Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: cdbearsfan on June 13, 2010, 10:46:12 AM
-
Hi all,
I was thinking of some rule changes that could benefit the game. Feel free to comment on them or think of some of your own.
Persistent fouling : this seems to be refereed in too much of an inconsistent way. Some players get booked after about two tackles, others (Mascherano and Scholes spiring to mind) seem to get away with about a dozen before being carded. This seems pretty easy to sort. Like basketball, have an official on the sidelines counting the number of fouls. When it gets to a certain number, say five fouls, he tells the ref through an earpiece to book the player.
Diving : to stamp this out they should have retrospective bookings and red cards so if a referee is deceived by cheating the cheat will suffer the consequences after the game. Any dive that earns a penalty or gets an opponent sent off to count as a red card and get a minimum one game ban. This was proposed by the SPL a year or two but rejected by FIFA for being too much like common sense.
I would also change the law that says players can only be retrospectively punished for incidents that a referee didn’t see or if the opponents make a complaint. Often the ref will have seen, but misinterpreted, an incident. The opposition may not want to make a complaint as they may not want the player suspended (if his team are playing one of their rivals next, for instance). Both of these exemptions allow cheats to get away with it and should be abolished.
Magic spray : I like the magic spray. For those that don’t know, this is a spray that the referee carries in a can used in the Argentine League. At a free-kick, he counts out ten yards then sprays there. This stops encroachment as it is obvious if a player has crossed the line, he can then be booked accordingly. The spray disappears after a few seconds.
Throw-ins : here is another use for the magic spray. The linesme…, sorry assistant referees, will also have the cans. At throw-ins, they mark where the throw should be taken from. If a player tries to gain yards, rather than being sent back and told to take it again, it will be awarded as a ‘foul throw’ and given to the opposition. Too many times a team is winning with minutes to go and tries to gain yards at a throw. They know if they don’t get sent back they have gained yards but if they do get sent back they have wasted valuable seconds. This would be stamped out by the threat of giving the ball to the opposition rather than just asking them to take it again.
Now I move onto the most controversial area : video replays. I think these need to be brought in. Teams would be allocated two ‘challenges’ per half (like the system in the NFL). If a manager thought that his team had been wronged, he would be able to challenge a decision. The TV Official would be given sixty seconds to check the incident. If CONCLUSIVE proof was found that the decision was incorrect it would be reversed and the team wouldn’t lose their ‘challenge’. If conclusive proof couldn’t be found they would lose a challenge. If they had no challenges left, obviously they would be unable to challenge a decision for the rest of the half. Under this system the challenges would be very valuable so managers would not want to waste them. As such, they would likely only challenge massive decisions. This, in conjunction with the maximum sixty-second review rule, would ensure the game isn’t slowed down too much.
-
The idea of the spray is a good one. But maybe he can carry capsicum spray and blast in John Terry's face every time he's being a complete ******.
-
Being serious though, good post.
-
I love the challenge rule, it's used in cricket but they get 4 I think. Something needs to be done regarding either goal line technology or more assistant refs or challenges because it's getting f***ing rediculous.
-
I love the challenge rule, it's used in cricket but they get 4 I think. Something needs to be done regarding either goal line technology or more assistant refs or challenges because it's getting f***ing rediculous.
Meant to say would also add goal-line technology.
-
It's like the majority of fans wan this in buy some awkward c**t is saying no. Ibwould love to see him say no infront of everyones who says yes.
-
All of these suggestions seem eminently sensible, which will probably be the reason they will never be adopted by FIFA.
-
The trouble is, these decisions that go for / against teams are great talking points in the pub, bulletin boards, work etc after the matches.
With these decisions taken out of the referee's hands, our discussions would become rather boring.
-
I like all of those ideas apart from the challenges. It would break the flow of the game too much and could be used tactically to relieve pressure.
-
Comedy Music: for instance Air on the G string should be played every time Robert Green is in possession of the ball.
-
The basketball-style foul count is a good idea, but I'd take it further and make the ejection after 5 (or 6) fouls the rule.
The persistent fouling is just plain wrong and is used as a substitute for talented tackling/defending by far too many players.
-
Comedy Music: for instance Air on the G string should be played every time Robert Green is in possession of the ball.
I'd suggest "Careless Hands" by Dottie West or the Benny Hill theme for that triangular fingered oaf.
-
Comedy Music: for instance Air on the G string should be played every time Robert Green is in possession of the ball.
Do you mean, 'if' he gets possession of the ball?!!
-
I'd like to see players trying to shepherd the ball out of play without attempting to touch it to be penalised with an indirect free kick. It annoys the poo out of me when you see a player look over their shoulder, clock the opponent and then blatantly step in front of them without any intention of playing the ball. Rather like the back pass rule it could make the game much more exciting as it would force defenders to play the ball and thus concede possesion/throw in, corner etc.
-
Good ideas apart from the persistent fouling. Each tackle should be judged on the tackle. Why should it matter if someone has done it 1 time or 50 times? A foul is a foul.
I'd also add a rule where, once the referee has spoken to a plyer regarding a decision and the referee gives his reason for the decision then the player must stop and move away. If not, a yellow card can be given freely by the ref. This would hopefully stop knobs like Terry and Stevie and a whole host of others constantly in the refs faces behaving like spoilt children. I think this rule probably exists now actually, but the refs are fearful of putting it into practice.
-
The idea of the spray is a good one. But maybe he can carry capsicum spray and blast in John Terry's face every time he's being a complete c***.
Impractical, Troy.
The container would need to be as big as one of those water coolers found in most offices.
The ref would look a bit of a tit if he was jogging around with that strapped to his back for every England match. They struggle to keep up with the game as it is.
-
I'd change the offside rule (again) no offside before an imaginary line which is the continuation of the 18 yard box. Free the game up a bit, much easier to manage, more goals. Suit Gabby perfectly
-
If a player is injured following a foul against him by an opposition player needing player to leave the field of play for treatment, then the player committing the foul should also be required to leave the field of play until the injured player returns.
If the injured player, who had been fouled against, receives treatment from the physio but is able to continue without leaving the field of play then he should be allowed to continue the game without doing so from the touchline.
It is an anomoly that a fouled against team can be at a numerical disadvantage following a foul against them and has needed ammending for a number of years .....
Also ... football is meant to be a 90 minute game ... many games the ball is actually 'in play' for nearer 70 minutes.
Take the responsibility for time keeping from the ref and appoint an official time keeper to stop and start the click each time the ball goes dead. This will cut out timewasting and the vaguery of added time at the end of each half.
Signal the end of each half and the game with a hooter or pre recorded whistle for the more tradionalists over the tannoy .....
-
Yellow card every time a player takes a throw in from the wrong place
Yellow card every time a defender shepherds the ball out over the goal line, obstructing the forward from getting to it
Automatic ten yards and sin bin for any dissent at all, even the slightest objection to a decision
Reintroduce physical challenges on the goalie, man and ball into the back of the net
Penalty for all shirt tugging etc in the penalty area at corners and free kicks
-
I think the refs should wear jet-packs.
1) They'd never get in the way of the ball.
2) They'd have a much better perspective of the pitch
3) They'd be able to escape from moaning players on the recieving end of bad decisions
4) They're fitness wouldn't be called into question.
5) They could hover above the bar at corners and set-pieces and would be able to give a definitive answer on whether the ball crossed the line or not.
There must be more benefits, but I need to drop the kids off at the pool.
We have the technology, why on earth don't these clowns at FIFA implement it?
-
If a player dives for a penalty, and the ref is quite certain it was a dive, and he then appeals for it heavily with all the histrionics, a penalty should be given - to the other side!
-
Not intending to make progress:
With a few minutes to go when one team who is winning (or drawing if that is all they need) decides to run the ball into the corner and run the clock down it should be an offence 'Not intending to make progress'.
It is boring and a pathetic end to a game, it's easy to spot stands out a mile.
It should result in a free kick to the opposition which then enables a last gasp launch into the opponents box and a 'real' end to the game.
-
Eric, that's just shit.
-
I wouldnt allow goalkeepers to come out of the area.
-
Not intending to make progress:
With a few minutes to go when one team who is winning (or drawing if that is all they need) decides to run the ball into the corner and run the clock down it should be an offence 'Not intending to make progress'.
It is boring and a pathetic end to a game, it's easy to spot stands out a mile.
It should result in a free kick to the opposition which then enables a last gasp launch into the opponents box and a 'real' end to the game.
That happens now. Refs have been mindful of this for a while, and you watch next season, when this happens, how often they penalise the attacking player for a foul, or give the throw-in to the defence.
-
If a player is injured following a foul against him by an opposition player needing player to leave the field of play for treatment, then the player committing the foul should also be required to leave the field of play until the injured player returns.
If the injured player, who had been fouled against, receives treatment from the physio but is able to continue without leaving the field of play then he should be allowed to continue the game without doing so from the touchline.
It is an anomoly that a fouled against team can be at a numerical disadvantage following a foul against them and has needed ammending for a number of years .....
This would be the most abused rule in the history of any game. Think about it, players could go down easily when an important player on the other team makes the slightest contact. Players would then fake injuries even more and take longer to come back into the game so the other player can't come in. Terrible idea
-
All of these suggestions seem eminently sensible, which will probably be the reason they will never be adopted by FIFA.
FIFA dont change the Laws, all changes are done by the International board, 4 are from the Uk nations, and 4 from other nations.
To be fair, when they do make the changes, they always explain why, and they generally tend to be for the better.
-
What about a yellow card for the ghastly crime of 'over celebrating' a goal?
I could see why that might apply if the player in question starts giving it the big' un to the opposition supporters. Incitement and all the rest of it.
But I think back to Cahill's goal against the Rags a few years ago and Gabby v Everton. Both moments of pure spontaneity, when for a brief period highly paid processionals and supporters were united in joy.
And the ref jogs over and says 'enough of this.'
I don't actually blame the refs for that. They are only enforcing the law as laid out, and the assessor in the crowd will mark them down if they don't.
But what doughnut thought that up in the first place. If you want to look at part of the reason why referees have so little credibility and respect in football, anomalies like that are a good starting point.
Shirt tugging/cynical fouling/time wasting? = at the referees discretion.
Celebrating a goal? Yellow card offence. Meaning your player is walking a tightrope for the rest of the game or might actually be sent off if he's picked up another yellow for next to nowt earlier.
-
All of these suggestions seem eminently sensible, which will probably be the reason they will never be adopted by FIFA.
FIFA dont change the Laws, all changes are done by the International board, 4 are from the Uk nations, and 4 from other nations.
To be fair, when they do make the changes, they always explain why, and they generally tend to be for the better.
Thanks for the correction Dave, I have to say I didn't know that. However, although I wouldn't necessarily disagree that all the changes to the laws are generally for the better, my point really was that the lawmakers are slothful in the extreme. For instance, I haven't heard a single credible argument against introducing video evidence, at the very least for goal line decisions, when the technology has been widely available and used in other sports for years. I happened to think that pretty much all of the suggestions in cdvillafan's original post had some merit and were worthy of consideration, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.
-
What happened to direct free kicks in the penalty area ? might be
a halfway house for iffy pen dilemas. It`s often one nil up and playing
against ten men OR sweet F.A.
The argument against video replay for key moments (pens and ball
over the line ) is bizzare.
France v Ireland, Henry handball (s). Everybody in the stadium new
it was handballs, apart from the one man who needed to know. Priceless.
The jet-pack ref idea is inspired. Had a good chuckle at that. Get the
linesmen on stilts (keep up with play + use opposite linesman`s
stilt as an in-line aid ). Tell Platini it`s part of a comprehensive plan to
elevate the standing of football officials and raise standards. Would get
more thought at UEFA than THE readymade solution.
-
If a player is injured following a foul against him by an opposition player needing player to leave the field of play for treatment, then the player committing the foul should also be required to leave the field of play until the injured player returns.
If the injured player, who had been fouled against, receives treatment from the physio but is able to continue without leaving the field of play then he should be allowed to continue the game without doing so from the touchline.
It is an anomoly that a fouled against team can be at a numerical disadvantage following a foul against them and has needed ammending for a number of years .....
This would be the most abused rule in the history of any game. Think about it, players could go down easily when an important player on the other team makes the slightest contact. Players would then fake injuries even more and take longer to come back into the game so the other player can't come in. Terrible idea
Yes I agree if Dagenham County Reserves were playing Barcelona then the Clumsy DCRFC Centre Half may well take the hit to get Lionel Messi off the pitch for a while.
-
All of these suggestions seem eminently sensible, which will probably be the reason they will never be adopted by FIFA.
FIFA dont change the Laws, all changes are done by the International board, 4 are from the Uk nations, and 4 from other nations.
To be fair, when they do make the changes, they always explain why, and they generally tend to be for the better.
Thanks for the correction Dave, I have to say I didn't know that. However, although I wouldn't necessarily disagree that all the changes to the laws are generally for the better, my point really was that the lawmakers are slothful in the extreme. For instance, I haven't heard a single credible argument against introducing video evidence, at the very least for goal line decisions, when the technology has been widely available and used in other sports for years. I happened to think that pretty much all of the suggestions in cdvillafan's original post had some merit and were worthy of consideration, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.
Id have no problem with goal-line technology, if it was only used for goal-line decisions, but tbh, there are very few decisions in a season when it would be used.
The media go on about it, but for the whole ball to be behind the line, the base of the ball needs to be a fair way behind the line. On most occasions they claim it is, most of the ball is, but not the whole ball.
I would be against using technology for decisions as those have to be with the discretion of the ref, and id hate to see a situation develope when the game becomes stop/start while a decision is debated by a tv monitor.
i know they use it in super league, but i believe thats only in games shown live on sky, i dont believe that is a fair system.
-
If a player is injured following a foul against him by an opposition player needing player to leave the field of play for treatment, then the player committing the foul should also be required to leave the field of play until the injured player returns.
If the injured player, who had been fouled against, receives treatment from the physio but is able to continue without leaving the field of play then he should be allowed to continue the game without doing so from the touchline.
It is an anomoly that a fouled against team can be at a numerical disadvantage following a foul against them and has needed ammending for a number of years .....
This would be the most abused rule in the history of any game. Think about it, players could go down easily when an important player on the other team makes the slightest contact. Players would then fake injuries even more and take longer to come back into the game so the other player can't come in. Terrible idea
If im right, this law about players going off for treatment was brought in because players were abusing the system to break up the flow of the game. Hence the change came in, so that a player who needs treatment now goes off for it.
Unfortunately, whatever law changes are made, coaches/players will always try to circumvent it to their advantage.
My idea would be for all players to abide by the laws of the game, respect the refs decisions, then we would have less problems.
-
All of these suggestions seem eminently sensible, which will probably be the reason they will never be adopted by FIFA.
FIFA dont change the Laws, all changes are done by the International board, 4 are from the Uk nations, and 4 from other nations.
To be fair, when they do make the changes, they always explain why, and they generally tend to be for the better.
Thanks for the correction Dave, I have to say I didn't know that. However, although I wouldn't necessarily disagree that all the changes to the laws are generally for the better, my point really was that the lawmakers are slothful in the extreme. For instance, I haven't heard a single credible argument against introducing video evidence, at the very least for goal line decisions, when the technology has been widely available and used in other sports for years. I happened to think that pretty much all of the suggestions in cdvillafan's original post had some merit and were worthy of consideration, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.
Id have no problem with goal-line technology, if it was only used for goal-line decisions, but tbh, there are very few decisions in a season when it would be used.
The media go on about it, but for the whole ball to be behind the line, the base of the ball needs to be a fair way behind the line. On most occasions they claim it is, most of the ball is, but not the whole ball.
I would be against using technology for decisions as those have to be with the discretion of the ref, and id hate to see a situation develope when the game becomes stop/start while a decision is debated by a tv monitor.
i know they use it in super league, but i believe thats only in games shown live on sky, i dont believe that is a fair system.
Sorry, but I can't agree with your arguments against using goal line technology, but you raise an interesting point concerning the criteria for a ball to be out of play, or indeed to count as a goal by virtue of the whole of the ball having to cross the line.
I am certain that referees do not interpret this rule correctly anyway. I believe that most referees and assistants will call a ball to be out of play, or a goal awarded if the centreline of the ball is just a few centimetres over the centreline of the line. Given that a size 5 ball can be up to 70 centimetres in circumference, the centreline of the ball must be at least 27.5 centimetres beyond the centreline of the line (that's almost a foot in old money) and I don't believe that this is hardly ever the case in disputed calls.
Another archaic rule that needs to be changed to fall in with actual practice.
-
All of these suggestions seem eminently sensible, which will probably be the reason they will never be adopted by FIFA.
FIFA dont change the Laws, all changes are done by the International board, 4 are from the Uk nations, and 4 from other nations.
To be fair, when they do make the changes, they always explain why, and they generally tend to be for the better.
Thanks for the correction Dave, I have to say I didn't know that. However, although I wouldn't necessarily disagree that all the changes to the laws are generally for the better, my point really was that the lawmakers are slothful in the extreme. For instance, I haven't heard a single credible argument against introducing video evidence, at the very least for goal line decisions, when the technology has been widely available and used in other sports for years. I happened to think that pretty much all of the suggestions in cdvillafan's original post had some merit and were worthy of consideration, but I wouldn't be holding my breath.
Id have no problem with goal-line technology, if it was only used for goal-line decisions, but tbh, there are very few decisions in a season when it would be used.
The media go on about it, but for the whole ball to be behind the line, the base of the ball needs to be a fair way behind the line. On most occasions they claim it is, most of the ball is, but not the whole ball.
I would be against using technology for decisions as those have to be with the discretion of the ref, and id hate to see a situation develope when the game becomes stop/start while a decision is debated by a tv monitor.
i know they use it in super league, but i believe thats only in games shown live on sky, i dont believe that is a fair system.
Sorry, but I can't agree with your arguments against using goal line technology, but you raise an interesting point concerning the criteria for a ball to be out of play, or indeed to count as a goal by virtue of the whole of the ball having to cross the line.
I am certain that referees do not interpret this rule correctly anyway. I believe that most referees and assistants will call a ball to be out of play, or a goal awarded if the centreline of the ball is just a few centimetres over the centreline of the line. Given that a size 5 ball can be up to 70 centimetres in circumference, the centreline of the ball must be at least 27.5 centimetres beyond the centreline of the line (that's almost a foot in old money) and I don't believe that this is hardly ever the case in disputed calls.
Another archaic rule that needs to be changed to fall in with actual practice.
Sorry, my wording may have confused you. What i meant was im in favour of goal-line technology for determining ball in/out of play, however for general fouls/misconduct then i believe that should be at the discretion of the ref.
I would disagree with you on your belief on how refs and a/r call ball out of play.
I spent 11 yrs officiating at non-league level, and whatever game i was on, we always wanted to get the big/key match changing descions correct.
when you are making a series of split second judgement calls, you are always going to get 1 or 2 wrong (some might say more).
It was always amusing doing a game, and part of the ball was over the line, and one team would swear blind that the ball was out of play!!!
-
I would make the following radical changes to the current rules:
1. If a defender fouls an attacker in the penalty area and is clearly the last defender by a country mile;
2. If a defender blatantly fouls a striker well inside the penalty area;
Then a referee shall 1. send off the offending defender and 2. award a penalty-kick even in cases where the defending team are currently in the Premiership Big Four.
A major change, I know...