Changes to the Current Football Rules

[Albion 4ever]

Physio allowed on the pitch during play to treat injured players. Would not have to stop the game unless it was the goalkeeper, or for a serious injury to allow a stretcher on.

Happens in rugby all of the time and never seen a physio get caught up with play.

 

[Easy 10]

When awarded a free kick, I would make it non-compulsary for a player to pass or shoot. In other words, if he chooses to, he can just start running with the ball.

No downsides. Lots of upsides. Keeps the game flowing, and could turn out to be a PROPER advantage to the fouled team if its taken quickly. There'd be no time to argue the toss with the referee over the decision when you need to be getting back into position in case KAZENGA decides to RUN IT.

 

[Questions]

Time wasting, feigning injury and worst of all simulation. Just throw the book at them.
It's too far gone though hasn't it ?
Learn some lessons from rugby union and sin bin cheats.

 

[edna krabappel]

Physio allowed on the pitch during play to treat injured players. Would not have to stop the game unless it was the goalkeeper, or for a serious injury to allow a stretcher on.

Happens in rugby all of the time and never seen a physio get caught up with play.

Agree entirely, though with footballers, sadly you probably can't trust many of them not to fake a serious injury, only to leap up miraculously seconds later once the game is stopped for them, whereas with rugby players- the odd Blood-Gate episode aside, they generally tend to not mince about when it comes to injuries.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

If you have fouled a player and he is injured, you must also walk off the pitch with him whilst he is treated. You have fouled him and thus broken the laws of the game, meanwhile your team benefits with 11vs10.

If a player is injured in a collision and it WASN'T a foul then that's just bad luck. No extra player is removed from the other team.

Idea 2.

Sin bin but ONLY in a VERY specific situation. You know when a team is COUNTER ATTACKING and a defending player doesnt a cheeky little TRIP, KNOWING he will receive a yellow for it but has stopped a counter attack....well SIN BIN HIM.

It's not a red card but he is stopping a VERY promising attack KNOWING a yellow is well worth it.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Ah, If the ref is aware that a player, who has fallen down clutching his face is CLEARLY trying to get someone else sent off, send him off as well. Cheeky blighter.

 

[Gary Leeds]

Remove the offside law totally, if teams want a player to goal hang for 90 minutes then let them, means more goals and more open play as the defending team has to keep a man or 2 back to mark him

Change the subs law, one named sub and thats it, stops the big clubs playing half their reserve squad in cup matches (or matches against so called weaker sides in the same division) with the big guns rested on the bench just in case they are needed. Brings back the fans seeing the best side the team can field or run the risk of the "minnows" turning over the bigger side.

Add a rule that a club in admin regardless of the division they are in are demoted 4 divisions at the end of the current season. Remove the nice cushion of "oh well we cocked that up, lets drop down one division and wipe the slate clean and do it again in a few years time", can't afford to play in the league? Well go non league then and start again

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Not a change to the laws, but I would encourage the refs to award free kicks/pens to players who were fouled but stay on their feet. Might stop some diving and might see so strikers score good goals despite being fouled in the process.

 

[Big_Unit]

1 rule scrapped / changed: I've always thought this would be fun - if you shoot and hit the bar or the post, and the ball goes out of play, it's a corner not a goal kick. I think that's a decent reward for a pile-driver that's inches away.

1 rule reintroduced: As was posted here earlier: "Bring back the 'keeper taking his kick from the side it went out. It's abused so much to waste time". That, and / or the 4-steps rule for keepers.

1 rule added: No substitutions, regardless of the circumstances, after 85 minutes.

 

[edna krabappel]

If you have fouled a player and he is injured, you must also walk off the pitch with him whilst he is treated. You have fouled him and thus broken the laws of the game, meanwhile your team benefits with 11vs10.

Again, I completely concur with the sentiment, but you forget how devious footballers can be.

What's to stop a mediocre player on one side, say a Paddy McCarthy or a Glenn Whelan, being on the receiving end of a slight trip from the opposition's star player- say a Diego Costa or a Sergio Aguero, and then going down "injured" for ten minutes, thus depriving the other side of Costa or Aguero for a lengthy period? Nobody will miss McCarthy or Whelan, but the absence of Aguero or Costa could make a huge difference for a team chasing the game or clinging on to a lead.

The idea, as I said, is completely justified. But the cynicism and tendency to cheat displayed by certain players, clubs and managers would ensure it would be exploited in a completely wrong way.

 

[James Bond's body double]

If your player is hurt in a tackle and has to have treatment, and the opposing player is yellow carded for the offence. Your player then gets treatment and doesn't leave the pitch and the opposing player who was yellow carded, then leaves the pitch until ref waves him back on, so your team is not penalised for having a player injured and opposing team are for the yellow card offence.

 

[Exile]

Also: any club signing an expensive striker from another team- let's say Nottingham Forest, for example, picking up a player from, say, Peterborough.

If you fail to meet payment deadlines for that player, you should be banned from playing him in the next match, minimum, until such time as you've coughed up.

Interesting that you should bring that up...

http://www.northstandchat.com/content.php?439-Albion-v-Nottingham-Forest-07-02-2015

A confrontation between Greer and Forest top scorer Britt Assombalonga, saw the latter raise his hands, and throw himself to the floor. A more uptight ref, might have issued more than a talking to, to either player. Assombalonga is the player whose transfer debt has led to the club's embargo. Personally, I don't think he should be playing. If Forest are not prepared or able, to pay his former club what they are owed, then he should be sent back there, or at very least, sat out, until things are resolved.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I'd ensure referees refused to stop the game for injured players unless there was conclusive evidence that said player was either seriously, life-changingly injured, or dead.

I'm fed up with games being stopped for some pathetic, grown man to have his shin tenderly rubbed by the physio (and that includes players kicking it out for their "injured" team-mate whenever he has the slightest knock. Usually when they're narrowly leading with a few minutes left). You want treatment, you go off. Man up.

If you go down injured then you leave the pitch for 5 minutes. This will sort the real injuries from the fake

 

[edna krabappel]

Interesting that you should bring that up...

http://www.northstandchat.com/content.php?439-Albion-v-Nottingham-Forest-07-02-2015

Yep. We were musing about it during the game. Shit though he actually was on Saturday, it still seemed unfair that he could be used despite Forest defaulting on payments. Posh should have sent the bailiffs in to seize him

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Again, I completely concur with the sentiment, but you forget how devious footballers can be.

What's to stop a mediocre player on one side, say a Paddy McCarthy or a Glenn Whelan, being on the receiving end of a slight trip from the opposition's star player- say a Diego Costa or a Sergio Aguero, and then going down "injured" for ten minutes, thus depriving the other side of Costa or Aguero for a lengthy period? Nobody will miss McCarthy or Whelan, but the absence of Aguero or Costa could make a huge difference for a team chasing the game or clinging on to a lead.

The idea, as I said, is completely justified. But the cynicism and tendency to cheat displayed by certain players, clubs and managers would ensure it would be exploited in a completely wrong way.

Of course, you're point is completely valid.

But I would say, before my rule change, your point still stands but with no opposition player being removed. There is nothing CURRENTLY deterring a player from injuring the oppositions best player.

At least with this rule change there is SOME deterrant/equalling of numbers if they do do it.

Of course where it could be REALLY manipulated is almost the exact opposite of what you said.

Let's picture it. Chelsea vs Burnley. Eden Hazard fouls some RUBBISH 17 yr old Burnley midfielder making his debut and have a MARE.

Now, if I'm the burnley defender I would FAKE injury and drag it out for AGES, just to get Eden hazard off the pitch as my useless expense.

So yeah, I've just argued against myself there.

 

[father_and_son]

If you go down injured then you leave the pitch for 5 minutes. This will sort the real injuries from the fake

Agree.... but make it 15mins.

 

[edna krabappel]

If you go down injured then you leave the pitch for 5 minutes. This will sort the real injuries from the fake

It's a difficult one. Sometimes I watch football and see the physio come on, give the player a drink, rub his ankle, and then jog off again- you do tend to wonder what impact they could possibly have had, and whether they actually do anything constructive for the player 95% of the time. Not saying physios are useless, by the way, simply that most on-field interventions don't actually achieve a lot, and the players could easily have carried on without them. So in those cases, which constitute most "injuries" during a game, then yes, it might encourage fewer stoppages, and give the players the incentive to get on with it.

Then again, to look at the other side of it, why should a player who has been absolutely CLATTERED by the opposition's Carthorse-In-Chief and who requires a brief check for potential fractures/dislocations/amputations have to sit out five key minutes of the game whilst said donkey carries on playing and maiming?

 

[edna krabappel]

I wonder if there would ever be a case for temporary blood substitutions in football, as they do in rugby. I suppose it's never really been an issue as footballers are less likely to sustain cuts.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Agree.... but make it 15mins.

What if your SMACKED in the balls?

Let's be honest. For those initial few minutes you are in no state to be on the pitch. 15mins off because of that seems slightly harsh.

 

[Gary Leeds]

Of course, you're point is completely valid.

But I would say, before my rule change, your point still stands but with no opposition player being removed. There is nothing CURRENTLY deterring a player from injuring the oppositions best player.

At least with this rule change there is SOME deterrant/equalling of numbers if they do do it.

Of course where it could be REALLY manipulated is almost the exact opposite of what you said.

Let's picture it. Chelsea vs Burnley. Eden Hazard fouls some RUBBISH 17 yr old Burnley midfielder making his debut and have a MARE.

Now, if I'm the burnley defender I would FAKE injury and drag it out for AGES, just to get Eden hazard off the pitch as my useless expense.

So yeah, I've just argued against myself there.

Even better would be the example of the keeper fouling a player who suddenly gets a broken leg, off goes the keeper for how ever long it takes