If you could change just one rule....

[Twa Cairpets]

What would it be?

Following on from the thread on the Killie Goal kick, the one rule I'd change would be regarding subs.

Here's the plan:

Have an extra area marked off the pitch at the half way line. A player wanting to come on has to stand in this area holding a board with the player to be subbed-off's number. The player coming off has to enter this "sub-box" and take the board before the other player can come on. Maybe need to have a ten yeard area on the pitch which would mean a player couldnt come on if the ball was in it to avoid them running on direct to get the ball. If a player was injured and carried off a quick sub could be made while getting treatment.

Benefits: No need to stop play for a sub. No timewasting. Possibility of rolling subs.
Drawbacks: None that I can see.

[wearethehibs]

Mines would be simpler than that. If an attacker hits a shot in the pealty area and after the ball has left his foot he is taken out by a defender or the keeper it should be a penalty.

The amount of times this happens is unbelivable. If it happend in the middle of the pitch after a pass is made, the ref would give a foul so why is it different in the box?

[allezsauzee]

My change would be the 'Hearts must get a penalty when they are playing at Tynecastle' rule that seems to have come in this season.

[Cropley10]

Mine would be this.

If a player is judged to have denied a clear goal- scoring opportunity in the box and a penalty kick is awarded the player will not be sent off IF the penalty is scored.

If the penalty is missed or saved, the player is sent off.

In other words the attacking team does NOT get double benefit.

This rule would not apply in the case of violent conduct

[MartinfaePorty]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Mines would be simpler than that. If an attacker hits a shot in the pealty area and after the ball has left his foot he is taken out by a defender or the keeper it should be a penalty.

The amount of times this happens is unbelivable. If it happend in the middle of the pitch after a pass is made, the ref would give a foul so why is it different in the box?

Assume this should be enforced, but is not, as exactly that happened in my Sunday amateur game a few weeks ago. Their player got a shot in and our keeper made a good save, but the ref awarded the pen.

I would like to see that if a player is fouled and has to receive treatment the player who committed the foul has to leave the pitch for the same amount of time or, at least, a prescribed period of, say, 1 minute. Where's the advantage if your star striker is laid low, so that he can't take part in the free-kick, but the offending player is allowed to defend it?

One more, if I can be greedy, is to have a sin bin for things such as handling the ball on the line, diving and other offences that do not cause physical harm and perhaps do not warrant a sending-off, but deserve harsher punishment than a yellow card.

[Teo10]

The stupid rule where its fine for a defender to stand inbetween the ball and the attacking player to "shadow" it out of play...

No matter what form, its obstruction

[Jim44]

How about doing away with offside completely?

[Diclonius]

Any club who fails to pay its players on time has all points won for that calendar month wiped.

[Billy Whizz]

Sin bin instead of yellow/red cards

[littleplum]

An alternative to penalty shoot-outs. Some interesting ideas here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty...9#Alternatives

[Franck Stanton]

The current off-side rule, is, in my opinion , a complete joke. I remember the experiment they had back in the early 70's when they extended the penalty box line to the entire width of the pitch and you couldn't be off-side until you crossed it and then the usual rules applied [ had to be two players between attacker and bye-line etc]. Made for exciting attacking football. Don't know why it was binned as most fans agreed it made for better games. As it stands just now, it depends far too much on the opinions of whichever ref is officiating at the game.

[Eyrie]

First choice would be a crackdown on dissent shown towards officials. Take a leaf out of rugby's book and book players for mouthing off, regardless of whether the decision is right or wrong.

If I can have a second, then make a yellow card a ten minute sin bin offence.

And for a third, allow physios onto the pitch to attend to injured players whilst the game continues.

[D7 Bohs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The current off-side rule, is, in my opinion , a complete joke. I remember the experiment they had back in the early 70's when they extended the penalty box line to the entire width of the pitch and you couldn't be off-side until you crossed it and then the usual rules applied [ had to be two players between attacker and bye-line etc]. Made for exciting attacking football. Don't know why it was binned as most fans agreed it made for better games. As it stands just now, it depends far too much on the opinions of whichever ref is officiating at the game.

I'd like to see that one - at least as an experiment. Try it in the Europa league?

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The stupid rule where its fine for a defender to stand inbetween the ball and the attacking player to "shadow" it out of play...

No matter what form, its obstruction

Totally agree - a pet hate of mine no matter who does it.

IMO you should only be allowed to shield the ball after you've touched it.

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The current off-side rule, is, in my opinion , a complete joke. I remember the experiment they had back in the early 70's when they extended the penalty box line to the entire width of the pitch and you couldn't be off-side until you crossed it and then the usual rules applied [ had to be two players between attacker and bye-line etc]. Made for exciting attacking football. Don't know why it was binned as most fans agreed it made for better games. As it stands just now, it depends far too much on the opinions of whichever ref is officiating at the game.

Or a 22/25 yard line - a bit like the shooting zone on a subbuteo pitch.

[Makaveli]

Touching an opponent with your hand constitutes handball and is punished accordingly.

Football is a man's game/contact sport etc etc - yes, with legs and shoulders. No time for shirt-pulling and sly pushing.

[The_Exile]

Rolling/unlimited subs, and if a player has been subbed off he can be brought back on if needed, it's ridiculous this hasn't been introduced before now, let the manager make full use of his squad at all times.

[theonlywayisup]

I really hate it when a player goes down as if dead, play is stopped until the 'injured' player hobbles to the sideline, at which point he makes a miracle recovery and immediately signals to be let back into play. The net result is that play is disrupted.

My solution would be that if you go down and the trainer has to come on then that player is off for (say) three minutes recovery time. That will teach them!

[The_Exile]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

First choice would be a crackdown on dissent shown towards officials. Take a leaf out of rugby's book and book players for mouthing off, regardless of whether the decision is right or wrong.

If I can have a second, then make a yellow card a ten minute sin bin offence.

Agree with this, should be zero tolerance on verbal from players towards officials, however rank the officials are!

Secondly, the sin bin I would love to see brought in...BUT....it only works if the officials are competent, and competent officials are few and far between up here. I fear although the idea is sound, it would ruin rather than enhance any game of football officiated by clowns such as Craig Thompson.

[Scouse Hibee]

Mine would be you can only use your sub keeper if your starting keeper is injured, if your keeper is red carded then you have to put an oufield player in goal.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Not a rule change .... but I would like to see a booking every time a shirt gets pulled, most bloody annoying thing in the game.

[SMAXXA]

I would like to see that if a player is fouled and has to receive treatment the player who committed the foul has to leave the pitch for the same amount of time or, at least, a prescribed period of, say, 1 minute. Where's the advantage if your star striker is laid low, so that he can't take part in the free-kick, but the offending player is allowed to defend it?.[/QUOTE]

I like this out of all mentioned, its crazy as your getting penalised twice, injured player and a man disadvantage.

[KingFranck]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Totally agree - a pet hate of mine no matter who does it.

IMO you should only be allowed to shield the ball after you've touched it.

Have to agree with this anywhere else on the pitch and its a free kick so what's so different when its 3 yards from your own bye line ?

[HibsMax]

Lot of good suggestions here.

I like the idea of rolling subs. It really sucks if you have a player injured and you've used all three subs.

I like the idea of dumping the offside rule or at least altering it (make it similar to ice hockey for example).

I also like the sin bin idea. Sending a player off is permanent for that game. Perhaps a player can be sent to the sin bin for X minutes, that way bad refereeing decisions don't impact the game as much, only for a few minutes - the 4th official could also review the incidence while play continues and adjust the time in the sin bin as needed - maybe even resulting in a sending off if the incident is particularly flagrant.



The first one that came to my mind was getting rid of offside. If the rule could be enforced correctly all of the time then I think it makes sense but how many times have we seen mistakes made that have resulted in goals chopped off or allowed when the reverse should be true? It's not necessarily a bad rule but it's hard to enforce. In ice hockey you can't pass the blue line before the puck does, and I don't think the officials screw that up too much compared with offside. But the rink is smaller than a football pitch and they have 3 officials on the ice.

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I really hate it when a player goes down as if dead, play is stopped until the 'injured' player hobbles to the sideline, at which point he makes a miracle recovery and immediately signals to be let back into play. The net result is that play is disrupted.

My solution would be that if you go down and the trainer has to come on then that player is off for (say) three minutes recovery time. That will teach them!

Me too. Simple solution would be do what rugby does. Trainer/ physio comes on but he play is not stopped unless its a blood injury. Would stop all this girlie rolling around. If your not hurt and he game was raging on you wouldn't be down for long.

[HibsMax]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Totally agree - a pet hate of mine no matter who does it.

IMO you should only be allowed to shield the ball after you've touched it.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Have to agree with this anywhere else on the pitch and its a free kick so what's so different when its 3 yards from your own bye line ?

YES! Hate this! Can you imagine if we had a circle of 6 players around 1 player who actually has the ball....these 6 players prevent the defence getting close to the guy with the ball....then they waltz up the pitch Monty Python style right into the net. ;)

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Blatant time wasting should be punished with a penalty kick.

[J-C]

The stupid rule where a player is injured and after getting treatment on the pitch, he has to go off until the ref allows him back on, why not just let him get treatment then carry on with him on the pitch.

In rugby, the physio can come onto the pitch at any time to treat injuries, the player gets up then rejoins the game, no fuss, ho hassles, just common sense.

[JoeTortolanoFanClub]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Or a 22/25 yard line - a bit like the shooting zone on a subbuteo pitch.

Absolutely...would result in a much more attacking game.

[Jonnyboy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The stupid rule where a player is injured and after getting treatment on the pitch, he has to go off until the ref allows him back on, why not just let him get treatment then carry on with him on the pitch.

In rugby, the physio can come onto the pitch at any time to treat injuries, the player gets up then rejoins the game, no fuss, ho hassles, just common sense.

Mine is along these lines. If a player fouls an opponent and said opponent needs treatment then both the injured player AND his assailant should go off the pitch. The current rules disadvantage one side over the other IMO.