Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Changing Football?

I was listening to the radio the other day and there was a suggestion to scrap the offside rule for a competition. I'd be interested to see how a match panned out with out it but I don't think it would work overall.
Another thing that I've heard mentioned before is the idea of making the goals bigger, this one kind of makes sense as when the current dimensions were set in stone the players were a lot smaller physically so as they have got bigger with time surely the goal should to?
Any other ideas that might be worth a go? Or should everything just be left alone?
In the infamous words of nolly... Discuss!?
«1

Comments

  • a bit like snooker are currently doing and also cricket with T20, changing a few rules for example say in the JPT would be interesting if only to see any impact.

    wouldn't personally be a fan of making the goals bigger, but something like scraping the offside rule for the last 20 mins or having a line 30 yards out from where you cannot be offside from (i.e similar to the half way line rule) would be interesting.
  • Rather liked the idea of bigger goals when the idea was mooted a few years ago, but I would like to see the stats regarding how many more goals were scored during the inter-war period. Better playing conditions and equipment, and the much lighter balls we have these days might counteract the physical differences?
  • edited November 2010
    The only rule I would like changing is timekeeping.

    Every time there is a stoppage of any kind, the clock should stop. When play resumes, the clock can restart again. There could then be no complaints on the amount of injury time added (as there would be no such thing), and there could be no advantage gained from taking too long at goal kicks/throw-ins. I can't remember exactly how much the ball spends in/out of play, but the length of each half would probably have to be reduced.
  • As for offside- I have always believed that the refs should use a 'seeking to obtain an advantage' element. This would be interpreted in a way that if a player goal hangs or holds back he is offside but if it is close or opponents rush forwards to play him offside- he isn't. Or to put it simply -if it is marginal -even marginally offside under current rules the player is not offside if the ref thinks he was trying to be onside. Unless technology is used, excellent runs are invaribly missed by officials and the game has become too good for them. yes it does require refs to use judgement which is a bit of an issue I suppose.

    Timekeeping is another interesting one- the fact that teams seek to timewaste suggests there is something it it for them. You can usually accurately predict how many minutes will be added on by reading the game so this suggests the current system is a bit hit and miss and unfair (I'm usually right far more times than wrong). Yes, would be good if every stoppage, stopped a centarlly managed clock. Games might need to be 80 minutes but fans would see 70 or 80 minutes (depending on what duration you choose) of football which is more than they get at the moment - possibly a step too far for purists.

    Not a fan of bigger goals as it would be difficult to compare the quality of a goal to a previous effort which would take something from the game. We couldn't say, Benson's upcoming hat-trick against Peterboro was a good as Super Clive's for instance
  • I like the idea of making the goals bigger - I was going to say "because the game needs more goals", then remembered our recent form!

    Another idea mooted a while ago was to reduce the number of outfield players by 1. The problem with that is the amount of unemployed footballers it would create.

    How about scrapping goalkeepers?

    The problem with doing something like scrapping the off-side rule for one competition is that the players will not be used to it and I'm not sure what you could learn from it. I don't think it's comparable to rule changes in snooker - snooker players don't have to make split second decisions. Neither is it the same as having the various versions of cricket.
  • The only change I want to see is goal line technology.
  • Argument of players being physically smaller when rules were set is indeed very pertinent but the solution cannot be to have bigger goals. That would only
    lead to have basketballer- sized goalies and problems would remain the same.
    Whereas if ground dimensions were to be increased to 80 x 120 yds, the extra surface would yield more goals because forwards (big or small) would have
    more space to be unmarked or to outpace defenders and thus have more opportunities to shoo
  • The problem with bigger goals is that you need to go out and source bigger goalposts, nets etc and dig holes and therefore damage the pitch, hardly worth it for a few games.

    Scrapping the off-side rule - great in theory but you'll encourage goal hanging and lumping the ball up to forwards route one style/Watford in the 80s. The consequence might be more goals and excitement, but there'll be a reduction in footballing skills to get the ball there.

    You have to be careful about changing the rules - bitesize versions of other sports have some appeal but aren't that successful and have never replaced the longer version of their respective sports for example - ODIs and T20 in cricket are ok but will never in my mind replace Test cricket and similarly Rugby Sevens is ok for a bit of light entertainment, but give me a 15 a side match anyday. I'd lose interest in both sports very quickly if they became the dominat versions of cricket and rugby.

    If you are looking for a suggestion you could think about changing the offside law to the point where the offside line is parallel with the edge of the penalty box, or you can only be offside within the penalty area. That would encourage attacking play and still utilise some midfield skills such as crossing and build up play without having a succession of Peter Crouch lookalikes hanging around the six yard box trying to head in long through balls.
  • Surely, if players are physically bigger now than they were many moons ago, bigger boots and larger shirts would be the most sensible solution?
  • Introduce the goals they have in gaelic football (a cross between a football goal with the rugby verticles) and get 1 point for a boot over the top and say 3 for the back of the net.....A bit tongue in cheek here but trying to come up with ways to make our strikers look good ;-). Regarding making the goals bigger, yes players may have been shorter 100 yrs ago but they didn't have these super duper lightwieght balls and they played in what were virtually work boots with studs and didn't have the fitness or ability training players today have, so hardly viable to make a comparison. Simply, the game has changed dramactically over the last century. What would be achieved from this? the better teams would still be the better teams and instead of winning 2-0 it might be 6-4. Might make the yanks take the game more seriously (then they can dominate that too) but for entertainment???? I've seen many a great 0-0 or 1-0 game over the years. a game of football doesn't have to be full of goals to make it enjoyable. For me the enjoyment is in the build up play, the great tackles etc. I also think the novelty of scoring half a dozen gooals every game would soon wear off and crowds would be less enthusiastic when No5 slams into the net. So on that note i'd say leave well alone
  • Sponsored links:


  • I did some analysis about15 years ago on amount of time the ball is in play for as part of my degree course. From memory the average was just over the hour mark. We did some comparison between domestic and international games and there was slightly more play in international football than domestic over a 90 minute game although the difference was not huge.

    I can see the sense in doing something similar to Rugby with the Ref stating clearly when time is stopped and when it isn't but i am not so sure how well this would propogate down to lower leagues in football.

    Offside wise it is interesting to compare football with hockey which in terms of speed of play are largely similar. They abolished the offside rule in the 90's (previously they had an offside line 25 yards from the goal) the idea being it would make the game more exciting. Essentially it has turned it into a long-ball game with midfield pretty much turned into a no-mans land.
  • If the ref were to stop the clock everytime the ball was out of play, a 3pm game wouldn't finish till about 6pm.
  • Remind me exactly which problem all these bright ideas are trying to solve?
  • I might be wrong but I thought they tried moving the offside line to the 18 yard line in a minor non league comp ( or was it in the USA - same thing really) many years ago but it was not very successful. They also tried having kick ins instead of throw ins but it was abandonded after a few weeks.

    What they shouls do is go back to the old offside rules where everyone knew what was what instead of the dogs dinner we have now
  • They ditched the offisde rule for free kicks in the Conference for a season in the 1980s. It wasn't a success.
  • the rule that needs changing is when a player gets sent off for a foul in the penalty box and the opposition have been awarded a penalty - it's a double blow anda nonsense. I can understand a penalty being given if a player is through on goal and gets fouled outside the box as the award of a free kick is often not much compensation but a penalty and sending off is wrong and often kills games.
  • [cite]Posted By: Bexley Dan[/cite]the rule that needs changing is when a player gets sent off for a foul in the penalty box and the opposition have been awarded a penalty - it's a double blow anda nonsense. I can understand a penalty being given if a player is through on goal and gets fouled outside the box as the award of a free kick is often not much compensation but a penalty and sending off is wrong and often kills games.

    give the victim the choice if a player commits a red card offence let the team manager decide if they want the player sent off or a penalty (regardless of where on the pitch the foul occurrs).
  • Making the goals bigger has got to be the most stupid idea I've ever heard.
  • [cite]Posted By: tangoflash[/cite]If the ref were to stop the clock everytime the ball was out of play, a 3pm game wouldn't finish till about 6pm.

    That's why you'd make each half shorter, based on the sort of research kigelia mentioned above.
    [cite]Posted By: kigelia[/cite]I can see the sense in doing something similar to Rugby with the Ref stating clearly when time is stopped and when it isn't but i am not so sure how well this would propogate down to lower leagues in football.

    Sorry, don't quite follow how it would be harder in the lower reaches of football. Is it that you can't rely on the ref to have to use a stopwatch every few seconds as there's no 4th official?
  • What about making pitches square to encourage more wing play?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Blindfold goalkeepers for penalties

    Players on receiving a yellow card should have to wear a yellow armband

    A 'track' should be installed from goalpost to goalpost and a 6ft robot goalkeeper should be remote controlled by the manager.
  • I'd like to see the rules that already esist being implemented equally and across the board.
    Foul throws is something that's never regulated. Time-wasting is dependant on crowd noise and the fourth official spends more time ensuring managers don't leave their boxes than watching the pitch.

    Something like scrapping off-side would simply lead to one man being left up front. After-all that's exactly what we'd do with Benson given that his our-field play isn't great.

    Teh one rule I would like to see scrapped is the awarding of a penalty and the sending off of the goalkeeper. Always struck me as double jepardy.
  • [cite]Posted By: dabos[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: tangoflash[/cite]If the ref were to stop the clock everytime the ball was out of play, a 3pm game wouldn't finish till about 6pm.

    That's why you'd make each half shorter, based on the sort of research kigelia mentioned above.
    [cite]Posted By: kigelia[/cite]I can see the sense in doing something similar to Rugby with the Ref stating clearly when time is stopped and when it isn't but i am not so sure how well this would propogate down to lower leagues in football.

    Sorry, don't quite follow how it would be harder in the lower reaches of football. Is it that you can't rely on the ref to have to use a stopwatch every few seconds as there's no 4th official?

    The problem is that by leaving it to the ref alone you would have no difference to the siutation we have now. The ref stops the watch if he wants to and then determines when time is up. To work effectively you need a clear display of when the clock is running and when it isn't otherwise it is still open to a log of argument as to whether it has been applied correctly.
  • One rule change that may not be bad for the game is that you must have at least two players in the opponents half at all times, it would mean a change to the offside rule of course say the first ten yards from the halfway line are deemed not offside, would prevent teams from parking the proverbial bus.
  • edited November 2010
    [cite]Posted By: Ketman[/cite]One rule change that may not be bad for the game is that you must have at least two players in the opponents half at all times, it would mean a change to the offside rule of course say the first ten yards from the halfway line are deemed not offside, would prevent teams from parking the proverbial bus.

    But would that not create the same problem? albeit 10 yds deeper?
  • One of the things that needs addressing I think is when a player gets sent off in the 90th minute. It gives no advantage to the other team and infact gives an advantage to the players next opponents as what could be the star man is suspended. For example, Tevez is sent off v Wigan in 90th minute, no advantage to Wigan but if Tevez then misses the next 3 games which could include relegation rivals to Wigan then they would actually end up worse off. Maybe they could, as mentioned above ask the manager if they would rather have a penalty than have the opposition reduced to 10 men! Even if it was only after 60 or 70 minutes, before that it's a red card. Thoughts?
  • Another idea would be to have "sin bins", like in Ice Hockey. Sometimes a potentially great game is ruined by a sending off.
  • If a game goes to penalties, all players (including the keeper) must take 1 penalty... This gives a team an advantage if the oppositon has had a player sent off
  • change the shape of the ball to a triangle
  • Only defenders can score.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!