FOOTBALL - IF YOU COULD CHANGE THE RULES?

[mattmid]

@Buzzy Agree, although I think Wilson at Newcastle might disagree on the favouring attackers with the handball though!

It just seems a total mess at the moment doesn't it. VAR's almost giving ref's a cop out and then when they get told to have another look then 9 times out of 10 they change their mind from the initial decision.

 

[Andy]

@Buzzy Agree, although I think Wilson at Newcastle might disagree on the favouring attackers with the handball though!

It just seems a total mess at the moment doesn't it. VAR's almost giving ref's a cop out and then when they get told to have another look then 9 times out of 10 they change their mind from the initial decision.

Can you imagine if Collina was still a ref, and they asked him to go look at the screen An article referee who everyone respected, because he usually got it right.

 

[mattmid]

@Buzzy I can just imagine.

I must admit re ref's they could be helped so much if they were backed up by the FA. All it would need is a couple of weeks of zero tolerance, bans for diving, cards for any hint of dissent from player's or managers, cards for any pressuring for a decision and so on. That would cut it all out and take some of the pressure on them to make decisions. It might help if player's didn't appeal for everything. They appeal for bloody throw-ins as if it's an LBW appeal.

Actually the bottom line is if player's weren't cheats then bar offside there'd be no need for VAR anyway! I still remember Fowler not scoring that penalty and the time Di Canio caught the ball, thing is those moments are so rare that's why they stand out.

 

[Andy]

@mattmid That's right, certain players i recall had a honest rep, and if refs saw them go down, the ref would know it was a foul, as these players would rather stay on their feet and try to score.

How many times did we used to hear "if he had gone down then, the ref would have given a penalty" but these players bless em, didn't think of going down. But today we have players going down all over the place as soon as contact is made.

 

[mattmid]

How many times did we used to hear "if he had gone down then, the ref would have given a penalty" but these players bless em, didn't think of going down. But today we have players going down all over the place as soon as contact is made.

Or contact is instigated by putting their leg into the defender. I think if that is one of those really obvious one's then it should be something like a 5 game ban. It really wouldn't take long to stamp all this nonsense out would it?

As for the screaming after an innocuous touch (or otherwise come to that), absolutely pathetic.

You can just see these players at home can't you? Knock their leg on the coffee table and go down theatrically screaming and asking for a card for the table.

 

[Andy]

Or contact is instigated by putting their leg into the defender. I think if that is one of those really obvious one's then it should be something like a 5 game ban. It really wouldn't take long to stamp all this nonsense out would it?

As for the screaming after an innocuous touch (or otherwise come to that), absolutely pathetic.

You can just see these players at home can't you? Knock their leg on the coffee table and go down theatrically screaming and asking for a card for the table.

yes mate, lets all remind ourselves of the king of theatrics....

For me, he should have been disciplined after the fact. Could you imagine boxers or cage fighters behaving like this? and also for someone with such ball skills, why can't they control a quick ball to the thigh? I bet if you insulted him though off the pitch and got into fisty cuffs she wouldn't go down so easily.

 

[mattmid]

Could you imagine boxers or cage fighters behaving like this?

I can't imagine an adult acting like that to be fair!

At the very least it should be something like a 3 game ban shouldn't it for essentially trying to get an opponent sent off.

 

[Fury Football]

Like a lot of you I've played football on the pitch & on video games & watched on tv for a long time, the only thing I would change is the offside rule.
I would change the offside rule to - as long as the attacking player has one of his feet in line with the defender it will be onside rather than the attacking player who has a cm of a toe forward past the defender which is ruled offside at the moment. Like in hockey, as long as the attacking player has his back foot on the blueline before the puck carrier on his team crosses the blueline then it's still onside it doesn't matter if the player has his chest or the rest of his body across the blueline.
Not sure if this would work in Soccer, I mean Football. What do you guys think?

 

[Andy]

Like a lot of you I've played football on the pitch & on video games & watched on tv for a long time, the only thing I would change is the offside rule.
I would change the offside rule to - as long as the attacking player has one of his feet in line with the defender it will be onside rather than the attacking player who has a cm of a toe forward past the defender which is ruled offside at the moment. Like in hockey, as long as the attacking player has his back foot on the blueline before the puck carrier on his team crosses the blueline then it's still onside it doesn't matter if the player has his chest or the rest of his body across the blueline.
Not sure if this would work in Soccer, I mean Football. What do you guys think?

Yes i agree good point

As i have mentioned to others before, surely the offside rule was intended to stop you sticking players in the area around the goalkeeper waiting for the ball to come to them. (when i was a kid we called it "Goal hanging" )
So when people say things like "it gives an unfair advantage to the attacker"that's not really the point of the rule. Also because an experienced defender in good form would handle that little change (as you mentioned).

Work skill and good finishing are still needed to score. In the spirit of the game the current ruling is farce like, when a hand arm or leg, foot can be judged offside.... Unfair advantage meter says 0%

 

[rojofa]

Using feet makes more sense to me than saying "any part of your body that can play the ball" and having the decision being up to how the officials define human anatomy - putting the line at the exact point where a shoulder becomes an arm.

Changing that though does just move the point where the line would be drawn so you'd still get goals ruled out by such small margins but at least it may seem more consistent.

To be honest I'm probably one of the only people who does think offsides should be enforced with as much precision as the technology allows. It's an objective thing that can be measured, like the ball being over the goal line. The ball either goes over the line completely and it's a goal, or it doesn't. You're either offside or you're not in the same way.

If being that close to offside isn't giving you an advantage, then don't be in that position. Leaving it up to the smallest margins where VAR has to get involved is on the attacker for me and they can't have any complaints.

 

[FCDallas_Fan]

A rule I'd like to see changed is regarding the penalty taker. I would like to see whomever is fouled inside the box be the person who has to take the spot kick.

 

[Fury Football]

A rule I'd like to see changed is regarding the penalty taker. I would like to see whomever is fouled inside the box be the person who has to take the spot kick.

That's what I always am thinking too. In hockey the guy who is tripped on a breakaway takes the penalty shot or if defending player covers puck with his hand in the goal crease then offensive player closest to the puck at that time takes the penalty shot.
If Walker is fouled in the penalty area then he should have to take the penalty not Aguero (although Aguero would likely kick it at the keeper anyhow).
There could be a problem however, if Walker is injured then who takes the penalty? If Walker cannot take the penalty then he must be subbed however then you would have teams taking dives in the penalty area in the final minutes of the game flopping like a fish out of water all over the place to not only get a penalty kick but also a free substitution.

 

[du0]

Stop the clock for anything that isn't the ball in play instead of giving stoppage time

 

[FCDallas_Fan]

That's what I always am thinking too. In hockey the guy who is tripped on a breakaway takes the penalty shot or if defending player covers puck with his hand in the goal crease then offensive player closest to the puck at that time takes the penalty shot.
If Walker is fouled in the penalty area then he should have to take the penalty not Aguero (although Aguero would likely kick it at the keeper anyhow).
There could be a problem however, if Walker is injured then who takes the penalty? If Walker cannot take the penalty then he must be subbed however then you would have teams taking dives in the penalty area in the final minutes of the game flopping like a fish out of water all over the place to not only get a penalty kick but also a free substitution.

That's an interesting thought. Maybe forcing the "next closest player" to the ball to take the kick would eliminate the diving? Since refs go the monitors for most penalty awards anyway, it would be easy to say who the next closest player is.

 

[Fury Football]

Stop the clock for anything that isn't the ball in play instead of giving stoppage time

That's an interesting thought. Maybe forcing the "next closest player" to the ball to take the kick would eliminate the diving? Since refs go the monitors for most penalty awards anyway, it would be easy to say who the next closest player is.

That would probably be the best way. Ref looks at replay to see who is closest to the ball or the play that occured or whatever but then the ref might see 2 guys that are as close then he has to decide on 1 of them lmfao

 

[Isslander]

I don't really hate penalties but here is a suggestion on how to change them, the kicker stands out side the box, just behind the line, and the keeper has to stand inside the goal, touching the back of the net with one hand. The moment the ref whistles, both can start running, no worries about placement on a line. Probably needs some adjusting, but could be entertaining to watch. Also pogba can't do his dumb hop skip run because the goalie would rush him before he even touched the ball.

 

[Stan]

Great thread.
Things i would change:

- the most obvious: handball rule: completely ridiculous at the moment
- off-side: only look at the feet. If an armpit, an arm or a hip is off-side, it is no off-side. The position of the feet decide if a player is onside or not.
- Points: in a draw, i would give two points to the team with most shots on target and one point to the other team.
- A transfer window for coaches, trainers and managers (the same as for players).
- 3 substitutions but a temporarily substitution for head injuries.
- If a player is sent off and if he only is banned for one match, it should be against the same team he got the red card.
- A ban on player agents of otherwise very strict rules (you can't be agent without having a certificate).
- Areal proper and fit test for new owners.
- If a new owner comes, all players can unilaterally decide to stop their contract after the ongoing season.
- diving defenders also get a yellow card.
- penalty: a foul that is a foul elsewhere is always a foul in the 16
- getting rid of clear and obvious error rule regarding to VAR interventions (that is far from a clear and obvious 'rule')

 

[mattmid]

Wycombe are the worlds worst team to play. From minute 1 to , well usually about minute 98 with them. If you get any kind of momentum against them, down goes one of their players, physio on and kill the game. Goal kicks, throw-in's, free kicks all delayed as long as possible and like you say, once they are 1-0 up you can forget any free flowing football happening from there on in. You can normally guarantee at least 5 minutes added on each half and that isn't even half of what should have been added.

Apologies for quoting myself but having just re read this thread I had to mention we played Wycombe last weekend and our 3pm Kick off finished about 5.03pm! So no change there!

- Points: in a draw, i would give two points to the team with most shots on target and one point to the other team.

I like that but feel it would be abused with teams doing half arsed long range shots that are catching practice for the keeper late on in a game. Maybe shots on target from inside the box would make it more genuine?

 

[Stan]

Perhaps my change about the draws is a bit harsh on GK's. Imagine you are the GK of Norwich and you play 0-0 against City having stopped everything...but this rule punishes the very negative teams.
Not sure now...

 

[jihado86]

I would make penalties harder to give. Not every contact should be given a penalty, nowadays we see ridiculuous penalties where a forward is slightly touched by the opponent's boot laces and he throws himself and he gets a penalty because there was a contact. (I'm sarcastingly exaggerating about the boot laces but I think I made my point hhh).
A penalty should be awarded when the foul comitted inside the area keeps you from performing your desired action (shooting, dribbling, passing, etc ...) or is dangerous for your body. Not just because you were touched.

The most ridiculous examples I see nowadays when a player tries to drribble the GK and there was a contact between their bodies, most of the times the contact doesn't affect the player's body balance or keep him from continuing his actions.

 

[Miku]

I had toyed with the idea to make offsides for the moment when the 'offside player' touched the ball (offside if he touches it in an offside position, not when he is played the ball), but then I realised that it would eliminate those perfectly timed through balls & one-on-one chances against the keeper. So I'll just say that after the match, the referee MUST have an interview to explain his decision-making during the match. Or the referee gets a microphone like the refs in rugby

 

[Flipper the Priest]

I had toyed with the idea to make offsides for the moment when the 'offside player' touched the ball (offside if he touches it in an offside position, not when he is played the ball), but then I realised that it would eliminate those perfectly timed through balls & one-on-one chances against the keeper. So I'll just say that after the match, the referee MUST have an interview to explain his decision-making during the match. Or the referee gets a microphone like the refs in rugby

I believe that pretty much every game should be re-refereed retrospectively. All cards upgraded/downgraded accordingly. Managers of opposing sides can ask for clarity on particular incidents. A full report is then published publicly.

If refs were to be mic'd up it'd have to come with a colossal clampdown on dissent. It's weird; for about 168 hours in a week I think referees get way too hard a time and an unacceptable amount of a abuse. But come 3pm on a Saturday... But on the pitch, from the players, I think a rugby-style mic for the ref would need to come with rugby-style conduct from the players.

I can't believe I just called for rugby-style behaviour for anything. 🙈