New Rules Tested During the World Cup: A Classic

Portugal kicked off their World Cup campaign against Congo. It wasn't the strongest start, but there's no need for alarm bells. Spain also drew with Cape Verde, who have made a fantastic entrance into the competition! I understand Roberto Martínez's perspective: "Talking about winning the World Cup doesn't help you win games." Today, they face Uzbekistan. A victory is coming, I'm confident. Good luck to our team.

In recent years, World Cups have served as FIFA's laboratory for testing new rules. This tournament is no exception. It's worth examining some of them to understand their potential impact on football. The first novelty is that, in practice, the game now features four official interruptions. In addition to the traditional halftime, there are two hydration breaks. Or, to be precise, two advertising breaks. Or two timeouts, much like in many indoor sports. In this column, we call things by their proper names. Sponsors fund the spectacle, and FIFA needs that revenue. They spend a lot of money, not always wisely, and not always on football. Two additional breaks represent millions. The logic increasingly resembles the NBA or American football. Good? Bad? Tell me, dear reader!

Perhaps because this World Cup is being held in the Americas, the competition feels more Americanized. Not just because of the commercial breaks, but also due to the spectacle surrounding the matches. Similar to the NBA or the Super Bowl, the game is just the centerpiece of a grand event that includes music, celebrities, influencers, and constant entertainment. We are, after all, in the land of show business.

FIFA believes that younger audiences seek more action and less wasted time. Hence the new time limitations. Throw-ins now have five seconds to be executed; goal kicks are the same. In the first case, delay hands the ball to the opponent; in the second, it results in a corner. The sanctions seem balanced: they combat time-wasting without altering the essence of the game.

Substitutions are also becoming more controlled. A substituted player must leave the field at the nearest point. If they fail to do so, the substitute can only enter one minute later, temporarily leaving the team with ten players. A simple, effective, and competitively logical solution.

Less convincing is the ban on covering one's mouth during on-field conversations. The so-called Prestianni rule seems excessive. Football thrives on constant communication between players, coaches, and referees. This communication has always had a private dimension. Technological evolution allows for capturing images and even interpreting lip movements from a great distance. The moment a player is prohibited from protecting a conversation, the door opens to endless controversies. A tactical instruction or just a yawn? UEFA, which already mishandled the Prestianni case, is now insisting on a solution that raises more questions than it answers, and has already led to an expulsion.

On the other hand, the expansion of VAR's capabilities seems to be working. Corners can be reviewed, and second yellow cards too. So far, without major upsets. The referee's camera, another novelty, has also shown potential to bring fans closer to the game.

This week's "Right to Goal" goes, first and foremost, to Manuel Kape, the Portuguese-Angolan UFC fighter who defeated Horiguchi by KO and will now fight for the title. Fantastic! And to Fernando Pimenta, who won another European canoeing title and continues to elevate Portuguese sport. Not forgetting the Cape Verde national team at the World Cup: two draws that felt like victories!