22A Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 I've just seen on SSN some proposals made by a team of lawyers & referees. Please feel free to discuss. 1; Games will last just sixty minutes, but the clock will stop every time the ball is out of play to ensure 60 mins of football. 2; Free kicks can be dribbled forward if so desired and the ball will not need to be stationary before being kicked. 3; If the ball is prevented from going in by a defender handling it, a penalty goal will be awarded. 4; A penalty will be awarded if a goalkeeper handles a back pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy1968 Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 19 minutes ago, 22A said: I've just seen on SSN some proposals made by a team of lawyers & referees. Please feel free to discuss. 1; Games will last just sixty minutes, but the clock will stop every time the ball is out of play to ensure 60 mins of football. 2; Free kicks can be dribbled forward if so desired and the ball will not need to be stationary before being kicked. 3; If the ball is prevented from going in by a defender handling it, a penalty goal will be awarded. 4; A penalty will be awarded if a goalkeeper handles a back pass. thoughts: 1. Wont play well with tv schedules. What analysis has been done on this already. How long is the ball in play at the moment? 2. I forsee debate on whether a free kick had been taken ou you hadn't stopped for the original whistle. Would the 10 yard rule still apply? How? 3. But why stop there? What about when you're taken out as you go past the last defender?? 4. WTF? how about this: 1. Retroactively ban cheaters who try to get others into trouble and especially where bookings, sendings off, and pens are involved. 2. Only given pens where there is a reasonable chance of a goal being scored e.g. so not a pen in the case v Cardiff at home last season. 3. FIFA go back to investigating those corruption claims properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo88 Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 Who are the lawyers and referees who have suggested this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossi the Robin Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 0 pts if you don't score a goal would possibly be a good rule Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 A lot can be done about ref security / constant complaints from players. If there refs don't get the possibilty of tv coverage support replays should be forbidden during the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, Rossi the Robin said: 0 pts if you don't score a goal would possibly be a good rule I`ve always been a bit of a fan of an extra point if you score more than three. It could possibly deter teams from parking the bus at 2-1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 ' Whereas last season the ball was in play for 62.39 minutes on average in Premier League matches, this season it rose to 64.42 – the most of any of the top five European leagues. Fulham (67.42min) offered the most action.' http://community.betfair.com/football/go/thread/view/94070/30640833/how-many-minutes-is-the-ball-in-play-on-average-per-match-these-days#flvWelcomeHeader It's not going to make much difference then. I like the idea of extra points for goals scored TBH, would make games more attacking therefore more open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loco Rojo Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 Shortening games to just 60 minutes? I wonder if they could reduce the players wages accordingly as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 40 min halves with the clock stopping would be more ideal from a fan perspective. 80 min of football would be a good 15-20 min more than we are getting now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 minute ago, JoeAman08 said: 40 min halves with the clock stopping would be more ideal from a fan perspective. 80 min of football would be a good 15-20 min more than we are getting now. Beer Army would support this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoystonFoote'snephew Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 I'm sure I've seen this before, and that the first point at least was part of a survey. However, for what it's worth: 1 I can see some arguments in this, as I believe the average time the ball is in play is between 53 and 58 minutes. If stopping the clock whenever the ball is out of play stops timewasters and substitutions in the last 30 seconds, I'd support that but not the cutting of the game to 60 minutes. 2 I agree with Sleepy1968. I foresee confusion as to whether the free kick has been taken or not. 3. Presumably close to the line to be sure. A rising shot handled middle of the box may be striking or clearing the bar. Assume the player still gets a red card. 4. Do any officials know what constitutes a back pass anymore? Keepers can seemingly dribble the ball back into their penalty area and pick it up again. Something that was banned at one time. In terms of adding a suggestion. Cannot we return to insisting that the keeper takes the goal kick from the side the ball went out of play. You could save 2-3 minutes per game by this simple requirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said: I'm sure I've seen this before, and that the first point at least was part of a survey. However, for what it's worth: 1 I can see some arguments in this, as I believe the average time the ball is in play is between 53 and 58 minutes. If stopping the clock whenever the ball is out of play stops timewasters and substitutions in the last 30 seconds, I'd support that but not the cutting of the game to 60 minutes. 2 I agree with Sleepy1968. I foresee confusion as to whether the free kick has been taken or not. 3. Presumably close to the line to be sure. A rising shot handled middle of the box may be striking or clearing the bar. Assume the player still gets a red card. 4. Do any officials know what constitutes a back pass anymore? Keepers can seemingly dribble the ball back into their penalty area and pick it up again. Something that was banned at one time. In terms of adding a suggestion. Cannot we return to insisting that the keeper takes the goal kick from the side the ball went out of play. You could save 2-3 minutes per game by this simple requirement. The trouble is we`d still be there at midnight if we were playing a Warnock side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 How about they start to make sure the existing laws are being applied properly and rigorously, before introducing a load of new ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fat Controller Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, downendcity said: How about they start to make sure the existing laws are being applied properly and rigorously, before introducing a load of new ones? Exactly. New rules are not required just officials who are willing/capable of enforcing the current ones to the letter. A couple of weeks of clamping down on all unsportsmanlike/time wasting/cheating behavior and dissent and it would soon disappear. Sure, it might be carnage for a game or two but the players and clubs would soon get the message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppyDAZE Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Rossi the Robin said: 0 pts if you don't score a goal would possibly be a good rule Really not keen with making changes as big as this. After all, footbal has worked the way it has for years and years. No need to start messing with what goals mean and how many points teams get for types of results. I hate this talk in all honesty. LEAVE IT ALONE FFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZiderEyed Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 Free kicks can be dribbled forward? What kind of 90s MLS bollocks is this? Surely there are greater priorities i.e. ways of preventing diving? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderbeans Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 Or let's simplify things. Get everyone to man up and relax the rules on tackling and go back to the football of the 80's and 90's. People are too sensitive nowadays. Injuries are part of the game and so should strong tackles be. Relaxed rules on tackling etc would mean less requirements regarding rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laner Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 How about no penalty kicks. Fouls in the box are uncontested (as a penalty) direct free kicks but from where the foul took place. A penalty shot so to speak. Although why change the rules of probably the greatest spectator sport in the world? As it's been said. Get these right first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 21 minutes ago, Red Right Hand said: The trouble is we`d still be there at midnight if we were playing a Warnock side. Didnt Johnson get furious after the Brum game and storm to the referee demanding to know why the ball was only in play for 15 minutes in the second half, or something along those lines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 hour ago, pongo88 said: Who are the lawyers and referees who have suggested this? Bunch of ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 The op is entering into the spirit of the silly season............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robintherobin Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 The International Football Association Board (Ifab) have floated some new ideas for rule changes. Reading through most actually seem quite reasonable, though I think a few of the ideas are crazy and would never work. Here's a summary: Games would be made up of two periods of 30 minutes with the clock stopped whenever the ball goes out of play. A stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee's watch Only the captain can speak to the referee Penalty shoot-outs to be taken in the order ABBA rather than ABAB Players who are being substituted leaving at the closest part of the touchline to them instead of at the halfway line. Passing to yourself at a free-kick, corner and goal-kick would be allowed Allowing a goal-kick to be taken even if the ball is moving A goal-kick has to be taken on the same side that the ball went out on A "clearer and more consistent definition" of handball A player who scores a goal with his hands gets a red card A keeper who handles a backpass or throw-in from a team-mate concedes a penalty The referee can award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line Referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play A penalty kick is either scored or missed/saved and players cannot follow up to score There's a link here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40311889 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bs4Red Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 Ludicrous can they not just leave the game alone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Septic Peg Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 hour ago, JoeAman08 said: 40 min halves with the clock stopping would be more ideal from a fan perspective. 80 min of football would be a good 15-20 min more than we are getting now. Have to agree with this. Much as I'm against changes to the rule book, this works well in Rugby. With goal line tech, video refs and ref/linesman/vid ref in radio contact, this would assist it. Would also help clamp down on timewasting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gillies Downs Leeds Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 3 hours ago, AppyDAZE said: Really not keen with making changes as big as this. After all, footbal has worked the way it has for years and years. No need to start messing with what goals mean and how many points teams get for types of results. I hate this talk in all honesty. LEAVE IT ALONE FFS Agree 100% with this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidered abroad Posted June 17, 2017 Report Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Septic Peg said: Have to agree with this. Much as I'm against changes to the rule book, this works well in Rugby. With goal line tech, video refs and ref/linesman/vid ref in radio contact, this would assist it. Would also help clamp down on timewasting. It's a fallacy that in a rugby match there is 80 minutes of play. Yes the ref stops the clock for certain stoppages but the time wasting now by teams is now similar to or even possibly worse than in football. For example the lineouts (throw in for the football only fans) is often preceded by lengthy huddles by one or both packs; this is very similar to the time wasting in football at throw ins or goal kicks. The only difference is that rugby throw ins are taken at the point where the linesman decrees that the ball left the field of play whereas 99% of football throw ins now take place at least ten yards nearer the opponents goal line that point of exit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanterne Rouge Posted June 18, 2017 Report Share Posted June 18, 2017 8 hours ago, Bs4Red said: Ludicrous can they not just leave the game alone They have to justify their exorbitant salaries somehow and by doing things like this they can also spend two years having meetings about it in such footballing hotspots as The Seychelles, Costa Rica or The Bahamas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malago Posted June 18, 2017 Report Share Posted June 18, 2017 I think the game should be played with two balls on the pitch at the same time. Twice the action, so there would only be need for one half of 45 minutes; the players would get more time for mangrooming and we could all spend more time in the pub. What's not to like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Cat Posted June 18, 2017 Report Share Posted June 18, 2017 How about double the half time break so that those in the Atyeo stand have half a chance of getting a pint of cider without missing the last 10 minutes of the first half. Or maybe not, now that we've been herded into the South Stand.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweeneys Penalties Posted June 18, 2017 Report Share Posted June 18, 2017 I can see this being the thin end of the wedge. It'd be much easier to "stop the clock" to review a controversial decision. It could also stop "divers" dead in their tracks, and many more cards being issued from the start of such legislation. If it helps the officials... why not!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.