mwram1973 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 2 hours ago, TigerTedd said: Isn't that just 5 a side? Yeah but a bigger version Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrdave85 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 15 hours ago, Dimmu said: Some pretty radical opinions how to make game better from the FIFA's Technical Director. - completely scrap the offside - replace penalty kick with freedom to do whatever you like in 8 seconds from 25 metres - sin bin. 5 to 10 minutes. Those who can read German: http://www.bild.de/sport/fussball/fifa/plant-neue-fussball-revolution-49833710.bild.html#fromWall What do you guys think? How would that be enforced? What do the opposing team do? Wait for a signal from the ref? A whistle? Whatever they would like is surely to score? Could they not just shoot and the 'keeper has to let it in? Ridiculous proposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Van Bonkers about sums it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Methinks he's been watching too much ice hockey.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 If you scrap offside you just end up with a load of strikers and defenders in each box hoofing the ball at each other surely? It would be like watching two Pulis teams playing each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richinspain Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 1 hour ago, mrdave85 said: How would that be enforced? What do the opposing team do? Wait for a signal from the ref? A whistle? Whatever they would like is surely to score? Could they not just shoot and the 'keeper has to let it in? Ridiculous proposal. I suppose it refers to something like the penalty shoot out in hockey, where the penalty taker runs from I think the half way line and they have a set time to score in. However if it's literally whatever you like to score in a set time then I'd send all 11 players running towards the goal and watch the keeper bricking himself as they all bear down on him ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 15 hours ago, G STAR RAM said: I've got a radical idea...leave the f**king game alone. Go back to the original offside rule which everyone (apart from women) knew. Put the number of teams in the European Championships and World Cup back to what they were. Just have the league winners in the European Cup. Instead of trying to cater for people sat on their sofa at home get back to looking after the people who make the game what it is...the fans. In addition to this - Make the Europa/UEFA Cup a two-legged knock out competition. Without so many squad sapping games, big teams might just give a **** about playing in it... League Cup should be just for the Championship, and League 1 & 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 who remembers the game before the backpass rule was introduced? I think that was a positive rule change. But I also remember the Golden and Silver goals rule, and the 10 yard advance for dissent at freekicks! I think this pot-smoking liberal loony should shut his mush, unless he introduces 'rush-back' goalies, then I'm in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 I think the only idea there that has serious merit for discussion is the introduction of a sin bin for a yellow card, you'd have to tighten the rules up a bit regarding what constitutes a yellow card offense but I think it could be used to seriously curtail cynical fouls and diving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BathRam72 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Being a rugby fan as well. I quite like the idea of a 10 minute sin bin after a yellow card. Too many times do we see a cynical tackle preventing a potential goal scoring/counter attack followed by a yellow which really does nothing other than temper that players tackles for the rest of the game. 10 minutes off would punish the team as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 14 minutes ago, BathRam72 said: Being a rugby fan as well. I quite like the idea of a 10 minute sin bin after a yellow card. Too many times do we see a cynical tackle preventing a potential goal scoring/counter attack followed by a yellow which really does nothing other than temper that players tackles for the rest of the game. 10 minutes off would punish the team as a whole. Exactly what I was thinking, as well as thinking that it would be an appropriate punishment for diving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 39 minutes ago, brady1993 said: Exactly what I was thinking, as well as thinking that it would be an appropriate punishment for diving. And dissent towards the ref. Of which a crackdown on, at the start of the season has done absolutely feck all to stop... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 3 minutes ago, ramsbottom said: And dissent towards the ref. Of which a crackdown on, at the start of the season has done absolutely feck all to stop... Only one way to stop dissent on a Professional level, mic the refs up so picks up everything. Diving should be retrospectively punished with minimum 3/4 game bans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Hows about properly enforcing the rules that already exist before creating new ones.. Thought we were supposed to see less ref-crowding this season, don't think I've seen a single yellow issued for it, and it's happened a number of times at Derby. Agree with @Mafiabob, mic 'em up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombo Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 21 minutes ago, Mafiabob said: Only one way to stop dissent on a Professional level, mic the refs up so picks up everything. Diving should be retrospectively punished with minimum 3/4 game bans. Two great suggestions. Here's my take on it. To the first point, would agree but I know many ex-pros say that some of the stuff refs say to players, they'd be crucified if it ever came out. Yet it generally keeps order on the pitch... I think a better way is just bookings for dissent immediately. No warning, no "move away or you're going in the book". Ref gets a crowd of 4 or 5 running towards him going nuts.... one, two, three, four, five...all in the book the second they open their gob to him. Only if you were directly involved in the incident or you're captain can you speak to the ref imo. I think the 'crackdown' as @ramsbottom has called it has helped somewhat against dissent. Referees just need to enforce their power more. They could absolutely do what I've said above but it takes a lot of balls to do it. If players knew how easily they could receive a booking for dissent, it would stop immediately. As to the second point, I definitely agree with that. But we need to reclaim the proper meaning of 'diving'. A dive for me has to be zero contact. Not 'making a meal of it' but literally not a touch. And to be honest, when was the last time you saw that? You could punish those just 'making a meal' of the challenge but who are we to judge how much contact is enough to knock the balance off a guy who's sprinting pretty quickly and playing a fast-paced game? I think you'd have too many innocent victims of such a rule. I sometimes think Will Hughes makes a meal of a lot of challenges tbh but he's a lot thinner than most of the guys he comes up against so it's hard to know whether they really did send him flying or whether he's trying it on. The old Chris Martin debate was 'is he trying it on or is he really that heavily targeted by defenders?'. A bit of both if you ask me. He scored lots of goals, was a wind up merchant, and isn't as tall as some of the defenders he came up against. He was fouled quite often...But he did make a meal of it very often. Can be very hard to spot the difference... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 On point 2 Tombo what about the deliberate catching of the players own foot behind the defenders leg? Vardy is a master of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 23 minutes ago, Tombo said: Two great suggestions. Here's my take on it. To the first point, would agree but I know many ex-pros say that some of the stuff refs say to players, they'd be crucified if it ever came out. Yet it generally keeps order on the pitch... I think a better way is just bookings for dissent immediately. No warning, no "move away or you're going in the book". Ref gets a crowd of 4 or 5 running towards him going nuts.... one, two, three, four, five...all in the book the second they open their gob to him. Only if you were directly involved in the incident or you're captain can you speak to the ref imo. I think the 'crackdown' as @ramsbottom has called it has helped somewhat against dissent. Referees just need to enforce their power more. They could absolutely do what I've said above but it takes a lot of balls to do it. If players knew how easily they could receive a booking for dissent, it would stop immediately. As to the second point, I definitely agree with that. But we need to reclaim the proper meaning of 'diving'. A dive for me has to be zero contact. Not 'making a meal of it' but literally not a touch. And to be honest, when was the last time you saw that? You could punish those just 'making a meal' of the challenge but who are we to judge how much contact is enough to knock the balance off a guy who's sprinting pretty quickly and playing a fast-paced game? I think you'd have too many innocent victims of such a rule. I sometimes think Will Hughes makes a meal of a lot of challenges tbh but he's a lot thinner than most of the guys he comes up against so it's hard to know whether they really did send him flying or whether he's trying it on. The old Chris Martin debate was 'is he trying it on or is he really that heavily targeted by defenders?'. A bit of both if you ask me. He scored lots of goals, was a wind up merchant, and isn't as tall as some of the defenders he came up against. He was fouled quite often...But he did make a meal of it very often. Can be very hard to spot the difference... Yeah on point 2 I would be with the no contact element of it..... deliberately cheating to gain an advantage no matter where on the pitch.... or trying to get a player sent off by feigning an injury from a "push/hand/punch" after confrontation etc. Its a difficult one when making meal out of it etc..... What this would do as well, particularly in point 1..... you'll get more accountability from officials..... they aren't still going to accurate every time..... we know that, but you'll probably here why the FK been awarded or who he's got a yellow etc and other guy didn't..... Consistency from officials ain't the problem for me..... communication is..... It'll also make redundant about 75% of football pundits who make a living out of berating a official for a mistake they've seen 4 times and changed their minds 4 times on what they think..... the amount of times commentary folk do that and get away with it annoys me greatly...... Players, managers, coaches, clubs and officials should be working together to try and make sure their is a football game to watch which the rules are applied yet the game flows nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 44 minutes ago, Tombo said: Two great suggestions. Here's my take on it. To the first point, would agree but I know many ex-pros say that some of the stuff refs say to players, they'd be crucified if it ever came out. Yet it generally keeps order on the pitch... I think a better way is just bookings for dissent immediately. No warning, no "move away or you're going in the book". Ref gets a crowd of 4 or 5 running towards him going nuts.... one, two, three, four, five...all in the book the second they open their gob to him. Only if you were directly involved in the incident or you're captain can you speak to the ref imo. I think the 'crackdown' as @ramsbottom has called it has helped somewhat against dissent. Referees just need to enforce their power more. They could absolutely do what I've said above but it takes a lot of balls to do it. If players knew how easily they could receive a booking for dissent, it would stop immediately. As to the second point, I definitely agree with that. But we need to reclaim the proper meaning of 'diving'. A dive for me has to be zero contact. Not 'making a meal of it' but literally not a touch. And to be honest, when was the last time you saw that? You could punish those just 'making a meal' of the challenge but who are we to judge how much contact is enough to knock the balance off a guy who's sprinting pretty quickly and playing a fast-paced game? I think you'd have too many innocent victims of such a rule. I sometimes think Will Hughes makes a meal of a lot of challenges tbh but he's a lot thinner than most of the guys he comes up against so it's hard to know whether they really did send him flying or whether he's trying it on. The old Chris Martin debate was 'is he trying it on or is he really that heavily targeted by defenders?'. A bit of both if you ask me. He scored lots of goals, was a wind up merchant, and isn't as tall as some of the defenders he came up against. He was fouled quite often...But he did make a meal of it very often. Can be very hard to spot the difference... The problem with the first point is that football is a highly emotional game. It's your natural instinct, for instance, to go bezerk if you are desperate to score a goal and see the referee wave off a blatant penalty. Also, some challenges on your teammates will naturally force a reaction. I remember when I used to play,one game the referee was allowing such crude challenges to go and we were all frustrated by it. I was a left-back, and one of their forwards went in knee high on our centre-back and took him clean out. The referee just allowed it go, which prompted myself to launch into a mass tirade on him. Incidently I was dismissed... But it's an emotional game. Its hard to act in a normal manner and just walk away when you've just seen your friend receive a dangerous leg-breaking challenge. I know people want to use Rugby as the example, but Rugby is a completely different sport. Much slower, lot's of breaks between play. It's less desperate. Easier to keep emotions intact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbrianRam Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Love the new idea for penalty shootouts, make player skill have more of factor. In regular time not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 9 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: The problem with the first point is that football is a highly emotional game. It's your natural instinct, for instance, to go bezerk if you are desperate to score a goal and see the referee wave off a blatant penalty. Also, some challenges on your teammates will naturally force a reaction. I remember when I used to play,one game the referee was allowing such crude challenges to go and we were all frustrated by it. I was a left-back, and one of their forwards went in knee high on our centre-back and took him clean out. The referee just allowed it go, which prompted myself to launch into a mass tirade on him. Incidently I was dismissed... But it's an emotional game. Its hard to act in a normal manner and just walk away when you've just seen your friend receive a dangerous leg-breaking challenge. I know people want to use Rugby as the example, but Rugby is a completely different sport. Much slower, lot's of breaks between play. It's less desperate. Easier to keep emotions intact. I'd argue the fact every team sport is highly emotional..... football ain't no different from Rugby, Basketball, Ice Hockey and baseball..... just to name a few well followed sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.