At the 2026 World Cup, speaking with a hand over the mouth will be forbidden All the new rules introduced by FIFA and IFAB

The 2026 FIFA World Cup will be unprecedented in many respects. For the first time ever, the tournament will be hosted across three countries — United States, Canada and Mexico — and will feature 12 groups, 48 participating national teams, and a record number of matches. Among the qualified sides are several nations rarely seen on football’s biggest stage, as well as four debutants: Curaçao, Cape Verde, Jordan and Uzbekistan. Alongside the action on the pitch, there will also be the full American-style entertainment spectacle, with a triple opening ceremony and a halftime show during the final serving as the most visible elements of a much larger phenomenon: the entertainment-driven culture that defines North American sports, a world apart from the traditions and customs of the European game. The innovations, however, do not stop there. There is more.

FIFA's New Battle Against Time-Wasting

FIFA and IFAB (the International Football Association Board), the governing bodies responsible for world football and its Laws of the Game, have officially approved a series of changes that could have a significant impact on how football is played. At least in theory. Some concern time management — or rather, time-wasting — others involve technology, while some focus on player behaviour. All of them, however, are part of the same vision: the football of the future as imagined by FIFA and IFAB. Faster, less fragmented, and above all less tolerant of practices that have long frustrated, or at best bored, spectators.

Substitutions, Throw-Ins and Goal Kicks: What's Changing

The most significant changes target situations that have long provided fertile ground for explicit or subtle time-wasting. The aim is to give referees the tools needed to combat these practices and, perhaps more importantly, to discourage them altogether. Substituted players will have 10 seconds to leave the field via the nearest exit point; if they fail to do so, the incoming substitute must wait one minute and until the next stoppage before entering the pitch, temporarily leaving their team a player short. A similar measure will apply to throw-ins and goal kicks: referees will be allowed to initiate a five-second countdown, and delays could result in possession being awarded to the opposition, either through a reversed throw-in or by granting a corner kick.

The logic behind these measures mirrors that of the recently introduced eight-second limit for goalkeepers holding the ball. A rule that has rarely been enforced, yet clearly signalled a new direction. Rather than creating automatic punishments, these regulations are designed to provide referees with tools — to be used with discretion and authority — in the most obvious cases of time-wasting. It is unlikely that we will see corners awarded because a goalkeeper takes two or three seconds longer than necessary to restart play while waiting, without malicious intent, for teammates to get into position. The mere existence of the rule, however, should discourage the systematic use of behaviours that have become deeply embedded in football culture — in some parts of the world more than others — and which ultimately damage the spectacle.

The same philosophy underpins the new rules regarding medical treatment. When a player receives treatment from team medical staff on the pitch, they must now remain off the field for at least one minute after play resumes, unless they were the victim of a card-worthy foul or suffered a specific type of injury. Once again, the target is not players with genuine physical issues, but rather the abuse of situations that allow teams to slow the pace of a match without consequence. A familiar sight in the closing stages of many games.

The New Rule on Covering the Mouth During Confrontations

The second group of changes concerns player conduct. Among the rules that have generated the most curiosity is the provision introducing a straight red card for players who cover their mouths while confronting an opponent or a match official — the so-called Vinicius Rule, as some have already labelled it. The rationale is to prevent discriminatory or particularly offensive insults from being concealed from cameras. The intention is not to ban private conversations between players, but to address situations of conflict in which the gesture can serve as a shield for unacceptable language. Here too, the new rule is designed primarily as a deterrent.

VAR Expansion: New Situations Eligible for Review

Finally, yellow-card accumulation suspensions have been removed during the knockout stages of the tournament — a measure intended to prevent star players from missing marquee fixtures and thereby protect the spectacle — while the range of situations subject to VAR review has once again been slightly expanded. The technology will now also be able to correct second yellow-card decisions and incorrectly awarded corner kicks. In the latter case, intervention will be limited to situations that can be clearly resolved with one or two replays and only if the review can be completed without causing significant interruptions.

FIFA and IFAB's Vision for the Future of Football

Let’s be honest: who has never sighed in frustration, whether in the stadium or in front of the television, at endlessly disrupted endings to matches, goalkeepers holding onto the ball for too long, players remaining on the ground for minutes at a time, deliberately delaying restarts and effectively holding the game, the referee and the clock hostage? One may be more or less tolerant of such behaviour, but it is difficult to deny the unnecessary burden these habits place on football as a product. The new direction pursued by FIFA and the regulations approved by IFAB stem precisely from this perception.

The objective is not simply to punish those who waste time, but above all to make time-wasting less worthwhile. The real change is expected to come not so much from the application of sanctions themselves, but from their deterrent effect. If a goalkeeper knows the referee has a tool available to intervene, they will naturally be less inclined to push the limits. Is it really worth risking a corner kick against your team just to steal a few seconds? The same reasoning applies to throw-ins, substitutions and medical stoppages.

In the background of these discussions remains a question that has accompanied football for years: is it possible to continue fighting time-wasting without introducing a stopped clock? While FIFA and IFAB have stopped short of implementing effective playing time, with the clock pausing at every interruption, they continue to approve rules aimed at limiting behaviours that thrive precisely during stoppages in play: longer added time, countdowns for restarts and sanctions for deliberate delays. The question is whether these incremental adjustments will be enough to produce a genuine breakthrough, or whether they simply represent another step toward the eventual adoption of effective playing time.

Will the New Rules Actually Work?

The new rules have already begun to show their effects. In recent days, during the friendly match between Japan and Iceland, the first known application of the substitution rule took place. With only minutes remaining and the score still level at 0-0, an Icelandic player took longer than the permitted 10 seconds to leave the pitch. As a result, his replacement was forced to wait on the sidelines, temporarily leaving the team with ten men. It was during that brief interval that Japan scored the winning goal, providing the new rule with its first controversial case even before the tournament had begun.

Given its global scale, the FIFA World Cup represents the ideal testing ground for assessing the effectiveness of these innovations. The goal is not merely to verify the technical functioning of the regulations and the quality of the instructions given to referees, but also to observe how players, stakeholders and supporters respond to a version of football that seeks to be more rigorous in its management of time. It will help determine which rules work best, which require adjustments, and which continue to generate debate. IFAB has already established that this package of measures is intended to be progressively adopted across domestic and international competitions, but first these rules must withstand five weeks of sporting, media and public stress testing.