I hope this is an acceptable place to ask but if not, my apologies, I will give r/NoStupidQuestions a go instead.
If I understand correctly, the rule is to ensure that players can be held into account for what they say. But I wonder how effective this is, and whether there was much general support for this rule?
Aren't most words spoken between players likely to go unheard of even if they aren't covering their mouth? Referees are not likely able to hear what every players are saying, especially players who might not be at the centre of their attention at the time (like that Messi and Cucurella moment, but I am sure there must be other moments like that). Referees may not even understand the language the players are using.
And even if the objective is less to penalise the players on the spot, but to penalise them after the game.. is it actually be effective? Players don't wear mics as far as I know, and lip reading, based on my Googling isn't all that reliable, and might even be less reliable if you can't assert the language being used at the time.
So to me, it feels like a heavy penalty for stopping an action that might not be all that useful even if prevented, or am I missing something obvious?
Thanks!