i think that anyone found diving should be sent off..i would hate if a video ref was brought because football is a lot more interesting when the ref has to make a split second decision
That all womens soccer should be kitted out in kit like womens beach volleyball. That will get the male hormones aroused at womens football and evryone would want to go. Yum yum yummy!!!Ooh la la!!
plenty of sexy curves!!!!
![]()
Never play leapfrog with a unicorn!!
i think that anyone found diving should be sent off..i would hate if a video ref was brought because football is a lot more interesting when the ref has to make a split second decision
That's what I said............eh............I think.Originally Posted by Risteard
![]()
Just a pity the rules aren't applied.
I hate when defenders 'shepherd' the ball out of play for a goal kick. If I had the power (lovely power!), I'd call that obstruction unless the defender actually touched the ball (in which case he wouldn't let the ball just roll out of play!)
This rule would be similar in its ethos to the back-pass rule - the idea being to keep the ball in play.
What about players robbing yards/metres taking throw ins?
Yeah, think you're right on ball to hand...Originally Posted by ken foree
The middle ground you mention is only when the ref's unsighted - not really a middle ground per se. The distinction between the ball striking the hand accidentally and handball being awarded is whether the ref decides the player had time to move his hand out of the way. Either way, the ref has to make a call and we're left with no middle ground.
A free in the box can only be given for an indirect free-kick offence - backpass and obstruction being the main ones. I don't think there are many "unintentional fouls" as you define them - they may fall under the heading of "He was stupid to dive in like that", in which case penalty.
3 rule changes:
- I want a rule brought in where "injured" players who leave the field, are made to wait a full 60 seconds before being allowed back on the pitch. Too many players abuse the rule, and anyone who is genuinely injured doesn't just leave the field, and return immediately. That would clean up that aspect of time-wasting.
- As it's also time-wasting, I would like something done about that personal bugbear of mine, of players keeping the ball at the corner flag in injury time, e.g. ref adding on more time on top of the allotted injury time, at the end of the game. That would clean that up. This particular time-wasting virus, seems to be only prevalent in Irish and British football. You rarely see it in other countries.
- To revive "interest" in the rubbish pit that is Women's football, a rule should be brought in that insists the players wear skirts rather than shorts, like in hockey and tennis. Now that would be a welcome change.
That's the second type of post like this. Leave the sexism outside of this forum lads.Originally Posted by mypost
![]()
What I meant was that when a player is injured or rolling around on the floor pretending to be injured (!) the trainer can come on and treat him while play continues ... everyone else just plays on around him.Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Meh. Could well end up getting in the way. I remember treating some rugger player on the pitch one time - didn't know that was the rule and the next thing, the match kicks off again and I've got a hoarde or rugger buggers running right in my direction after the ball! Legged it fairly quickly... Not an ideal rule for treating genuinely injured players!
It raises other problems though. Does an injured player affect the offside? If a clearance comes off the physio and out for a throw, who's throw is it? Don't think there's much of an advantage in it, to be honest.
Think its ridiculous when a player is treated on the pitch for five mins and then has to walk of after receiving treatment only to walk back on. the rule is that a player can not be treated on the field of play but must leave the pitch for treatment except in extreme circumstances(broken leg, head injury etc). it is totally pointless at the moment the way a player goes down the physio comes on applies the magic sponge and the player and physio walk off for the player to walk back on.
I'd introduce citing rules like they have in rugby.
A citing commisioner who can make judgements himself, and both teams can cite opposition players. Possible also include the ref - like in Rugby League where they can refer an incident their not sure about. Any diving, off the ball incidents etc. I know it is some times done, but there's no formal way that the opposition can cite people to the video panel - only if the media kick up enough about it.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Allowing teams to cite opposition players would lead to widespread abuse and tit-for-tat citings. It's best left to an independant person.Originally Posted by Macy
We're not arrogant, we're just better.
Yeah but I'd say even those beach volleyballers would look a lot worse in the rain. A tan does a lot for ladiesOriginally Posted by Thunderblaster
![]()
As for rules, here's something I always wondered. 2 scenarios (with examples)
1) John O'Flynn breaks through on goal and is one on one with Dean Delaney. Hawkins makes a last gasp tackle and misses the ball but O'Flynn is brought down. City get penalty, and Hawkins is sent off as he is the "last man".
2) Again flynn breaks through on goal and Hawkins is gone so nobody can catch him. He is one on one with the keeper, and goes around him. He knocks the ball past Delaney and is taken down. This time, Hearey has got back on the line as a "covering defender". Delaney gets a yellow card.
Surely both tackles denied a one-on-one, but most of the time, the keeper will get off with a yellow because there was a "covering defender", but the defender will get a red even though there is a "covering keeper".
Seem weird?![]()
The glass isn't half full or half empty it's just too damn big!
Not sure if it has been mentioned but would like to see 4 linesmen instead of the normal 2. So that all sides of the pitch can be covered and more involved with the ref.
At last, someone else who gets annoyed by defenders obstructing play. After diving, "shepherding the ball out of play" is my biggest bugbear. I'm sure there's already a rule on obstructing, it's just never used for those instances and bl00dy well should be. It's supposed to be entertainment afterall, so the rules should give the attackers the advantage.Originally Posted by crc
The one thing I wouldn't introduce is the sin-bin. It smacks of a minority sport to me, we'll be having time-outs next.
"...and it's Charlie Chaplin on the wing..."
Linesmen in football are only ever linesmen.
Touch judges in rugby are also referees and they alternate between the jobs. The touch judges have much more influence in rugby than linesmen in football and much more off the ball incidents are dealt with.
Except for when they're "assistant referees"Originally Posted by Bald Student
![]()
"...and it's Charlie Chaplin on the wing..."
Top of my list, is an easy one.
From an experiment in the Brasilian league.
The Ref carries a white spray can in his back pocket, used after a free kick is awarded to mark the distance a defense wall should line up behind and in one strokeeliminate all that farce of a ref lining up the wall the required distance, the wall transgressing etc. Gives unquestioned authority to the ref. I only saw it used in two games, it worked superbly.
hear you re: handball. funny i was thinking about this only yesterday watching psg-marseille (dire). there was a big shout at the end for a peno where a psg forward had dribbled just inside the area and pushed the ball to one side of a defender.. it looked as if he might lose control and the defender stood his ground when they collided. it was a real 6 of one situation; the forward's path to goal was impeded (crashed to the ground, chance lost), but the defender had his hands in the air as if to say "he's barging into me, i'm not at fault!" no peno given obviously, which woulda been very harsh. but as you put it, "obstruction" could perhaps be more widely applied in these in-between cases?Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Bookmarks