Proposed Rule Changes?
More bizarre ideas...
http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40311889
I quite like the one where you can pass to yourself from a free kick or corner.
The time wasting ones they can implement immediately are a little worrying. God knows what time our games will finish if they do bring them in
0
Comments
Moving to a stop clock is something I've been keen on for a while and would be strongly in favour of.
The degree of time wasting that goes on now is utterly absurd. It contributes significantly to the difficulty gettng back into a game once a team goes behind.
Can't see the benefit in not allowing anyone to follow up a penalty save.
"Self passing" with free kicks and push ins (as throw ins) has speeded up the game of hockey considerably. That, and adopting the card system they use ie: Green (off for two minutes) Yellow (Off for usually 10 minutes) and Red (Off for the rest of the game) would improve football I suggest. The timed penalties only start when the player has gone off and sat down so no point in arguing.
Can't help thinking it'll take a lot of the post match "outrage" out of the game. I mean what will we talk about in the vere after the game...?
@Ozzie_the_Relaxed you reckon the games will finish before closing time?
One rule change I would like tried out would be the ball must travel 10 yards when taking a corner. This would eliminate the time wasting a winning team deploys near the end of a game.This ploy ,which we of course use, does nothing for the game as a spectacle.
@wingnut I've always thought minority sports like football have a lot to learn from global mega sports like hockey.
Good point, Mr67
It would also probably reduce instances of the short corner in general play, which although a legitimate play, is a pet hate of mine.
@bill_stickers why do you hate short corners bill?
It always seems they rarely develop into an effective attack.
I feel you're losing the advantage of a corner when you take it short. It's an uncontested dead-ball from a dangerous crossing position. Teams should be practicing taking advantage of not being closed down, you have time to pick a good cross out.
If you pass it short, suddenly you're being pressured on the ball and you've surrendered the advantage.
I believe the perceived advantage of the short corner is that it pulls the defence in the box out of shape, the resultant disruption giving strikers an (theoretical) advantage as the ball then comes in.
But that's not really an advantage is it? That's just stretching the play.
Having been awarded the potential to do so could be construed as an advantage, but once we get down to semantics that's just stretching the point.
Ban stretching the play!
Haha. As I qualified in my comment, I feel a short-corner is legitimate and shouldn't be banned, but I still don't understand them.
Every year we get ludicrous suggestions to justify the existence of some of these committees. Managers are then asked to comment, their answers are misquoted and therefore the media gets to fill their empty columns whilst the football world is largely on holiday.
Some of these proposals sound very good to me - they literally do justify the existence of the committees.
Cut the game to sixty minutes....stopping the clock for every break in play...great success in American football...plenty of ad breaks...game lasts three hours. Makes it popular in the US. FIFA Bribes all round. Huzzah
I'm not sure that makes sense. The proposed change is intended to decrease the amount of time with the ball out of play, not increase it - so there would be less scope for adverts during play.
If broadcasters wanted to play an advert between the ball going out for a goal kick and that goal kick they could presumably do so at the moment, or if it's not allowed negotiate it without needing to change the timings of a half.
Precisely @Chris. The stop clock method would remove the incentive to take excessive time at set pieces and other breaks in play. Under the current rules it takes such a ludicrously long time for teams to make subs late in the game that I'm surprised we don't already have ad breaks.
This particular rule change would only work if it went hand in hand with either some sort of overall time limit for stoppages and/or the total game time. Without this we could indeed see games lasting for an indefinite period of time, with teams taking as long as they like for restarts.
Yes, I'd love to actually see 60 mins of ball in play but not broken up by endless time taken over restarts. Our games would be running to 2hrs plus ......
Is the referee just going to stand there while the goalkeeper refuses to take a goal kick leading to the game lasting forever?
Much of the incentive is removed for players to take unnecessary time over set pieces - but also the referee will presumably retain the power to book time wasters.
But my point is, perhaps I ought to have said it, the ref is supposed to do that now and they don't.
All that will happen is we get the correct amount of time added on for stoppages and the game time will last 2hrs plus
Let's stick with the fun of guessing how many minutes will be added (with small denominations of small change involved to add an additional frisson). Where I sit, we already do this although so far we have not added the financial element. This is sometimes one of the more enjoyable aspects of the afternoon.
I really like these ideas, almost without exception. Stadium game clock, a la rugby, and subs getting off the pitch by the shortest route (it's got to the point where if the player being subbed is not on the other side of the pitch and looking the other way when his number goes up, he is practically being "unprofessional") are particular examples of ones I like.
I especially like the willingness to think way beyond current rules and practice and to address seriously some obvious deficiencies within the game with simple but original solutions. I find it refreshing, perhaps because I am so surprised by it, that there are people within the game willing to countenance adopting ideas from other sports in more than superficial fashion. Full marks from me.
I wonder how the 'stadium game clock' will work on a Sunday morning on the Rye.
I think the laws are already in place to stop alot of the cheating these proposals are designed to stop. We just need referees prepared to uphold the laws and players and managers to care a little more about the integrity of the sport rather than the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Why not change the rules so that they are easier for referees to enforce and to takes the pressure off players and managers to eke out every available edge?
How @Chris ?
It's is all so very easy to make that kind of statement without stepping in to the realms of actually giving an example of how it could be done.
I think refs can already be much harsher on cheating in all its forms. Pretty much everything I see as cheating is already against the laws of the game. If I'd change anything I'd probably add a sin bin type of punishment.
One thing to add to the enjoyment of the game for all is to have the referees miked up. As fans we could then sometimes understand there decisions i e Rugby. I know what you think yea right but in my opinion it would move the game forward regarding entertainment for all