What rules would you change !

[missing in action? 0]

5% of each teams value in the premiership  eg.( chelsea worth 1bn, 5% is 50m) should be taken from them and split between the lower 72 league teams....subsidies could keep teams like luton going.

[7rew 0]

I would incorperate several features from rugby and a major change.1. timing - instead of adding time at the end of each half the clock will stop when the whistle blows/goal is scored and restart at the next whistle/kick off.2. only the captain may approach the referee.  The referee will be miked and addressed as SIR.A very radical change - an orange card which includes a 5 minute sin bin.So then 2 Yellow = 1 orange. 3 Yellow = 1 Red.fouls can then be dealt with in a more finessed manner.Matches will not be abandoned for having less than 7 players due to orange cards.Crowding the referee would be an orange card for all but the captain - reducing some teams to about 4 men for 5 minutes repeatedly.

[Buncey 1]

1. A continous clock that stops when the ball is not in play and starts again when it is.2. You are not allowed to waste time by shielding the ball in the corner (i.e. within 5 yards of the corner flag). An automatic free-kick is given for doing so and corners must travel at least 10 yards and if any player from you team enters within that 10 yards an opposition player is no longer restricted to being 10 yards from the ball.

[Cheerio 0]

[quote user="USA Canary"]

I would like to see a rule change when a defender can shield an attacking player from the ball as ir runs out for a goal kick.  IMO this is obstruction as in almost every case the defender is not making any attempt to play the ball. 

If this happened in the middle of the pitch the referee would blow for a foul almost everytime.  I think if defenders were forced to play the ball in those situations it would make for a more exciting attacking game...

What do you all think???

[/quote]Completely disagree. Its ingrained in all FA coaching schools that you can stand your ground shielding the ball, arms out, legs out, whatever. if the oppo pushes you to get to the ball its a foul. I think its an excellent rule. Obstruction is when the defender moves into the path of the oppo player, once there however, he has every right to stand his ground. I''d bring in 3 points for away win - two for home plus a bonus point for aggregate scoreI''d make it a red card offense for any player other than the team captain to speak to the referee. No exceptions.Offside is offside. Sod all this ''interfering with play'' nonsense.Lastly if a player goes down allow the trainer to come on whilst the game is in progress. Good bye tome wasting.

Good thread by the way

[Canary Pirate 0]

[quote user="djc"]

To keep playing until Norwich have taken the lead, then the match ends.

 

[/quote]

Good grief, how long do you want the game to last for ! [;)]

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="Attack Barclay 2nd Half FFS"]Offside is offside. Sod all this ''interfering with play'' nonsense.[/quote]

Problem is that involves a modicum of common sense...

[Canary Pirate 0]

[quote user="rct2mad"][quote user="Canary Pirate"]

In a recent M.O.T.D. commentary following a foul on Solano in the penalty area John Motson said " well he''s not going to get a penalty from an innocuous challenge like that in that part of the area ". WHY ? if it was a foul and if it''s in the penalty area it doesn''t matter WHICH part its in, it should be a penalty kick ( else they might as well reduce the size of the penalty area ).

With this in mind I wondered what rules you would change to improve the game, here are a few of mine ;

1) Goalkeeper must not hold on to the ball for longer than six seconds. Unless they apply the rule, drop it, David Marshall always takes at least 10 seconds before he gets rid.

2) Don''t give the goalkeeper a free kick every time he comes into contact with an opponent, he can use his arms for gawdes sake !

3) Offside rule, well you can''t change that can you, its been changed too many times already and now nobody understands it ( so, at least whatever your opinion WE ARE ALL RIGHT ! ).

Over to you !

[/quote]

1) This is already a rule and SHOULD be enforced (well at least its in my Refereeing course booklet)
2) Hmm, I guess this would depend on the scenario
3) Maybe the FA website would have more on the proper Offside rule (by the way, as a junior referee it is VERY, VERY hard to get EVERY single decision right, so maybe the public should lay off our backs. Nothing will stop me becoming an International Referee and I can shrug off critisicm, but others arent so determined.)
[/quote]

1) Thats what I was getting at. Its a rule so why the heck don''t we enforce it !

2) Hmm, I guess you are right.

3) I''m with you mate, I have every sympathy with referees and the offside rule, I don''t envy you one bit. You ask 10 supporters to explain it to you and you''ll get 10 different versions. Its simple really, if you are a supporter in the Norwich & Peterborough stand and Hucks is caught offside at the barclay end, then he was ONSIDE ! - So what chance have you got of being right ! [;)]

[Cheerio 0]

[quote user="Bobert"]

Well being as one of the excitments of the game is goal scoring I would make the goal mouth wider.

[/quote]Yankee go home

[Badger Pie 0]

Instead of standard extra time, I''d like to see a scenario whereby a player from each team is withdrawn after every 5 minutes if a goal isn''t scored. This then repeats until the first team scores. Imagine the excitement if it gets down to 5-a-side!

 

Alternatively, instead of penalties being taken at the end of extra time, I''d have them at the beginning. Although it would create different mindsets for both teams, I think it would help to maintain a competitive edge, rather than both teams settling for the ''lottery'' of the shoot-out.

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]Instead of standard extra time, I''d like to see a scenario whereby a

player from each team is withdrawn after every 5 minutes if a goal

isn''t scored. This then repeats until the first team scores. Imagine

the excitement if it gets down to 5-a-side![/quote]Even better, give the subs paintball guns and get them to take up sniper positions around the ground !  Then each player from the opposing team gets withdrawn when they get hit !  It''s a sure-fire way of making sure that Preston get value for money from Chris Brown !

[Ginja 26]

[quote user="7rew"]I would incorperate several features from rugby and a major change.1. timing - instead of adding time at the end of each half the clock will stop when the whistle blows/goal is scored and restart at the next whistle/kick off.2. only the captain may approach the referee.  The referee will be miked and addressed as SIR.A very radical change - an orange card which includes a 5 minute sin bin.So then 2 Yellow = 1 orange. 3 Yellow = 1 Red.fouls can then be dealt with in a more finessed manner.Matches will not be abandoned for having less than 7 players due to orange cards.Crowding the referee would be an orange card for all but the captain - reducing some teams to about 4 men for 5 minutes repeatedly.[/quote]Completely agree 7rew, I very much like the idea of a sin bin and think it would be an excellent addition. There are some dangerous tackles where you think, well a red may be too harsh, but a yellow too soft, thus the sin bin for 5 mins would provide an excellent intermediate punishment. However the idea of an orange card I think is unnecessary, if the ref wants to send a player to the sin bin, it should be at his discrestion.I also totally agree that players are getting to big for there boots, they need a good kick up the arse and the FA needs to back the refs by having a no tolerance policy on any form of abuse or back chat to the referee.

I''d like to point one more thing out to people, there is NO such thing as obstruction in the Refereeing laws.

[Shack Attack 0]

A red card and a five match ban for anybody who celebrates a goal by rocking an imaginary baby along with his team mates.

[Green and Yellow 0]

Immediate red card for any play that argues with a referee''s decision relating to an incident involving another player.

[Big Down Under 0]

I don''t think we need wholesale changes! The offside rule hasn''t in essence changed, FIFA just changed the way it was explained. I can''t believe it when commentators don''t understand the offside rule, what are they paid for? ''Interfering with play'' or not is part of football folklore, I don''t want to see it changed at all. Maybe stopping the constant replays that pile pressure on the refs...Wouldn''t need a rule change, just an edict enforcing, but (and as others have said);1. less protection for goalies, why shouldn''t they be challenged in the air? They get it too easy2. Enforcing rules about time wasting and obstruction (as in defenders shepherding the ball out)I would add;1. Ability to use video evidence after the game to stop people cheating. If they are shown to have dived, give them a yellow or red card, ban and a fine after the event. This cheating is a real blight on a game2. More protection for the ref. Once again more red cards for people swearing at the ref, arguing with the ref etc. Also as in Rugby, go back ten yards.3. I would try and add rules about locally trained players quotas for each teams matchday squad. If I could turn back time, I would have stopped the Premiership breakaway, kept and enforced the rules stopping directors of football clubs profiting financially from the game, and ensured a fairer distribution of money throughout the leagues was continued.Bigger goals? Ban offside? 4 quarters? Shame on you ;-)

[The 4th Official 0]

[quote user="UEA Canary"]
I''d like to point one more thing out to people, there is NO such thing as obstruction in the Refereeing laws.
[/quote]

The word "obstruction" doesn''t appear, but "impeding the progress of an opponent" does:

"Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.

All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept in playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent."

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/laws_of_the_game_0708_10565.pdf 

 

[Ginja 26]

[quote user="The 4th Official"]

[quote user="UEA Canary"]I''d like to point one more thing out to people, there is NO such thing as obstruction in the Refereeing laws.[/quote]

The word "obstruction" doesn''t appear, but "impeding the progress of an opponent" does:

"Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.

All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept in playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent."

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/laws_of_the_game_0708_10565.pdf 

[/quote]Could you reference the page of where you are quoting that from as I could not find it.Obstruction is not used in refereeing terms because it is considered as a tackle to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the player before touching the player

[The 4th Official 0]

[quote user="UEA Canary"][quote user="The 4th Official"]

[quote user="UEA Canary"]
I''d like to point one more thing out to people, there is NO such thing as obstruction in the Refereeing laws.
[/quote]

The word "obstruction" doesn''t appear, but "impeding the progress of an opponent" does:

"Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.

All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept in playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent."

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/laws_of_the_game_0708_10565.pdf 

[/quote]

Could you reference the page of where you are quoting that from as I could not find it.

Obstruction is not used in refereeing terms because it is considered as a tackle to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the player before touching the player
[/quote]

Page 115.

[Hairy Canary 699]

I''d like to see changes brought in to make things fairer across the game rather than all the power and money residing with the top clubs. Therefore only the champions to play in the champions league, gate receipts split equaly between home and away teams, only two substitutes on the bench per team.

As far as the game goes I''d like automatic yellow cards for diving, off field timekeeping, and penalties only given for denying a goalscoring oportunity. It can''t be right that a virtual goal is given for an piddley foul just because it happens to be in the area - the punishment is too harsh for the offence. 

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Hairy Canary"]

I''d like to see changes brought in to make things fairer across the game rather than all the power and money residing with the top clubs. Therefore only the champions to play in the champions league, gate receipts split equaly between home and away teams, only two substitutes on the bench per team.

As far as the game goes I''d like automatic yellow cards for diving, off field timekeeping, and penalties only given for denying a goalscoring oportunity. It can''t be right that a virtual goal is given for an piddley foul just because it happens to be in the area - the punishment is too harsh for the offence. 

[/quote]

with penalties it all depends.. theres always the chance the goalkeeper will save it... in some situations its actually penalising a team by giving them a penalty.. Imagine going up against a Crossley, Seaman or Schemeinchel who all had impeccable records at stopping from the spot...

jas :)

[One Flew Over... 33]

[quote user="Hairy Canary"]

I''d like to see changes brought in to make things fairer across the game rather than all the power and money residing with the top clubs. Therefore only the champions to play in the champions league, gate receipts split equaly between home and away teams, only two substitutes on the bench per team.

As far as the game goes I''d like automatic yellow cards for diving, off field timekeeping, and penalties only given for denying a goalscoring oportunity. It can''t be right that a virtual goal is given for an piddley foul just because it happens to be in the area - the punishment is too harsh for the offence. 

[/quote]

Are you seriously suggesting that a club like Norwich that has attracted a large supported base, built good facilities, created community links etc. etc. should give away half its gate receipts to clubs that can only attract a few thousand? 99% of home supporters are there to see Norwich.

2 subs? Does this include a goalkeeper? Would make for a more boring game with fewer changes. Most clubs in the same league have similar sized squads. 3 outfield changes sounds about right to me.

Off field time keeping - yes. But I guess the referee still has to decide at what point to end the game.

Agree also on penalties. Thats probably why refs seem to ignore minor infractions in the box. What happened to indirect free kicks in the box? That was all the rage in the late 90s - not seen one in years.

[7rew 0]

I would also like to see a maximum squad size for the premier league.  I would set this at 20 outfield players with goalkeepers exempted. The 16 would have to be selected from this every week.  Players could be called up to this from within the club but would have to stay in/out of this squad for a month.  I think this would make it easier for lower league clubs to get loans.

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

Offside. Firstly go back to the original interpretation, so that anyone is deemed to be interfering with play unless they’re lying by the corner flag with two broken legs.

Secondly, change the rule from two defenders to one outfielder. The rule was formulated when goalkeepers stayed in their penalty areas and it was assumed they would always be the last man. Now they act as sweepers and go outside the box and even go up for corners, but if they do that and there is only one defender back then a counter-attack by the opposition can unfairly be caught offside.

This happened at Carrow Road some years ago when we were 1-0 up against Crystal Palace going into added time. Palace got a corner and Nigel Martyn – that should date it roughly – went up for it, leaving one defender back. The ball got headed away (we obviously could defend set pieces in those day) and two Norwich players – possibly Akinbiyi and Forbes – raced into the Palace half, drew the defender, and one of them put the ball into an empty net. Cue celebrations. Until someone realised the linesman had his flag up for offside. And he was right. With Martyn still puffing his way back over the half-way line it was offside, so the foray upfield – perhaps cunningly deliberately – had a kind of failsafe mechanism built into it.

As it happens none of this mattered, as we still won, but there might be times when such an event would change the result. The year we got to the play-offs we were 1-0 up at home to Burnley when the Burnley keeper rushed out to the edge of the area to make a save, but couldn’t hold on to the ball. It got played back into the six-yard box and Roberts forced it home, past the one defender on the goal-line. One Burnley player turned to the linesman, appealing for offside, which Roberts was, even with the defender between him and the goal, because the goalie was further out. In this case the goal stood and we won 2-1. And which team did we beat, by the narrowest possible margin, to the sixth play-off spot that season?

[O.T.B.C 0]

No team can score more than Norwich, every other Saturday in the winter time, the rule shall be changed for June and July, when the rule would be changed to, teams can only ever score the same as Norwich.

Well, when I''m the king of the world, that will be changed and guess what rule I would enforce on Ipswich?????????????????

 

ooooooaaaaaaarrrrrr (In the style of a leader of the world laughing in the 60''s)

 

I''ll take my tablets now.