Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Rules you would change if you could...
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Interesting topic and some good comments but some of the responses indicate that there still is a lack of understanding of the LOTG. A lot of this seems to stem from the "punditry" of Andy Gray ilk. Really annoys me.
personally, i'll go for the obvious one, the offside rule. the interfering with play lark still comes across as pretty pointless when it comes down to it. if you're too lazy/stupid/smartarse-is to get onside you deserve to be penalised. i'm all for leeway, but people get ridiculous.
I cant understand why people are confused over the offside rule.
Its not an offence to be in an offside position, unless a player is in an offside position when recieving the ball after being in that offside position when played by a team mate. Ok I think that part is clear.
The infereing with play part is where the debate lies. I've highlighted play as actually its classed as interferring with an oppenent or involved in active play.
An example of the first part is when a ball is played forward, attacker is offside but ball goes to goal keeper. Now is the flag raised? Not unless the attacker is within sufficient distance of the keeper to interfere with him (not in that way) i.e. collide or make him make a mistake.
Active play is obviously being involved in that passage of play. If you are standing on the corner flag picking your nose and your team mates score, why should you be offside.Red card automatically for simulation. Pisses me off no end. Can't ever watch a Chelsea match without 5 or 6 minutes of the game consumed by Drogba's "injuries".
Things happen in a game so quickly, a decision has to be made. You would end up in a situation where now the debate was - he got sent off unfairly as there was contact and that changed the game. Different spin on the same argumentNecronomicon wrote: »Being forced off the pitch because you were seen for two seconds by a physio is ridiculous. Especially when the player misses a set-piece that came about as part of the challenge.
No its not really. There is a procedure for referees to assess an injury. If the player is on the ground we ask - do you need treatment? The when the physio is on we ask - can he be moved? when the physio says yes we say right off you go so we can get on with the game. It deters player for getting treatment for little things or for a drink break. Works quite well in fact.Play goes on regardless of someone being injured similar to the way rugby is. Physios come on and treat the player on the pitch while play goes on around them. I realise this is drastic and not the best solution but it's a thousand times better than cnuts rolling around on the ground when there is clearly nothing wrong with them, breaking up the flow of the game. That carry on really sickens my poo.
Too risky and dangerous. What if its a head injury and the balls strikes the player on the ground. There are cases in rugby where play is stopped. It wouldnt work.I'd like to bring in a rule that substitutions can't be made in injury time.
We are allowed to add additional time lost for substitions. No case there reallyIf you mouth to the Ref once a free, twice a yellow card three times sent off..
A player can instantly get a red for foul, abusive language. They are less tolerant of swearing in England than Ireland.Asking the ref to book another player or even doing that stupid yellow card gesture with your hands should get you a yellow card yourself - if that's not already the case
That does (should) get a yellow.Keano A Legend wrote: »This joke of a rule that you can obstruct a player when the ball is rolling over your end line. The defending player imo is fouling the player as he makes no attempt to play the ball.
It is perfectly legal to shield the ball as long as its in your possession. Referees should punish blocking if the ball is not within playing distance of the defender etc.I'd also like to stop see the phsyical aspect of the game being pushed out. When I played football, if you were running parallel with an opponent, you could use your shoulder to nudge him, and it wasnt a foul.
Its horrid seeing shoulder to shoulder challenges, players diving, and free kicks giving against.
Shoulder barges are still quite legal. However a lot of players seem to be unable to distinguish a shoulder to shoulder from s shoulder charge into the back.ArmaniJeanss wrote: »No indirect free kicks inside the penalty box.
All such freekicks to be direct.
A direct free kick is a penalty. You want to see peno's for a deliberate pass to the keeper???
Interesting one this one. I think that would be ok in Under 10'sThis post has been deleted.
As others have mentioned yellow card for arguring with the ref.
There is such punishment already. Its called dissent1. I would like to see referees being allowed to award an indirect freekick for accidental handballs inside the box. I always feel these rulings are harsh when given as a defender often doesn't mean to do it. Also the ball is often not in a dangerous position when it happens so to get pretty much a guaranteed goal straight from this is harsh sometimes I feel. Plus there dosn't seem to be a set rule on this, sometimes they are given and sometimes they are not (Assou-Ekotto against Liverpool). These variable decisions cost points and I feel this rule would eliminate the harsh penalty against defenders, while still rewarding the attacking side who have been impeded.
2. Why not introduce the 'time-off rule' like in rugby? Any time a sub is made, a player goes down etc..., the referee simply calls time off and the clock stops. This would eliminate controversy like in the United City game about whether the game should have been over or not. Time-off and then once the 90 minute mark is reached, the players play untill the next whistle (whether that be a foul, an offside, or the ball going out of play) and then the game is over. This would also eliminate the effectiveness of Drogba's antics, as as soon as he hits the floor, the ref can call time-off and the oposition players know they are not being done over.
Handling the ball accidentally is not an offence. Why put a rule in place to penalise a player for having arms?
The time issue would slow the game down as referees can add time at their discretion. All this rubbish on the tv , saying there were 2 substitions and 1 goal thats 2 mins. Non-sense. The ref can add additional time for goalkeeper taking their time on goal kicks and he doesnt have to take any further action.Racing Flat wrote: »I'd like to see some changes that would involve player responsibility and hopefully improving the integrity of the game, to make it more self-regulated like golf. Probably impossible....but maybe something like you can only get booked for diving if you claim for a free or a foul. If you just get up again the referee assumes you weren't looking for it and can make his own mind up as to whether it was a foul or not. Or if the ref blows for a free but the player awarded the free says it wasn't (like Robbie Fowler v Seaman) the ref can change his mind.
I'd be against changes involving more refs and video technology, purely from the point of view that it seperates the game from that played by amateurs. Ever try to play a game of american football with your friends - it's totally different to the NFL game. Human error is part of it, sometimes it goes against you, sometimes with you. It's only sport, take it if it goes against you.
Any rules to bring the sport back into it would be great. At the moment winning is so important that cheating is endemic - e.g. when I was playing, every time the ball went over the top, as defenders we claimed for off-side, regardless of whether we had any idea if it was or not. We also claimed for every corner, throw-in etc. as did the other team. Basically constantly cheating doing anything possible to gain an advantage. And there were fights every week. What's all that about?
Bring the sport back into it.
Cant argue with anything above. I would say though,refs can change their mind as long as they havent restarted play. I did so recently. I thought the defender handled the ball on the goal line. Gave the penalty and after consultation with oppostion players and the player himself realised I made a mistake and change my mind. Other refs probably would have just gone a ahead with peno but I didnt.
Start penalising holding in the area
Remove time keeping from ref
Allow the captain to question the ref, book other players
Holding should be penalised in the area. I dont know why they dont do it more it the EPL. If its a free kick outside the box then its a free kick inside the box
You want the captain to be able to give yellow cards??? strange one.The captains in England already do have certain rights and access to the referee but he must also control the behaviour of his own players. Doesnt happen in top flight though.I thought it was at the refs discretion to award indirect frees inside the box already. I remember this happened years ago (aka: when I was playing) quite frequently. And while that was back in Germany I think the rules are pretty much aligned everywhere in the UEFA/FIFA zone.
There a set offences for direct and indirect free kicks so its not at our discretionActual respect for the referee like in rugby. Only the captain of the team is allowed to speak to the referee and in a respectful manner. Automatic 5 game ban for ANY player (England players included) who breaks the rules. Same rule to apply to the manager if he approachs the referee after the final whistle or at half time.
I dont mind talking to other players but the captain is the one I do the communicating through. The managers are allowed to approach the referee 30 minutes after the game to talk about the decisions so it amazes me when I see them charge up after the game. Silly really.
There are plenty of indirect free kicks. A free kick for offside is indirect, direct pass to the keeper etc.i would bring back indirect free-kicks. there seems to be none anymore.
shielding/ushering the ball out of play, its obstruction simple as.
offside = OFFSIDE
Another quote above was in relation to the assistants seeing offsides. It is surprisingly sometimes easy to spot offsides. The reasons for not having two assistants in the same half would be that there could be conflicts in their decisions leaving the officials looking more foolish and then giving rise to more arguments on the pitch.
Unless you have been in the middle with the whistle the LOTG do seem sometimes a bit funny, but they do work well when applied correctly.
In relation the cheating last night - I wouldnt take issue with the referee - I would take issue with the assistant as his positioning was poor to see the handball.
Sneaky0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Advertisement