Fitba has a lot to learn from egg-chasing

[lapsedhibee]

As well as the obvious, eg penalising half-men half-apes like Rooney (great player btw) for screaming abuse at officials week in week out.

The greatest concept that we could borrow from them is that of the 'penalty try' where an actual try is awarded where in the ref's opinion the attacking team deserves it, and no other penalty would be adequate.

For example, at the moment a defending team whose player commits a professional foul in injury time in the box gets sent off and the attacking team gets the chance to score. Defending team loses that player for next match, but if the attacking team misses the penalty then the defending team has not really suffered at all.

How much better it would be if the ref could send off the defender and simply award the attacking team the goal.

[Twa Cairpets]

As well as the obvious, eg penalising half-men half-apes like Rooney (great player btw) for screaming abuse at officials week in week out.

The greatest concept that we could borrow from them is that of the 'penalty try' where an actual try is awarded where in the ref's opinion the attacking team deserves it, and no other penalty would be adequate.

For example, at the moment a defending team whose player commits a professional foul in injury time in the box gets sent off and the attacking team gets the chance to score. Defending team loses that player for next match, but if the attacking team misses the penalty then the defending team has not really suffered at all.

How much better it would be if the ref could send off the defender and simply award the attacking team the goal.

Nope. Part and parcel of the game.

How about a last ditch tackle, which the ref sees as a foul with a "penalty goal" awarded and player dismissed accordingly to provide the win for the team, but replays show that its a perfectly good tackle.

The ref has awarded the game without a goal being scored. That would go down well.

Leave it as it is, and leave rugby rules to rugby.

[ginger_rice]

Nice idea no reason why football can't borrow ideas from other sports.

However how many of our refs would have the balls to award a penalty goal against one of the ugly sisters or the away team in an OF game?

[Pretty Boy]

Nope. Part and parcel of the game.

How about a last ditch tackle, which the ref sees as a foul with a "penalty goal" awarded and player dismissed accordingly to provide the win for the team, but replays show that its a perfectly good tackle.

The ref has awarded the game without a goal being scored. That would go down well.

Leave it as it is, and leave rugby rules to rugby.

:agree:

Think of Darren Fletchers sending off in the Champions League semi final v Arsenal a couple of years back. Imagine the result had still been in doubt and the referee sent him off and awarded a goal. The subsequent replays showed that was a great tackle but with the rules the OP suggests a team could have missed out on a Champions League final due to the referees mistake/incompetence.

There are proably hundreds of other example but this was the 1st one that popped into my head.

[lapsedhibee]

How about a last ditch tackle, which the ref sees as a foul with a "penalty goal" awarded and player dismissed accordingly to provide the win for the team, but replays show that its a perfectly good tackle.

The ref has awarded the game without a goal being scored. That would go down well.

I wasn't thinking so much of matches at 0-0, but rather of matches at 2-1.

Anyway what you've described isn't that far away from what happened with Dickoh last week, and the world didn't end (and wouldn't have ended if we'd only been 2-1 up rather than 2-0).

[ScottB]

What Football should implement from Rugby is having Captains be the only players allowed to approach the referee, any abuse from other players results in a warning, then a yellow card.

People say it won't work in Football, but even the dumbest players would catch on after a couple of yellow cards, then once we have players treating officials with some respect hopefully it will catch on with the rest of us. Of course similar rules should apply to Managers and Coaching Staff too.

[ginger_rice]

What Football should implement from Rugby is having Captains be the only players allowed to approach the referee, any abuse from other players results in a warning, then a yellow card.

People say it won't work in Football, but even the dumbest players would catch on after a couple of yellow cards, then once we have players treating officials with some respect hopefully it will catch on with the rest of us. Of course similar rules should apply to Managers and Coaching Staff too.

:top marks

[ancienthibby]

:top marks

And again.:top marks

In a nutshell as things stand regards refereeing in the two sports, football is a game for uncontrolled thugs and rugby is a game for controlled thugs!:aok:

[ancienthibby]

Admins,

This thread should be elsewhere,

Ta!

[lapsedhibee]

Admins,

This thread should be elsewhere,


Eh? It's directly relevant to events in the SPL of less than one hour ago! How much more fitba-topical could it be? :dunno:

[Iggy Pope]

:agree:

Think of Darren Fletchers sending off in the Champions League semi final v Arsenal a couple of years back. Imagine the result had still been in doubt and the referee sent him off and awarded a goal. The subsequent replays showed that was a great tackle but with the rules the OP suggests a team could have missed out on a Champions League final due to the referees mistake/incompetence.

There are proably hundreds of other example but this was the 1st one that popped into my head.

I thought Fletcher took man and ball in that incident and his red card was justified.

One reason why I don't think football needs to introduce any such initiative from any other sport.

[greenlex]

Injured players getting treatment while play goes on is another. Stop all this rolling around timewasting. If they are not hurt they will get up and get on with it. If they are hurt they get treatment without the need for the ref to make a judgment call.

[Bristolhibby]

What Football should implement from Rugby is having Captains be the only players allowed to approach the referee, any abuse from other players results in a warning, then a yellow card.

People say it won't work in Football, but even the dumbest players would catch on after a couple of yellow cards, then once we have players treating officials with some respect hopefully it will catch on with the rest of us. Of course similar rules should apply to Managers and Coaching Staff too.

Agree, any abuse results in a free kick to the opposition. Any more abuse and free kick is moved 10 yards towards goal.

Soon shut up the likes of Rio, Rooney, Terry, etc

J

[blackpoolhibs]

I actually hate rugby, both codes.

[Cropley10]

In the World Cup when Ghana were denied a last minute goal by the boy handling/saving it on the line, this is where a penalty goal should be awarded. No need to send the offender off, no need for a penalty; goal awarded, so no point anyone handling on the line, as it will be just classed as a goal.

But what I don't understand is why a keeper be sent off AND the attacking team get a penalty (other than for serious foul play, obviously) - it's double indemnity and doesn't make sense.

I've always wanted the law changed so if the keeper or defender fouls in the box it's a penalty and if the penalty is missed/saved THEN the player is sent-off; not BOTH.

[Cropley10]

I actually hate rugby, both codes.

I can't begin to tell you how boring I find rugby union. Too many players on the pitch and sooooo many rules. :grrr:

[Gala Foxes]

only the English Rugby team could have a player called Toby

[hibsbollah]

As well as the obvious, eg penalising half-men half-apes like Rooney (great player btw) for screaming abuse at officials week in week out.

The greatest concept that we could borrow from them is that of the 'penalty try' where an actual try is awarded where in the ref's opinion the attacking team deserves it, and no other penalty would be adequate.

For example, at the moment a defending team whose player commits a professional foul in injury time in the box gets sent off and the attacking team gets the chance to score. Defending team loses that player for next match, but if the attacking team misses the penalty then the defending team has not really suffered at all.

How much better it would be if the ref could send off the defender and simply award the attacking team the goal.

Nope. The penalty try thing actually really annoys me at rugby, although I suppose the referee runs out of options if a team keeps collapsing a scrum.

In general terms, rugby union's rules are incomprehensible to a lot of people, especially offside and what constitutes a ruck and a maul and when a scrum stops being a scrum:rolleyes: Games can turn on borderline decisions; the referee often decides who wins, with too many points awarded for a penalty.

I like 'the captain being the only person allowed to talk to the ref' idea. apart from that I wouldnt take anything from the eggchasers.

[Iggy Pope]

What about that one when you're winning into added time, all you have to do is boot the ball out and the game's over? That's a beezer too eh?

Or the 'blood injuries' one? Football loves a scandal!

Or raking / biting each others ears off on the pitch instead of at the Xmas night out?


Think we should stick to our own laws meself.

[lapsedhibee]

In general terms, rugby union's rules are incomprehensible to a lot of people, especially offside
Agree, wouldn't want to introduce any complicated offside rule into fitba. :panic:

[hibs0666]

As well as the obvious, eg penalising half-men half-apes like Rooney (great player btw) for screaming abuse at officials week in week out.

The greatest concept that we could borrow from them is that of the 'penalty try' where an actual try is awarded where in the ref's opinion the attacking team deserves it, and no other penalty would be adequate.

For example, at the moment a defending team whose player commits a professional foul in injury time in the box gets sent off and the attacking team gets the chance to score. Defending team loses that player for next match, but if the attacking team misses the penalty then the defending team has not really suffered at all.

How much better it would be if the ref could send off the defender and simply award the attacking team the goal.

Players get paralysed chasing the eggs.

[lapsedhibee]

Or raking / biting each others ears off on the pitch instead of at the Xmas night out?

Probably wouldn't want that, or the spearing thing. But none of these are actually compulsory in eggchasing, I don't think.

Only allowing captains to speak to refs would be an improvement, but remember Ferdinand and Terry have been captains of EPL teams and they're foul-mouthed bullying *****, so that in itself wouldn't wholly clean up the air entering officials' lug'oles.

[lapsedhibee]

Players get paralysed chasing the eggs.

Listen, even if you think eggchasing's a completely stupid game - which it obviously is - that doesn't mean you shouldn't covet any of its features. For example, the second half only lasts 40 minutes, so people could go for their bus after 40 minutes and not get abuse on here from uberfans for leaving before the end. :agree:

[Kaiser1962]

I agree with your comments 100%.

I have said before that I played rugby, albeit a while ago now and the rules have changed (and got more complicated Cropley10), but the basic values governing an individuals behaviour, and the policing of a game, remain the same. There have been high profile examples of cheating lately, like "bloodgate", but nothing that compare to the dishonesty rife in football.

Lennon moans about the ref telling lies but what is it when a player claims for a throw in, or a corner when he obviously knows its not his, but a lie?

Unfortunately modern football is based on cheating that masks itself, and is excused as, professionalism. Players cheat, dive, feign injury, wave imaginary cards, conspire beforehand to put pressure on the ref and are supported, and excused in this, by their managers.

I love football but there are times the cheating is downright embarrasing. Even Crawley Town players were throwing themselves to the ground in the box tonight and I despair, I really do.



What Football should implement from Rugby is having Captains be the only players allowed to approach the referee, any abuse from other players results in a warning, then a yellow card.

People say it won't work in Football, but even the dumbest players would catch on after a couple of yellow cards, then once we have players treating officials with some respect hopefully it will catch on with the rest of us. Of course similar rules should apply to Managers and Coaching Staff too.

[Kaiser1962]

Disagree on that one. What you do get in rugby though is an "accidental" offside but basically to stay onside you have to remain behind the ball and the "back feet", none of this interpretation of active or inactive nonsense.

What rugby does though is constantly review its rules and its not afraid to make changes, sometimes they work and sometimes they dont but when they dont, they recognise this very quickly and make alterations accordingly.


Nope. The penalty try thing actually really annoys me at rugby, although I suppose the referee runs out of options if a team keeps collapsing a scrum.

In general terms, rugby union's rules are incomprehensible to a lot of people, especially offside and what constitutes a ruck and a maul and when a scrum stops being a scrum:rolleyes: Games can turn on borderline decisions; the referee often decides who wins, with too many points awarded for a penalty.

I like 'the captain being the only person allowed to talk to the ref' idea. apart from that I wouldnt take anything from the eggchasers.

[hibsbollah]

Agree, wouldn't want to introduce any complicated offside rule into fitba. :panic:

I think the interpretation of the offside rule in rugby is way more incomprehensible than in football.

[Kaiser1962]

I think the interpretation of the offside rule in rugby is way more incomprehensible than in football.

Not at all :greengrin

The ref in rugby even tells you when your wandering offside and lets you get back on.

[Iggy Pope]

Listen, even if you think eggchasing's a completely stupid game - which it obviously is - that doesn't mean you shouldn't covet any of its features. For example, the second half only lasts 40 minutes, so people could go for their bus after 40 minutes and not get abuse on here from uberfans for leaving before the end. :agree:

Unless, of course, no-one boots the ball out and the game apparently goes on for ever.

[Haymaker]

A goal can only be given when it is scored - you cannot give a goal when the ball hasnt crossed the line.

If a keeper permits a foul in the box that is worthy of a red card then he is sent off. A penalty is just a direct free kick in the designated area after all.

Also, refs know that football is an emotional game and therefore people get away with swearing at the ref in the heat of the moment. It is when players continue after the "Are you ****ing kidding me ref?!" moment that it becomes a question for the ref.

[Kaiser1962]

A goal can only be given when it is scored - you cannot give a goal when the ball hasnt crossed the line.

If a keeper permits a foul in the box that is worthy of a red card then he is sent off. A penalty is just a direct free kick in the designated area after all.

Also, refs know that football is an emotional game and therefore people get away with swearing at the ref in the heat of the moment. It is when players continue after the "Are you ****ing kidding me ref?!" moment that it becomes a question for the ref.


All sports have an emotional commitment, particularly from the participants. Most sports though, in order to succeed, require discipline, particularly in adversity, and this is especially true in team sports. You moniker suggests you may be an afficianado of the noble art so imagine what would happen to a boxer if they lost their discipline in the heat of battle? Only one outcome there.

In football it appears the abuse/swearing directed towards the referee are, in some cases (Man Utd, Celtic?) a calculated attempt to gain an unfair advantage over the opposition.

Unfortunately though the football authorities lost this particular battle years ago and are unlikely to address it now. The "respect" campaign is as toothless as it is laughable.

[jonny]

Up until quite recently I played rugby - It is a completely different game from football and so generally the laws of the game can't/shouldn't be transferred between the 2 sports.
Offside in rugby is really straight forward if you've ever played, stay behind the ball or the back of the ruck and you're fine.

A couple of instances where rules could be shared in my opinion are as mentioned the captain is the only person that communicates with the referee, any abuse or argument from any other player results in a warning then a yellow.
I like the idea of an independent time keeper (obviously this only happens in pro rugby). The timekeeper decides what goes on the added time board. The board goes up at the end of the game with 4 mins for example, the timekeeper adds on any additional time within the 4 mins for injury, a goal etc and then after the time is up a hooter or similar goes and the next time the ball goes out of play the game is over. If a free kick/penalty is awarded these do not count as the ball going out. It'd iron out problems of the whistle going when a team is in a good position.
I don't agree with a "penalty goal" being brought into football.

[Kaiser1962]

But Jonny can you imagine what the SRU would do to a club or its players if eight or nine of them surrounded and harangued the referee? Or regularly sought "clarification" of refereeing decisions?

[jonny]

I suppose the culture breed into the game from grass roots levels generally ensures that sort of thing doesn't happen - even when obviously wrong decisions are made.
I certainly wouldn't want to be the director of the club that had to stand in front of the SRU panel if it did though!
The individual players would be dragged over hot coals and the club would no doubt get hit with huge fines.

[lapsedhibee]

Unless, of course, no-one boots the ball out and the game apparently goes on for ever.

That does seem a bit bonkers, having to wait until the ball goes out of play before the ref can blow up. But it seems to me equally bonkers that in fitba the refs always seems to wait until the ball is in play, in some innocuous position, before they blow for full time. They never seem to blow when the ball has gone out for a corner, or is bobbing around in the penalty box, etc. Can be very annoying if as on Sunday you're 1-0 up and playing absolute craply.

[Green_one]

As one poster points out they are very different games. Football is much more dynamic and you cannot wait around for some of the processes Rugby uses. There are one or two interesting points, like moving the ball forward if there is any arguement but generally things like penalty tries have no logic in football.

Also ignores the poor aspects of rugby, with still a lot of violence going on and poor refs. The time keeper idea might be worthwhile but really just changes the person people will blame.

Rugby keeps altering rules and point scoring. I cannot say that is attractive. It would be better if football sorted out their own offside rule.

[Kaiser1962]

At least the "violence" you refer to in rugby is reasonably honest. None of this pretendy girls blouse nonsense which appears to be a combination of acting, politics and sleight of hand you see in football. On a rugby field you go in the face of another player, chest puffed out and eyeball to eyeball you are going to have to be prepared to back it up and not throw yourself to the ground at the faintest of contact, even the absence of contact, or you would never hold your head up again. Its about personal dignity and who you are as a person.

Rugby is far more dynamic than it used to be and anybody who watched the Scotland France game would have to agree. The speed at which guys move and the physical contact is awsome these days. and a lot of these improvements in play, and the speed of play, are down to rule changes.

Different games but a number of the laws, but mainly the spirit of the laws, should and could be adapted to suit a football game.


As one poster points out they are very different games. Football is much more dynamic and you cannot wait around for some of the processes Rugby uses. There are one or two interesting points, like moving the ball forward if there is any arguement but generally things like penalty tries have no logic in football.

Also ignores the poor aspects of rugby, with still a lot of violence going on and poor refs. The time keeper idea might be worthwhile but really just changes the person people will blame.

Rugby keeps altering rules and point scoring. I cannot say that is attractive. It would be better if football sorted out their own offside rule.

[Stevie Reid]

For example, at the moment a defending team whose player commits a professional foul in injury time in the box gets sent off and the attacking team gets the chance to score. Defending team loses that player for next match, but if the attacking team misses the penalty then the defending team has not really suffered at all.

How much better it would be if the ref could send off the defender and simply award the attacking team the goal.


Would be *****e IMO. A penalty is still a striker vs a goalkeeper, and he can take as much time as he needs to choose how and where he is going to hit it - i.e. it is an absolute sitter. In these cases one clear goal scoring opportunity is directly replaced with another clear goal scoring opportunity. Seems fine to me.

The only thing I would change about football is that I would have goal line technology, as goals are the most important thing in football, and it is always an injustice when a goal is scored but not awarded. God forbid we should start awarding goals that are not scored, particularly when put in the hands of some of our ridiculously incompetent referees.

[GloryGlory]

What Football should implement from Rugby is having Captains be the only players allowed to approach the referee, any abuse from other players results in a warning, then a yellow card.

People say it won't work in Football, but even the dumbest players would catch on after a couple of yellow cards, then once we have players treating officials with some respect hopefully it will catch on with the rest of us. Of course similar rules should apply to Managers and Coaching Staff too.

I also like the rugby rule where the ref moves a pen/free kick 10 metres forward if there is any dissent or if the defending team are slow to move back/slow down taking the kick. Have that in football and if the 10 metres takes the kick into the penalty box, then as direct free kick automatically becomes a penalty.

I must say that foul-mouthed dissent is one of the things that annoy me most (you don't have to be a particularly good lip reader to see how much effing and blinding is directed to referees during a game).

[lapsedhibee]

Would be *****e IMO.

:panic: I wasn't suggesting it as a permanent option. Merely something which in my view should be applied, retrospectively, to any such situations occurring at the PBS last Saturday afternoon between the hours of 1640 and 1650.

[Kaiser1962]

I dont think a "penalty goal" similar to a penalty try would work in football but I would suspend anyone who commits a "professional foul" for a period of ten games or something, or deduct points.

The ten yard rule is very effective at nipping dissent but refs would have to be miked up so it wasnt the refs word against the players.


I also like the rugby rule where the ref moves a pen/free kick 10 metres forward if there is any dissent or if the defending team are slow to move back/slow down taking the kick. Have that in football and if the 10 metres takes the kick into the penalty box, then as direct free kick automatically becomes a penalty.

I must say that foul-mouthed dissent is one of the things that annoy me most (you don't have to be a particularly good lip reader to see how much effing and blinding is directed to referees during a game).

[Haymaker]

All sports have an emotional commitment, particularly from the participants. Most sports though, in order to succeed, require discipline, particularly in adversity, and this is especially true in team sports. You moniker suggests you may be an afficianado of the noble art so imagine what would happen to a boxer if they lost their discipline in the heat of battle? Only one outcome there.

In football it appears the abuse/swearing directed towards the referee are, in some cases (Man Utd, Celtic?) a calculated attempt to gain an unfair advantage over the opposition.

Unfortunately though the football authorities lost this particular battle years ago and are unlikely to address it now. The "respect" campaign is as toothless as it is laughable.

Some footballers need a higher level of arousal than others to perform at their peak (Rooney? Gattuso?) however any top ref will understand that they can explode, my point being that they understand that they may fire off a few swear words as soon as the whistle goes.

Your point about boxing is correct but what happens when a player loses his cool? Goes for in two footed on a player who previously fouled him? They are sent off and his team may lose. A Boxer would lose the bout as well.

ALL sports have ways to enhance your teams chances of winning - simulation, off the ball fouls, harrasing the ref - however is it the refs fault if players surround him and demand a card? Or the players? The managers who may have told them to do it?

IMHO it is the weak authorities who undermine the refs constantly. There may be mistakes made (and there are in other sports too -rugby, NFL, Hockey all make mistakes) but it is ultimately the refs final decision and he should be supported by the authorities whatever happens.

[Kaiser1962]

IMHO it is the weak authorities who undermine the refs constantly. There may be mistakes made (and there are in other sports too -rugby, NFL, Hockey all make mistakes) but it is ultimately the refs final decision and he should be supported by the authorities whatever happens.

Absolutely correct that man. :aok:

One of the points i was trying to make is that the SRU would always, publicly at least, support the official, as would the IRB. And everybody involved in the game knows it.

[Haymaker]

Absolutely correct that man. :aok:

One of the points i was trying to make is that the SRU would always, publicly at least, support the official, as would the IRB. And everybody involved in the game knows it.

:agree: They should be backed publicly 100% of the time. If, of course, they are repeated offenders then they should be privately moved out of big game situations.

[Twa Cairpets]

Some footballers need a higher level of arousal than others to perform at their peak (Rooney? Gattuso?) however any top ref will understand that they can explode, my point being that they understand that they may fire off a few swear words as soon as the whistle goes.

Your point about boxing is correct but what happens when a player loses his cool? Goes for in two footed on a player who previously fouled him? They are sent off and his team may lose. A Boxer would lose the bout as well.

ALL sports have ways to enhance your teams chances of winning - simulation, off the ball fouls, harrasing the ref - however is it the refs fault if players surround him and demand a card? Or the players? The managers who may have told them to do it?

IMHO it is the weak authorities who undermine the refs constantly. There may be mistakes made (and there are in other sports too -rugby, NFL, Hockey all make mistakes) but it is ultimately the refs final decision and he should be supported by the authorities whatever happens.

Spot on - great post.

On the fairly recent mega threads about the refs strike one of the criticisms that was levelled at refs were that they were aloof and distant. Hoiw much more aloof and distant would they become if you were officially not allowed to speak to them? Also, for amateur/youth football, entirely and completely impractical.

The best referees are usually the ones who do talk to players during a game, expalining decisions, having a quiet word etc. Its a mindset thing, but if referees become viewed as an inherent and critical part of the game rather than some evil force intent on screwing over your team thats the first step to cutting out the crap.

The only things (as a ref) I'd liek to see would be the option to sin bin players, which could take the heat out of some issues and to avoid the relatively ineffective sanction of a caution.

[Haymaker]

The only things (as a ref) I'd liek to see would be the option to sin bin players, which could take the heat out of some issues and to avoid the relatively ineffective sanction of a caution.

It could work, sin bin for 5 minutes, cool and calm down, then back into the fray. Teams play with ten men on the occasion people are off getting treatment, shouldnt really make much of an impact.

[Kaiser1962]

The best referees are usually the ones who do talk to players during a game, expalining decisions, having a quiet word etc. Its a mindset thing, but if referees become viewed as an inherent and critical part of the game rather than some evil force intent on screwing over your team thats the first step to cutting out the crap.


Talking is fine as long as the players you are speaking to are reasonable and not screaming irresponsible banshees. Rugby refs talk all the time. And some are pretty useless too.

On the emotion part having seen first hand Jim Telfer "motivating" Damien Cronin before a game then it dosent get much more "emotional" than that. :greengrin

[snooky]

Nice idea no reason why football can't borrow ideas from other sports.

However how many of our refs would have the balls to award a penalty goal against one of the ugly sisters or the away team in an OF game?

And....how easy would it be for the ref to 'gift' the OF a goal if the score is against them. It's bad enough just now.
Absolute madness to provide our enemies with a free "Get Out Of Jail" card.