The governing bodies of English football are preparing to introduce a pilot scheme next season that seeks to eliminate the practice of goalkeepers feigning injury in order to waste time and give their teams a tactical edge. The initiative has been endorsed by the Premier League, the English Football League (EFL), the Football Association (FA), the National League, the Women’s Super League (WSL) and the Professional Referees’ Association (Pro Ref), all of which have secured approval from the International Football Association Board (IFAB) to move forward with the experiment. The problem that the trial aims to address is well known among coaches, players and officials: a keeper who pretends to be hurt can prompt the referee to call for medical attention, thereby halting play. During that pause the manager can convey instructions, reorganise the defence or simply break the rhythm of the opposition.
Critics argue that this behaviour undermines the flow of the game and creates an unfair advantage, especially when the injury is clearly fabricated. After a series of consultations, the participating organisations have agreed on a straightforward punitive measure. Should the referee decide that a medical professional may attend to the goalkeeper, the head coach will be given a ten‑second window to designate an outfield player who must leave the pitch for at least one minute. If the coach fails to make a selection within those ten seconds, the team captain will be required to exit the field instead.
The selected player must remain off the touchline for a minimum of sixty seconds after play resumes, ensuring that any potential benefit from the stoppage is neutralised. The core intention of the rule is two‑fold. First, it preserves the right of genuinely injured players to receive prompt medical care without delay.
Second, it removes any incentive for teams to exploit stoppages for strategic purposes, thereby protecting the integrity and continuity of the match. By imposing a tangible cost—temporarily playing with one fewer outfield player—the trial seeks to discourage deliberate time‑wasting while still respecting player welfare. The pilot will be monitored closely throughout the season by the same bodies that devised it, together with IFAB and other relevant stakeholders.
Data on its impact on game flow, the frequency of genuine injuries, and any unintended consequences will be collected and analysed. The findings will inform whether the rule should be adopted permanently, refined, or abandoned.
Initial implementation is expected to occur during the early rounds of the Carabao Cup, potentially as early as the preliminary stage. This timing allows officials to test the procedure in a lower‑stakes environment before it is rolled out to the higher‑profile league fixtures. The need for such a rule has been highlighted by several high‑profile incidents in recent months.
In November, Leeds United manager Daniel Farke publicly accused Manchester City’s goalkeeper Gianluigi Donnarumma of pretending to be injured in order to “bend the rules” and disrupt the flow of play. Farke’s comments sparked a broader debate about the ethics of feigned injuries and the responsibility of clubs to uphold the spirit of the game. Later, in December, former England international and pundit Gary Neville suggested that Newcastle United’s Aaron Ramsdale deliberately went to ground after receiving an instruction from midfielder Lewis Hall, allegedly relayed by manager Eddie Howe. Neville speculated that the instruction was intended to stop a promising United attack, noting that Ramsdale’s fall occurred just as United’s Luke Shaw was about to take a throw‑in.
Neville’s theory was that Howe had told Hall to signal Ramsdale to “stop the game,” a claim that added fuel to the ongoing controversy. Manchester United had taken the lead in that match through a goal from Patrick Dorgu, and the game ultimately ended 1‑0. The incident underscored how a single moment of perceived time‑wasting can influence the outcome of a tightly contested fixture. In March, Brighton & Hove Albion manager Roberto De Zerbi (often mis‑spelled as Fabian Hurzeler) criticised his own goalkeeper, David Raya, for appearing to take a tactical timeout after a save.
De Zerbi argued that even when a keeper is genuinely injured, the timing of the medical request can be manipulated to disrupt the opposition’s momentum. These examples illustrate the growing concern among coaches, referees and fans that goalkeeper‑initiated stoppages are being used as a strategic tool rather than a medical necessity.
By introducing a clear, enforceable sanction—removing an outfield player for a minute—the trial aims to restore balance and discourage any future abuse of the injury protocol. Supporters of the experiment argue that it will enhance the spectator experience by reducing unnecessary interruptions, thereby preserving the natural rhythm of the sport.
Critics, however, warn that the rule could penalise teams unfairly if a genuine injury occurs and the coach is forced to sacrifice a key player. The trial’s data collection will be crucial in addressing these concerns and determining whether adjustments—such as a shorter exclusion period or alternative penalties—might be required. Fans can follow the development of the trial through official club communications, the Sky Sports app, and other broadcasting platforms. The league has also encouraged viewers to use the Sky Sports app for live coverage, while offering non‑Sky subscribers a contract‑free option to watch matches online.
As the season unfolds, the football community will be watching closely to see if the new rule succeeds in curbing goalkeeper time‑outs without compromising player safety. If the pilot proves effective, it could set a precedent for other leagues worldwide, prompting a reevaluation of how injury stoppages are managed in the modern game.