If you change a rule in football, what would it be?

[The Great Drinkell 50]

The removal of an injured player to the touchline after they have been foulded. Where the advantage in that?

Any others? Please keep it to changes in the rules and not personel!

[DTT 0]

give a penalty for taking down the last man standing when he''s heading for goal, not sending off the offending player.

[Ramrod 258]

When an injured player has to leave the pitch the player who fouled him should have to go off and come on again too.

[Yellow Rages 0]

I have loads but this shoulder to shoulder thing where the first player to fall over gets a free kick.

I also don''t like the bizarre one where a player is competeing in the air for the ball and he steps backwards to be under the ball to head it. He is adjudged to have backed into his opponent. Rubbish, he couldn''t head the ball otherwise.

Also the one when the ball is going over the byline and the defender shields the ball and makes no attempt to play it.

Also the ball over the line thing. The ruling is that the WHOLE of the ball has to be over the line by we see the linesman flag all the time when it is only two thirds over.

I could go on.

[Canary Boy 0]

Yeah, I got a great one.

How about not being able to gazump another Football Club when a player has already signed for you!

Anyone agree?

[YankeeCanary 0]

I would immediately reverse the rule that a linesman has to delay calling offside until the offending player causes the call to be activated. I understand the good intentions behind such rules but, even at this early stage of the season, it is clear this rule causes more issues than it solves. Even before the delay factor was implemented it was tough enough for a lineman to get the offside call right 100% of the time. In my view, when a call is made in error it is frequently when a linesman flags offside even though the player was not in an offside position when the ball was played forward. This delay factor by the officials appears to exacerbate that particular problem by creating an even greater space between the forward and the last defender, giving the impression to the linesman that it has to be offside, thereby increasing the number of times a mistake is made. Additionally, it creates added frustration to both the players and the fans because the delay factor tends to give the impression that the linesman is not decisive on his call.

[slackey 0]

scrap the transfer window.

[Huddy 0]

[quote user="The Great Drinkell"]

The removal of an injured player to the touchline after they have been foulded. Where the advantage in that?

!

[/quote]

Spot on

Its a joke!

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

Offside would only be in the eighteen yard box.

[chicken 0]

[quote user="Yellow Rages"]

I have loads but this shoulder to shoulder thing where the first player to fall over gets a free kick.

I also don''t like the bizarre one where a player is competeing in the air for the ball and he steps backwards to be under the ball to head it. He is adjudged to have backed into his opponent. Rubbish, he couldn''t head the ball otherwise.

Also the one when the ball is going over the byline and the defender shields the ball and makes no attempt to play it.

Also the ball over the line thing. The ruling is that the WHOLE of the ball has to be over the line by we see the linesman flag all the time when it is only two thirds over.

I could go on.

[/quote]I would go with these - I would also add that the one people go on about when it comes to going off the pitch - the idea is that so those little darlings who dive or feign injury don''t hold up play for longer than is nessisary. As for the fouling player to come off as well - that leads onto my idea:Introduce the sin bin. The referee is able to hand out 2min and 5min "bins" to players. A yellow card is automatically 10mins. If a player totals up 10mins a yellow card is given. This means that if they are on one yellow card they still have to watch what they are doing.With the injury thing you could say that the offending player is binned for as long as the other player remains off the pitch or untill he is subbed? These minutes would not count towards the total unless he was given a token 2 min "binning". ie Hux is taken down by say Steve Stone, Huckerby goes off the pitch to recieve treatment, Stone is given a two minute binning although it takes four minutes for Huckerby to recover and come back onto the pitch which is the length of time Stone serves although it counts as the sanctioned 2.In my opinion this would help the referee deal with the situation where a player keeps fouling but not badly enough to deserve a yellow card out-right. Niggling tackles and that sort of thing along with foul language and a Rooney esque tantrum.Possibly also introduce rugby style "blood" replacements. Ie a player comes off injured as above and is removed from the field of play another player is able to come on and take his place on a temperary basis untill either the other player is ready to come back on or the switch is made permanent. Would allow the play to be more flowing and also give the downed players team no dissadvantage for him recieving treatment for someone raking their boots down his calf.

[Scot-e-dog 34]

I like this question.

For me it''s got to be getting rid of obstructing a player when trying to reach the ball without making any attempt to play it.

According to a referee mate of mine, strictlly speaking it''s still

against the rules, but is now regarded as "shielding" if you are facing

your own goal line.

I have recently watched the 1966 world cup final again and you can see

a huge difference when this rule is applied properly.  Defenders

have much less time and have to play the ball.  It means that it

gets hoofed into the stands a lot, placing the advantage back with the

attackers.

Turning this around a little, the best "new" rule is getting rid of

back passes to the keeper.  This has had a huge positive impact in

a similar vein to that described above.

Other ideas are:

1) Introduce a rugby style sin bin for the first yellow card

2) Compulsory 5 minimum mins off the field for any injury requiring attention from the physio

3) All top level games should be reviewed on video post match and

yellow and red cards given and taken, especially for play acting.

4) All clubs that play in yellow and green should have a two goal head start (if that doesn''t work, we could try 3!!)

[Peter Grants Auld Man 0]

Only happens in Scottish Premier League games, but the rule where Rangers are awarded dodgy goals, contentious penalties or quesationable free-kicks on the edge of the penalty box in the last 10 minutes of 0-0 games - that rule has to go I''m afraid.

It''s ruining the game north of the border (as if it needs ruined any more).

[still holding out for new heroes 0]

shepherding he ball out of play should be classed as obstruction

[Cantiaci Canary 556]

Booking players for taking their shirts off after scoring.

Okay players shouldn''t do it in front of opposition supporters but sometimes I think the authorities WANT to take away the joy of playing football and scoring goals. I also hate seeing linesmen and refs shepherding players back to the re-take seconds after scoring goals.

OTBC

[Rossi 0]

football is now a family game so to help those of both genders (ahem) no offside at all.

[AP16 0]

Players leaving the field, AFTER they have received treatment is utter tripe, what does that achieve!?

Diving should be punished more harshly, if a player was sent off every time he blatently dived, that''d bloody stop him!

If a team has posession after a foul has been committed, providing the player committing the foul does not need to be cautioned, the game should carry on regardless of anything else. It drives me insane when say, Etuhu is fouled, the ball rolls to Safri and we can carry on, and the ref blows up. Does my head in! I know some refs do this, but it should be compulsory, It would allow the game to flow loads more, and reduce the power of refs to ruin games. Just to make my example clearer, if on the other hand, Etuhu was fouled, and an opposition player picks the ball up, the ref should then blow up.

 

[Saint Canary 0]

I would change the offside rule back to how it was, none of this "inactive" or "interfering with play" nonsense.  I don''t see how a player in or around the opposition box cannot be affecting play, even if they don''t touch the ball.  Someone must have an eye on them or at least be aware they are there.  Even if a defender is not marking a player in such a position it can influence his movement and stop him preventing a goal. 

In fact I don''t see how you can be anywhere on the pitch without affecting the game - unless you have "Francis" on your back and you are playing away at Fulham.

[Carrow89 0]

Unfortunately most of the excellent responses to the idiocy of the game will not be implemented as the game is now being sold more and more to TV audiences.

My understanding of the so called ''work rate'' ethos being promoted is that players are having to play far far more than ever before.

The worst of this is the stupidity of having another ball thrown straight back the moment a ball goes out for a throw. I know it may discourage players from launching the ball as far as they can to waste time but it could easily be remedied.

Simply have the referee signal that time has been stopped when it appears time wasting is taking place.

And if we are to have the nonsense of announced time added on then lets have it applied to as in normal time. At the moment you can have four minutes added on, yet any time wasted in that four minutes is rarely added on.

[Harleston Canary 0]

No real change - how about actually enforcing the foul throw rule.  It''s more strictly followed in Sunday league than any top-level game.

[7rew 0]

[quote user="Safri15"]

Diving should be punished more harshly, if a player was sent off every time he blatently dived, that''d bloody stop him!

[/quote]Repeated Diving should be punished by:2 attempts to get a penalty  - penalty to opposition.4 attempts to get a free kick - free kick (to opposition) from the point at the other end that is equivalent to the most advanced position of the dives.1 for penalty + 2 for free kicks - free kick (to opposition) from the point at the other end that is equivalent to the most advanced position of the dives for free kicks.Each dive after these would be punished by a penalty/free kick to the opposition in the same way.The delay - not first offence - would be for if people genuinely trip up, but not repeatedly.50-50 situations could be left out at the refs discression.Also if conditions are poor i.e. heavy rain, the barriers could be raised to reflect the increase difficulty of staying upright.This would stop divers trying for penalties especially as thier defenders beat 10 kinds of crap out of them for giving away multiple penalties in a match.

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]At the moment you can have four minutes added on, yet any time wasted in that four minutes is rarely added on.[/quote]

I agree that this is one of my biggest problems with football.  As you say if four minutes is added for time wasting, teams just do the same for that four minutes.  The opposition does not get that four minutes back it is simply "wasted" again.

Also agree with the foul throw, it annoys me that the "best" referee''s hardly ever seem to pick it up yet a ref for a pub match will spot it.  One ref blew for a foul throw in the World Cup and the commentator stated that he was being “pernickety”!!

Another one that gets on my nerves is all the pulling and grabbing in the penalty box during free-kicks and corners – the players should get a room if they want to paw each other.  Also, how can it not be obstruction if the opposition striker stands right in front of the goalie and blocks him during set pieces?

 

[Carrow89 0]

With the foul throw I would like to see much more done to make the person taking the throw take it from the spot the ball went out not fifteen yards further down the line.

It is usually done by a small run up, followed by a few shuffles then a throw.

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]With the foul throw I would like to see much more done to make the person taking the throw take it from the spot the ball went out not fifteen yards further down the line. It is usually done by a small run up, followed by a few shuffles then a throw.[/quote]

It is kind of like watching Fred Astaire take them!

[Carrow89 0]

I would have the linesman peg a little stake into the ground the tie the thrown in player to that to ensure he doesn''t encroach.

It would have to be a he as women''s football is too silly to be termed a sport.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,398]

Straight from rugby- if you argue with the referee you lose ten yards.

During Season One it would seem silly- loads of penalties would happen as the girls got whinging out of theuir system

thereafter it would sort out all the bad attitude and teach players discipline.

 

[Herb 0]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]It would have to be a he as women''s football is too silly to be termed a sport.[/quote]There speaks a man who''s obviously never watched more than 5 minutes of women''s football.

[Herb 0]

[quote user="vicar in green and yellow"]

Straight from rugby- if you argue with the referee you lose ten yards.

[/quote]That was trialed in at least some levels of league football a couple of years back if I remember correctly, why it wasn''t adopted is anyone''s guess.Maybe the Refs weren''t up for the abuse they''d inevitably endure (but only for the first season or two, as you rightly point out)Welcome back to the forums by the way, where were you when "peace and goodwill to your fellow man/fan" went out the window in the summer? ;)

[Dean Coneys boots 1,398]

watching in the wings...and rather too bored by all the negative drivel to contribute.

I think a lot of people would enjoy NCFC a lot more if they gave thanks for the good things we do have rather than just moan about the bad things and things they wish we had.

But thats just my humble opinion Personally I thin the club is in a far better position than it has been since we dropped from the Prem first time- and that is good news.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Ralph Wright"]I would have the linesman peg a little stake into the ground the tie the thrown in player to that to ensure he doesn''t encroach. It would have to be a he as women''s football is too silly to be termed a sport.[/quote]

I knew a female footballer once who was better then half the male footballers i have seen. Where i used to live this girl played for a local womens side, we had a lad who was on the books of City at some level and she could skin him repeatedly. she could also get the ball and keep it.. for hours.. because no oen could get anywhere near it.

 im willing to bet there are some women footballers who could make our current 1st team look foolish

jas :)

[salp 0]

adding extra minutes for pointless reasons, sometimes changes the result

having to wait for the ref to whistle at freekicks, which gives the defence the advantage...why?

oh, and ''assistant referees'' - they were and always will be ''linesmen''

and...if we have to have a 4th official, then let him have tv evidence