Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Football] 'One-shot' penalties and deliberate handball.



Guinness Boy

Guinness Boy

Tofu eating wokerati
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Jul 23, 2003
34,119
Up and Coming Sunny Portslade
Titanic said:
Closer subs - Substitutes would walk off nearest touchline rather than to technical area

I can see problems with players in full playing kit wandering around the outside of the pitch... not sure this is a good idea.
Click to expand...

Yep. I run the line at my son's game most weekend. My ABSOLUTE pet peeve is subs, or recently subbed players walking up and down the touchine without their bib or rainjacket. It makes offside much harder to judge. Admittedly PL assistant refs will have better eyesight and training than me and a pro is unlikely to stand still picking their nose while they try and remember where they left their water, but nonetheless it could cause issues. Injuries are slightly different as the injured player is normally accompanied.
 




El Presidente

El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,705
Pattknull med Haksprut
A player who takes the ball and shields it near the corner flag to waste time near the end of the match can be kicked in the bollocks without it being a foul.
 


rogersix

rogersix

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2014
7,902
Titanic said:
One-shot' penalties - the ball is 'dead' if it is saved or hits the post from a penalty

Stops the stupid pushing and shoving on the edge of the box, and encroachment (which they never penalise anyway). but doesn't prevent the ridiculous delaying tactics, arguing with the ref, standing over the penalty spot, etc... which is the thing that really riles me.

Closer subs - Substitutes would walk off nearest touchline rather than to technical area

I can see problems with players in full playing kit wandering around the outside of the pitch... not sure this is a good idea.
Click to expand...

physio could carry a sub's tabard in his kit?
 


Guinness Boy

Guinness Boy

Tofu eating wokerati
Helpful Moderator
NSC Patron
Jul 23, 2003
34,119
Up and Coming Sunny Portslade
Of the others I would also ban subs in injury time, totally and utterly pointless except to waste time. Nothing wrong with the current handball rules except that refs do not all apply it in the same way. Consistency is what is needed here. "Single shot" pens? No thanks. The ball should be live if it comes back in to play. How are you going to restart if the ball is saved and palmed straight back to the taker? Anyway, to enforce this doesn't the biggest, hardest player on the defending team just have to say "no rebounds" as soon as it's given? :shrug:
 


Guy Fawkes

Guy Fawkes

The voice of treason
Sep 29, 2007
8,197
What i would like to see is something brought in to stop players diving after minimal contact such as, if the ref thinks a player falls over far too easily, then there is no foul and the player falling over is booked (meaning players have to try to stay on their feet, rather than the "he's entitled to go down there" approach we currently have.)

It would stop a lot of the gamesmanship by teams trying to stop or slow down the opposition by falling over at every opportunity, looking to be able to re-organsise and stop the other team from breaking away quickly and counter the culture of diving in or around the penalty area, looking to get players booked as well as a free kick. (some teams are very good at stopping teams from countering by these means, especially teams like Man City, who play a high line and try to ensure they don't get hit on the counter, and often get possession back from decisions which are basically 50/50 challenges that both players are entitled to go for)

The rules were changed years ago to protect skillful players from being kicked out of the game by the opposition, but instead of leading to fans being able to watch these skillful players doing their stuff, they instead dive at every opportunity meaning that the fans still don't get to see the skillful players demonstrating their skill
 






maltaseagull

maltaseagull

Well-known member
Feb 25, 2009
12,990
Zabbar- Malta
Any player rolling on the ground clutching his face and checking for bleeding when there is no contact to the face should be forced to train with a rugby team for a week.
(Video review of incidents post match)
 


Guy Fawkes

Guy Fawkes

The voice of treason
Sep 29, 2007
8,197
BBassic said:
Good point.

How about faster subs? Once your number is up on the board you've got 10 seconds to get to the touchline. Instant booking for not getting there in time. Absolutely no reason, unless coming off injured, that a player who's been pelting around a pitch for 70 minutes suddenly cannot run.
Click to expand...

At which point they will act like they have tweaked a muscle and limp off, (ie the sub is being made because of this tweak, rather than necessarily tactical) making it a pointless rule that would be hard to enforce
 






Spiros

Spiros

Well-known member
Jul 9, 2003
2,361
Too far from the sun
What annoys me these days is where players losing the ball are suddenly 'injured' when the opposition have the ball and stay down in the hope that they will kick it out or the ref blows up to stop play. When that happens they then make a miraculous recovery, Drogba was particularly fond of doing this. Instead why not allow a neutral doctor on to the pitch to assess any 'injured' player while play continues (injuries don't stop rugby games for example) only stopping play if the doctor tells the ref to do so. Ref retains the ability to stop play immediately if the injury is obviously real and severe.

Also when a goal is scored allow the team that has conceded to kick off as soon as they are ready regardless of where the opposition are. Should stop some of the more nauseating long-winded goal celebrations
 


rogersix

rogersix

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2014
7,902
defenders "obstructing" an attacker to allow the ball to leave the field,
thus denying us a bit of goalmouth action,
book'em danno!
 




Deadly Danson

Deadly Danson

Well-known member
Oct 22, 2003
3,989
Brighton
Spiros said:
What annoys me these days is where players losing the ball are suddenly 'injured' when the opposition have the ball and stay down in the hope that they will kick it out or the ref blows up to stop play. When that happens they then make a miraculous recovery, Drogba was particularly fond of doing this. Instead why not allow a neutral doctor on to the pitch to assess any 'injured' player while play continues (injuries don't stop rugby games for example) only stopping play if the doctor tells the ref to do so. Ref retains the ability to stop play immediately if the injury is obviously real and severe.
Click to expand...

Was just about to write the same thing and have said this for years. If a player goes down "injured" the game doesn't stop but a trainer (or better still your idea of a neutral doctor) comes on and treats the player whilst the game goes on. And any player seen to be holding their head when they blatantly have an injury elsewhere is banned for 3 games.

And definitely a separate timekeeper in the stands as refs seem completely incapable of timekeeping properly which is their simplest job. Then a player can take as long as he likes to get off the pitch - the exact time taken for the substitution will be added regardless.
 


lawros left foot

lawros left foot

Glory hunting since 1969
Jun 11, 2011
13,716
Worthing
If a team is deemed to be time wasting on throw ins, goalkicks, free kicks etc, the opposing team is automatically given a corner, and the time wasting player is sent off the field of play till after the corner is taken. Or, an independent time keeper, who just adds on time for any time wasting.
 


L

loz

Well-known member
Apr 27, 2009
2,239
W.Sussex
El Presidente said:
A player who takes the ball and shields it near the corner flag to waste time near the end of the match can be kicked in the bollocks without it being a foul.
Click to expand...

I am sure the rule is you can shield the ball if it’s in playing distance , sometimes when defenders run the ball out the ball
Is 10 feet in front of them. This surly should be obstruction?? Drives me mad !
 






drew

drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,048
Burgess Hill
loz said:
I am sure the rule is you can shield the ball if it’s in playing distance , sometimes when defenders run the ball out the ball
Is 10 feet in front of them. This surly should be obstruction?? Drives me mad !
Click to expand...

You're correct, the ball must be within playing distance. That said, if a forward is in the corner then it should only take two defenders to get the ball off him!

As for the other changes, surely the problem is the referees don't apply the rules. Scuffing up of the penalty spot would stop as soon as refs book the first player that does it or the first players that jostle them. Nothing wrong with the handball rules as they are, just need to be applied consistently.

Don't agree with the spot kick change, again nothing wrong with the rules just that refs need to apply them, especially in respect of encroachment. If the ball was dead after the spot kick then Watford might not be in the Premier league now!
 


Sheebo

Sheebo

Well-known member
Jul 13, 2003
29,287
Agree with them. It irks me how much time is often wasted during stoppage time. Often well over 50%.

I will forever bang the drum about people not getting the whole ball whole line rule either (from a straight along the line view). I’d guess 80% of close throw ins or corners/goal kicks given are wrong and the whole ball hasn’t crossed the whole line. Also the Birdseye view of a ball overlapping any part of the corner quadrant is fine yet still fans wrongly shout and also refs get players to move a perfectly leagal ball.
 


Acker79

Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,854
Brighton
AmexRuislip said:
One-shot' penalties - the ball is 'dead' if it is saved or hits the post from a penalty
Click to expand...

No. Not even sure how anyone could come up with that as an idea. What are you supposed to do, just stop? The game is still going on! The penalty is taken and the ball is now in play. Why stop everyone from touching it? Take the penalty kick out of the equation - if they introduced a law that said once you've taken a shot, that's it. No one is allowed to touch it, either it's a goal, or you have to run back to the halfway line and let the keeper have the ball we'd all think that was ridiculous. It is essentially the same thing. That is an utterly stupid rule change. Is it added to make all the others seem more sensible?

Handball - Players will be penalised for arm or hand movement towards the ball
Click to expand...

The handball law needs to change, but this is too simplistic. As others have pointed out, it's leaves far too many 'what about when...' examples that would be, but absolutely should not be, handball. The law needs to account for the benefit gained by unintentional handballs, but also still allow for accidental contact, and attempts by players to force handball.

Limited subs - Managers only able to make limited amount of changes, or none, in injury-time
Click to expand...

Eh. Yeah, it would just lead to a rush of subs in the 89th minute, but it would still result in uninterrupted 3-5 minutes of injury time. In theory. In practice, footballers will always find a way to waste time.

Closer subs - Substitutes would walk off nearest touchline rather than to technical area
Click to expand...

Again, in theory sounds fine. But in practice, people will walk slower, and some will still chance it, stand closer to the far touchline, when the number comes up start walking across the pitch,, keep walking ignoring the ref's whistle, until he is halfway across, then take a bit of time to apologise, he forgot, and argue he might as well keep going now anyway.

loz said:
Law 1 covers this..A player who makes unauthorised marks on the field of play must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour. If the referee notices this being done during the match, the player is cautioned when the ball next goes out of play.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you're focusing on the main complaint. It's more about the goalkeeper time-wasting by going to the opposite end and then wasting more time with the amateur excavation. I also think most refs don't view what goalkeepers are doing as marking the pitch, because it's about creating a divot of sorts to act as a ball holder as a practicality, rather than an attempt to mark that acts as some sort of indication, so even if you highlight that rule with refs, it's not going to be applied in the circumstance you're responding to here.

dazzer6666 said:
After the penalty is given, keeper has 10 seconds to get in position - second whistle after those 10 seconds and striker can take the kick, with a max of a further 20 seconds. Anyone else in the box after the first 10 seconds is carded.
Click to expand...

What if the defending team "inadvertently" kick the ball away? ("I didn't hear the whistle! I was already preparing to clear the ball before I realised you'd given the penalty, it's not my fault the fans are holding on to the ball!")
Would there also not be a risk you're disadvantaging the penalty takers by rushing them?


I think my preferred rule changes have been suggested - stronger punishment for diving (to include going down easily after contact), and a culture that supports this (initially from commentators/pundits/journalists - this would then feed through to more fans - obviously there will always be team-tinted glass wearing fans). Not allowing players to take the ball into the corner and run the clock down. Deliberately fouling an opponent 'taking one for the team' should be punished more strongly.
 




bluenitsuj

bluenitsuj

Listen to me!!!
Feb 26, 2011
4,352
Willingdon
When a player has received medical help and has to go off the pitch for a couple of minutes the player who commited the foul/tackle should go off too. Unfair advantage at the moment
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here