a “deliberate play” by a defender. The term was introduced during the 2016-17 season to determine whether a defender’s touch could restart an offside phase.
Referees initially applied the rule strictly, which sometimes allowed attackers in offside positions to benefit from slight touches by defenders.
The regulation received further attention after a controversial moment in the 2021 UEFA Nations League final. In that match, Eric Garcia stretched to reach a pass and made minimal contact before the ball reached Kylian Mbappe, whose goal secured victory for France against Spain.
Following the incident, Ifab clarified that a defender must have a realistic expectation of controlling the ball for the action to count as a deliberate play.
Even with the clarification, the wording still creates confusion. A defender may intentionally attempt to play the ball, yet if there is no control, the action may still not qualify as a “deliberate play.”
Disciplinary laws have also evolved. When a defender denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity (Dogso) inside the penalty area, the punishment now depends on the nature of the challenge.
If the defender genuinely tries to win the ball, the sanction is typically a yellow card rather than a red. Only clearly cynical fouls, such as pushes or pulls, are more likely to lead to a dismissal.
As a result, incidents that previously resulted in red cards might now receive a caution instead.
The law surrounding advantage has also created confusion among supporters. During a recent match, Arsenal forward Gabriel Martinelli was fouled by Chelsea’s Pedro Neto but quickly got up and continued the attack.
Referee Darren England stopped play and showed Neto a second yellow card. Many Arsenal supporters questioned why advantage was not played.
However, the law states that advantage should not normally be applied if a red card offence must be shown unless the attacking side has an immediate opportunity to score.
VAR and the future of football rules
VAR has changed how matches are experienced. The system has slowed the flow of games and produced extremely tight offside decisions that many fans find frustrating.
More significantly, it has turned refereeing decisions into detailed technical explanations. Supporters who once simply debated a call now hear extensive reasoning involving arm positions, violent conduct criteria or potential red-card reviews.
For some fans, this feels overly complicated. Many believe their understanding of the game, built over years of watching football, is being replaced by legal-style interpretations known mainly to referees.
Yet the situation may soon become even more complex. A recent Ifab meeting introduced numerous law adjustments that will take effect during the World Cup and from the 2026-27 season.
Among the proposals are VAR checks for corner decisions and reviews of second yellow cards once they have been issued, although similar checks will not apply to goal-kicks or potential second cautions.
Additional changes include a five-second countdown for throw-ins and goal-kicks, though corners are excluded from that rule.
Substituted players will also have ten seconds to leave the pitch, while players receiving medical treatment must remain off the field for one minute before returning.
Even the Dogso regulations are set to receive further adjustments.
Another idea under trial is Arsene Wenger’s “daylight” interpretation of offside.
All of these developments suggest that, rather than becoming simpler, football’s rulebook is likely to grow even more detailed in the coming years.
