Football Rules you'd like to see changed or better implemented

With the introduction of a video ref next year in cup competitions I was discussing with some friends other football rules that we would like to see changed. Here were a few reasonable ones that we came up with before alcohol made the suggestions quite outrageous.

1) defenders backing in to an opponent disguised as shielding the ball out for a goal kick - surely this has to change, sometimes players start 'shielding' the ball and the ball is nowhere near any player... any other part of the pitch and it's a free kick, surely an attacker has the right to attempt to get to the ball without a defender backing in and shielding some 10 yards away from the ball

2) Swearing at and surrounding the ref.. how do players still get away with it? Rooney and so many other high profile players are often seen in shouting at the ref 'F**k off' right in his face... surely automatic yellows for swearing at the ref should be implemented. I hate the egg but only the captain can speak to the ref and the rest of the players must back off... that would be great in football

3) Sin bin - related to the above - I was not a fan of this but one or two said that a sin bin idea would be much better than two yellows for innocuous incidents. Maybe it would be a way of getting rid of unnecessary behaviour and OTT red cards. I personally can't see how the ref could manage it though.

4) GBH in the box - remember Skertal when we played them at Anfield? Crazy. We would have had two penalties if the ref had any balls. Glad that it has reduced somewhat but still see attackers wrestled to the floor

5) Diving - understanding that the ref has a tough job and often can't tell in real-time if enough contact was made for the fall I think that retrospective punishment for diving should be implemented... Dele Allis dive against the jacks was outrageous and a three match suspension would soon stop players diving.

Any others?

Number one and four drive me mad - I think I have mentioned this before, but I was watching a re run of a Big Match programme from 1979 where a defender tried to "shield" (i.e. obstruct the attacker) the ball as it was rolling out for a goal kick and the ref gave the attacking team a free kick and booked the defender.

When did the onus change from favouring the attacker to favouring the defender? 1997 seems to be as good an answer as any, because that's when the old offence of obstruction was ditched by football's law makers - instead we now have FIFA gobbledygook and an explanation from a ref in this piece which I feel goes some way to explaining why nos. one and four in your list are now allowed by all refs (except for Mike Dean now and again when it comes to number four).

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/s...on-325037.html

1) has got to be obstruction by the defender because he hasn't touched it so he hasn't got control of the ball

A minimum gap of 5 minutes between tactical substitutions in the last 20 minutes of a game.
So often a sub will be made and then a second will come on a minute or 2 later. By all means make more than 1 at the same time but not with a small gap just to waste time.

My big bugbear is where an injured player has to leave the field after receiving treatment, then has to stand on the touch line giving the opposition a temporary man advantage when they were the ones who caused the injury. Ok if said player is time wasting but not if clearly injured as a result of a foul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

My big bugbear is where an injured player has to leave the field after receiving treatment, then has to stand on the touch line giving the opposition a temporary man advantage when they were the ones who caused the injury. Ok if said player is time wasting but not if clearly injured as a result of a foul.

---

Or 2 players as happened v Liverpool in the Premier League when they scored from a corner when we had 9 players on the pitch..
Could have been 3-5 instead!

Offside means offside! No grey areas, no "is he going for the ball or not"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

My big bugbear is where an injured player has to leave the field after receiving treatment, then has to stand on the touch line giving the opposition a temporary man advantage when they were the ones who caused the injury. Ok if said player is time wasting but not if clearly injured as a result of a foul.

---

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The player who caused the injury should have to leave the pitch as well, until the injured player is ready to come back on.

PLUS:---- Timekeeping, I wish we could follow THE EGG AND STOP THE BLOODY CLOCK

Introduce the sin bin for 5 minutes for kicking the ball away or holding on to it after committing an offence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUETIT

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^

The player who caused the injury should have to leave the pitch as well, until the injured player is ready to come back on.

PLUS:---- Timekeeping, I wish we could follow THE EGG AND STOP THE BLOODY CLOCK

---

Stopping the clock is a great idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Penarth Blues

Stopping the clock is a great idea.

---

It is, although I think it would need to be done in conjunction with a change to the length of matches.
At the moment a 90 minute match typically involves about 50 minutes of ball in play time tops.

Stopping the clock for what? Every time the ball is out of play?

Think people would be surprised how little the ball is in play during a game.

In fact, if you think about it, this would slow down the game a lot. Imagine a corner where the attacking team can take as long as they want, until it's all just right. Teams huddling to decide on their tactic. Not convinced.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bloop

Or 2 players as happened v Liverpool in the Premier League when they scored from a corner when we had 9 players on the pitch..
Could have been 3-5 instead!

---

That's the one that stood out for me - wasn't one of them Mark Hudson? i.e the kind of person you'd want to have on the pitch when you're defending a corner?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Stopping the clock for what? Every time the ball is out of play?

Think people would be surprised how little the ball is in play during a game.

In fact, if you think about it, this would slow down the game a lot. Imagine a corner where the attacking team can take as long as they want, until it's all just right. Teams huddling to decide on their tactic. Not convinced.

---

I like the idea of stopping the clock, but you only stop the clock for injuries, subsitutions and goal celebrations.

Unlike Rugby though, when time's up, time's up, no going on until the ball goes dead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Stopping the clock for what? Every time the ball is out of play?

Think people would be surprised how little the ball is in play during a game.

In fact, if you think about it, this would slow down the game a lot. Imagine a corner where the attacking team can take as long as they want, until it's all just right. Teams huddling to decide on their tactic. Not convinced.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

I like the idea of stopping the clock, but you only stop the clock for injuries, subsitutions and goal celebrations.

Unlike Rugby though, when time's up, time's up, no going on until the ball goes dead.

---

I see you used the left side of your brain, UNLIKE SOME OTHERS :hehe::hehe::hehe:

Stopping for the ball going out of play !!!!!!

We would never get home. :hehe::hehe:

The rule that seems to allow defenders to sheild the ball while it runs out of play angers me more than most things in football. Like you say anywhere else on the pitch, it's a free kick for obstruction and not playing the ball. Defenders seem to get away with more and moe extreme examples of it these days too, sometimes letting the ball roll out even though it's hardly moving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BLUETIT

I see you used the left side of your brain, UNLIKE SOME OTHERS :hehe::hehe::hehe:

Stopping for the ball going out of play !!!!!!

We would never get home. :hehe::hehe:

---

I said 'stop the clock for what?' which, grammar fiend as you are, you'll notice is a question. TH63 was good enough to give an answer in his opinion :thumbup:

Because FOLLOW THE EGG isn't really helpful. They stop to chat to the TV official.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

I said 'stop the clock for what?' which, grammar fiend as you are, you'll notice is a question. TH63 was good enough to give an answer in his opinion :thumbup:

Because FOLLOW THE EGG isn't really helpful. They stop to chat to the TV official.

---

" They stop to chat to the TV official.[/QUOTE]"

If they brought in video evidence, yes "STOP THE CLOCK"

Starting to think you haven't thought this through :hehe:

Players allowed to wear multicoloured boots - w@nkers the lot of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobh

Offside means offside! No grey areas, no "is he going for the ball or not"

---

I think the main problems with offside are:

1) Linesmen flagging late
2) Pundits not knowing what's going on


With 1), there are times when it's pretty clear they are going to flag eventually but they let a sprinting forward get close before flagging. That's annoying to everyone but I actually don't see it happen that often. It's just very noticeable when it does.

A bigger problem is the pundits. They're paid to talk about the game and educate viewers but they always whine "we just don't know the rules anymore". Well bloody read up on them! They're employed to talk about the game in 2017 not how it was when they were playing. There's no reason for them not to understand what the rules are and why they are in place.

The current offside rule makes it very difficult for defences to step up and play the offside trap because the forwards now have lots of advantages - the risk is just too great. If defences aren't stepping up and are playing deeper, then there is more of the pitch available to play in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by insider

Players allowed to wear multicoloured boots - w@nkers the lot of them.

---

Massive knock-on effect to this too. Bloody impossible to find boots in the shops that aren't bright yellow or green, as I found out trying to replace mine this weekend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lardy

Massive knock-on effect to this too. Bloody impossible to find boots in the shops that aren't bright yellow or green, as I found out trying to replace mine this weekend.

---

everytime a team gets a corner kick , make sure the player put the ball inside the quandrant , its a joke nowadays, the quandrants are marked up on the pitch for a reason, yet nowadays the players do not put the ball anywhere near it, :thumbup:

If you score with your penis then your team gets an automatic 10-0 victory and 10 league points.

#shafted

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

everytime a team gets a corner kick , make sure the player put the ball inside the quandrant , its a joke nowadays, the quandrants are marked up on the pitch for a reason, yet nowadays the players do not put the ball anywhere near it, :thumbup:

---

Yeah that was a pretty pointless rule change.

the markings on the pitch are part of the rules of the game, and by moving the ball a few inches over the quadrant the laws are been broken. its like moving the centre circle another ten yards down the pitch. the halfway line is the halfway line, not where the players decide it should be . the white spray introduced for free kicks was a good idea as it stopped players from moving the ball forwards or players encroaching within ten yards before a free kick was taken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobh

Offside means offside! No grey areas, no "is he going for the ball or not"

---

Get rid of off side, and stretch the game ,ooooh and the return of goal hangers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chris

the markings on the pitch are part of the rules of the game, and by moving the ball a few inches over the quadrant the laws are been broken. its like moving the centre circle another ten yards down the pitch. the halfway line is the halfway line, not where the players decide it should be . the white spray introduced for free kicks was a good idea as it stopped players from moving the ball forwards or players encroaching within ten yards before a free kick was taken.

---

Chris in sensible post shocker!

Taking your theme a step further, how about the lino having some of that spray and spraying where the ball went out - some players can nick anything up to ten yards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TH63

Chris in sensible post shocker!

Taking your theme a step further, how about the lino having some of that spray and spraying where the ball went out - some players can nick anything up to ten yards

---

yeah :thumbup:, plenty of players must run two three yards from where the ball went out at throw ins, before releasing the ball gaining an advantage :thumbup:. the trouble is so many referees are too incompetent nowadays and all interprete the rules differently its just not consistent enough. its usually the top sides that seem to fall in favour with the referees whilst the teams that struggle seem to get no favours whatsoever.:thumbup:

Defenders being favoured over attackers :hehe: That would be a nice change.

Throw-ins taken where the ball went out. If you want a run up before throwing the ball in then you should end up where the ball went out rather than start there. The worst instances of this being mistreated I've seen is where the ball goes out on side of the halfway line and returns on the other or that one time where a counter attack was given added impetus as the throw-in was taken running past one of the few defenders back.

Bookings for time-wasting. I've never seen anyone sent off for time wasting and yet in the case of the Wales (home) Andorra match the goal-keeper should have been.

I'd quite like to change the January window into a loan window only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by life on mars

Get rid of off side, and stretch the game ,ooooh and the return of goal hangers.

---

Goalie when?

Go back to the proper offside law, if you're offside, you're offside, none of this inactive/passive shite. We all understood it before, it must be a nightmare for officials, this not interfering with play is bollocks, every defender worth his salt will have his mind and eyes on every attacker wherever he is, so every attacker is interfering with play. Why make a simple game more difficult? Also agree with the defender shielding the ball for about fifteen yards before it goes out for goal kick, it's good old fashioned obstruction, nothing less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

Go back to the proper offside law, if you're offside, you're offside, none of this inactive/passive shite. We all understood it before, it must be a nightmare for officials, this not interfering with play is bollocks, every defender worth his salt will have his mind and eyes on every attacker wherever he is, so every attacker is interfering with play. Why make a simple game more difficult? Also agree with the defender shielding the ball for about fifteen yards before it goes out for goal kick, it's good old fashioned obstruction, nothing less.

---

Exactly! :thumbup: