Rule changes up for debate

[westcoastcanary 173]

Among several rule changes tabled for discussion at IFAB (see this BBC report) is one which requires referees to stop their watches at certain junctures until play is resumed (as happens in RU). The intention is to increase actual playing time by decreasing time lost through, e.g. substitutions, placing and preparing to take free kicks, taking throw ins etc. But the idea of having play stopped in certain circumstances might seem attractive for many other sorts of reasons, and to many people. It could, for example, allow Ricardo to eliminate the frequent lacunae in his match reports, which occur when he misses some crucial penalty box action through having to hastily leave his seat .............. [;)]

[Bill 1,788]

The bit I read yesterday was about adding time for goal celebrations.I think it would benefit there was some visible indication that the clock has stopped and that time is also seen to accumulate rathre than  have it seemingly added on at the end on some ad hoc basis.It can come back to bite some on the ar se as when Savage took an age to mince off the pitch, as if his last game was of any significance to City fans ... and Jackson.I usually am very wary of stuff that interferes with the game, but this doesn''t and it cannot be beyond the wit of modern technology for the ref to simply click a button and the clock(s) stop until the game restarts.It would mean longer games, but I think the view that justice was not only being done, but being seen to be done would suit most fans.

[Nuff Said 6,025]

They do it already in rugby, works fine.

BUT the flip side of this is that each half would be 30 minutes long! No sure how I feel about that.

[TIL 1010 5,291]

If it ain''t broke don''t fix it. The game is fine as it is with just a very odd occasion when we get frustrated by the actions of an opposing team. Time added on for such instances is the answer. Stop/starting games is not for me.

[HertsCanary93 223]

I certainly think the new proposals are worth some trials.

While the halves will be technically shorter, an actual match would last a very similar amount of time to a game at the moment.

There is nothing more frustrating than fake injuries and other time wasting nonsense. This would go a fair way to eliminating that stain on the game.

[Lessingham Canary 108]

A sin bin is the thing i would like to see in football, the time wasting is what it is, and as long as the ref adds on as they have up to now is good enough.

[Yellow Wal 316]

It''s good to see America involved more in today''s football.

How long before we have a couple of quick adverts before the decision of the the video ref is announced?

How long before the already ridiculous number of substitutes becomes even bigger?

How long before the substitutes become ''roll on, roll off'' so that special teams can be on the pitch at any time (roll on, roll off already applies to all junior adult football in this county)?

How many players run on to the pitch before an American Football match when there are only 11 of them on the pitch? Would we start matches with ''teams'' of 30?

How long therefore would it be before the most wealthy clubs have a complete monopoly of the best players who the public would be deprived of seeing as they became bench warmers? (or has this already started?)

It seems sin bins are to be trialed in the Anglian Combination next season - good luck to the referees keeping check on that!

TIL has this 100% right - if it ain''t broke, don''t mend it!

[Yellow Wal 316]

The only rules I would like to see changed are to get the cheats out of the game.

Retrospective match bans for diving will be no good whatsoever if the ban is one, two or three matches. With the quality of the squads of the top clubs, how many of them would accept a three match ban for a player if it meant getting three points by cheating against another top rival? Most of them I would suggest.

To get rid of this out of the game bans must be up to ten matches. Perhaps the players and the clubs would then think twice!

The same applies to the relatively minor bans for serious foul play and two yellow cards. Increase the bans or more players will continue to ''take one for the team''!

As I said above ''If it ain''t broke don''t mend it''.

This has been broken for a long time and needs mending!

[CDMullins 502]

Thank Christ for that,

My absolute biggest annoyance.

The ball should be in play for 90 minutes.

No need for the referee to be involved, just need a time keeper

[Donkey dangler 0]

Lets have time outs, so that when the crowd is too quiet, Delia can come on the pitch and bawl:

Let''s be havin'' ya!

[Bill 1,788]

bring back the rule where a throw in had to mean the ball going behind the head, not briefly touching the foreheadand introduce something I used to do as a linesman (NW Norfolk when sub) point to where the ball went out and stay there until the player was readyany creeping forward would get flaggedhow many times do we see a player gain ten yards or more on a throw,if we can see it so can the lino and the ref

[First Wazzock 1,014]

There are so many things regarding time wasting that really make my blood boil - but the solution has always been with the referees. The idea of having to spray a line on the floor for free kicks is ludicrous, pace it out and use your man management skills - encroachment is a yellow card and a retake, simple. The amount of time that is wasted having to spray the line and then get the wall back is madness. Throw ins in the wrong place - why can''t the ref on his diagonal be in line with where the ball went out? More than a couple of yards beyond this is a foul throw and goes the other way. Goalkeepers retaining the ball - it''s up to the Ref to been an eye and give a free kick against blatant timewasting, and if necessary a yellow card. I think we should have the ball in play for a greater time - I don''t think the ball will ever be active for the full 90 minutes - because if we don''t it is cheating the fans. a lot of Refs do them selves no favours at all by allowing players to argue the toss with them which also eats up time - you have to ask yourself who''s in charge the Ref or some stroppy defender? Yellow cards soon stop all of that. As I said, the solution has always been with the Refs but so few actually implement it. There seems to be a complete lack of common sense, perhaps enforced by the powers that run the game, but sadly this is not what the fans want to see.

[Bill 1,788]

Maybe the ref should use his spray during arguments.Simply spray a white line in front of him and step back.Anyone coming over that line is yellow cardedhe can then decide to call both (or one0 of the captains overSimilarly ''grappling'' at corners.  Automatic yellow.

[Yellow Wal 316]

Most of the posts above relate to the implementation of the rules that are already in place, and I couldn''t agree more.

At the beginning of last season Mike Dean implemented some of these rules especially grappling in the box and gave a few penalties.

Almost at the same time his fellow referees ignored similar fouls, as they always seem to, and Dean was an outcast. In no time at all his ''mini revolution'' of implementing rules, that I believe the majority of supporters backed, had ended by peer pressure and we returned to the grappling in the box.

As was said above, most of it is down to the referees.

Another interesting (well it is to me!) point is when there is a melee how ''peace keepers'' rush in to break it up.

Have you noticed that they never seem to rush in and restrain their teammate but always grab an opponent.

If they really wanted to break it up they should restrain their own players. Perhaps bookings or worse it they laid hands on opponents would solve the problem.

[FenwayFrank 2,718]

If the current rules were implemented properly there wouldn''t be much of a problem

[Tumbleweed 106]

I agree with those who suggest that it is largely a failure to use existing mechanisms which needs to be rectified. How many times, for example, do we see blatant time wasting and then a 1 minute extra time board? Whoever is on the clock should just add it on more diligently.

The only two changes (one big one small) I think would help are:

-sin bins as a yellow isn''t much use and a red is very harsh (and sometimes favouring future opponents rather than the present), so putting a team down to 10 or even 9 for a time would in my view be very effective and works in rugby

-linesmen who run the entire touchline like they do in rugby and stand with the flag where the throw is. Easy to do and again works well in rugby

But football just really needs to get its house in order re the complaints and antagonism towards referees after decisions. Again the tools are there but refs seem afraid to take the tough decisions. A few reds for getting in their faces would do the trick.

[Woodman 92]

For me, the most frustrating element is time wasting. Its so annoying to watch teams blatantly do it and for ineffectual refs ignore it. Fulham last season was a prime example and the Boro game when Bamford and their keeper must have wasted 10 minutes during the game.

Plus, we''re not very good at it when its in our favour! Games like Newcastle away last season come to mind!

[Guest]

One of the beauties of football is that the rules are simple.

There aren''t too many and someone could understand them from watching a game.

Rugby has so many technical offences that they have to add time on by stopping the clock.

Apart from the referee not being responsible for timekeeping, I don''t see the need to complicate it.

[Europe_93 51]

If a player is injured, then he should be allowed to call a physio on to the pitch, and the physio should also be allowed to tend to the player if he sees fit (maybe within agreement of the 4th official). Treatment carried out on the pitch, but the game keeps rolling (player is safe, but no time wasted).

No need to stop the game to make a substitution, there is a fourth official.

I agree with the introduction of the sin bin too (do away with the yellow, let the team offended against gain the benefit).

I''d have a video replay for any red or sin bin.

My real pet hate is shielding the ball from an opposing player to let it run out of play. The rule should be ''you can only shield the ball you are in possession of, to be in possession you must have touched the ball. Otherwise it is obstruction!! i.e. you have no intent to play the ball, only the man.

[It's Character Forming 1,210]

I agree that simplicity is one of the great things about football.  But I think time-wasting is really annoying.  In the 21st century I think the clock should simply be stopped whenever the ball is out of play or play is stopped.  It''s normal that a 45 minute half only has about 30 minutes of real playing time, so why not recognise that.

 

If we had this, the team that wants to run down the clock no longer has any incentive to feign injury or put the ball out of play etc.  The only way to waste time would be to take the ball down by the corner flag (or keep possession just by passing it around) which already happens, but at least a team doing that is keeping the ball in play & it''s for the other team to get the ball off them, which is part of what football is all about.

 

The other time wasting tactic that annoys me is when the goalkeeper keeps hold of the ball too long.  Remember the Boro keeper receiving the ball with no one anywhere near and promptly falling over (at CR when they beat us 1-0 shortly before the end of the season when we beat them in the playoff final) ?  The time limit for how long a keeper can hold on to the ball should be strictly enforced and an indirect free kick given, which would make sure keepers get rid of the ball quickly !

 

None of this would make football any less simple, it would just cut out the feigning of injury or people strolling off slowly when they''re being substituted - the other side wouldn''t care because they''d know the clock had been stopped, so you''d no longer have ridiculous substitutions in injury time just to run some more time off.

 

My preference would be to have the clock displayed with another solely official responsible for stopping/starting it, so it''s not down to the whim of the ref.

[It's Character Forming 1,210]

Also I agree that football is begging to have a sin bin introduced.  A yellow is basically just a warning so fair enough but has no immediate effect, but the problem is that a red card, especially if given in the first half, is such a nuclear option that it totally changes the rest of the game.  A sin bin is a real punishment but doesn''t change the whole game, it''s up to the other side to take advantage.  A red card could be reserved for really extreme offences or presumably for repeated sin bin offences.

[Lessingham Canary 108]

It''s Character Forming wrote;

Also I agree that football is begging to have a sin bin introduced. A yellow is basically just a warning so fair enough but has no immediate effect, but the problem is that a red card, especially if given in the first half, is such a nuclear option that it totally changes the rest of the game. A sin bin is a real punishment but doesn''t change the whole game, it''s up to the other side to take advantage. A red card could be reserved for really extreme offences or presumably for repeated sin bin offences.

That gets my vote, yellow card offences should be, 2 x yellow is 10 minutes in the sin bin, 3 yellows =15 minutes and 4 x yellows is a red, a straight red should/ could still be allowed for dangerous or reckless tackles (studs showing, both feet off the ground etc) if a player is sent to the sin bin in the last 10 minutes of the match the time added on should be no less than time allocated to the man in the sin bin, could be interesting.

[The Bristol Nest 612]

Quite right. It works in rugby. Why support time wasting and subjective breaks for injuries? It''s time that football became as professional as it thinks it is.

[Donkey dangler 0]

[quote user="Jean Moulin"]bring back the rule where a throw in had to mean the ball going behind the head, not briefly touching the foreheadand introduce something I used to do as a linesman (NW Norfolk when sub) point to where the ball went out and stay there until the player was readyany creeping forward would get flaggedhow many times do we see a player gain ten yards or more on a throw,if we can see it so can the lino and the ref[/quote]

Good idea Jean, the linos need to be stricter with players

[Skip 3]

I run a team in a Vets over 35''s League, we have been asked by the county FA if we would trial a 10 min sin bin this coming season. we have agreed to it.

it''s basically classed as a yellow card option for a player being a knob, time wasting etc. rather than a poor tackle - hand ball. which will get an actual yellow card.

if something kicks off involving a lot of players reducing your team to less than 7. the ref can delay a players sin bin.

they have been using it in small sided games. apparently its worked really well.