can we make soccer better

pickarooney

Boskowski wrote: »

The most annoying thing is play acting and diving in my opinion. It disreputes the game and is really annoying to watch. In extreme cases - I'm thinking of certain classicos - it turns a match almost into a farce from a spectators point of view.
But it's a tricky thing because if you don't go down in certain situations the ref simply won't give it or even fails to see it altogether as the foul ithat it is. I know it is often infuriating to watch grown men go down after contacts that are clearly harmless enough and they would just shrug off in non footie situations but that's the reality. From there then it's only a small step to outrageous exaggeration and even making it up altogether.
It's like in real life with anything that leaves a grey area some people will abuse it.
I have thought about this and I have no idea what to do from a rules perspective really. Only thing I could think is retrospective banning for 100% clear simulation like outright no contact dives.
Anyone else any suggestions for this?

Ah here, only yesterday you were defending Müller after his cock-acting against Portugal.

CSF

Also 90% of the ideas in here read like they were written by a 5 year old who doesn't fully understand why the current rules are in place.

'Allow teams to bring an extra player when they go 1 goal down'

Seriously, my 11 year old brother would be scoffing and looking down his nose at you with that idea.

MajorMax

madra dubh wrote: »

Can we improve soccer by adding a few rule changes. I feel soccer needs a shake up here are a few things I would like to change.
1. Sin bin for yellow card
2. Siting similar use as in rugby but also to stop faking injury from fouls.
3. Red card for shirt off after scoring. This would stop it instantly
4. Only captain can approach the ref
5. No passing back into your own half
6. No offside rule????? Not sure
What do you think

Landmines, it'll keep the players on their toes

pickarooney

It's a bit disturbing how some people are completely incapable of distinguishing obvious jokes from serious suggestions. Which may well apply to this post...

Will I Amnt

Boskowski wrote: »

The most annoying thing is play acting and diving in my opinion. It disreputes the game and is really annoying to watch.

You were defending Müller's pathetic play acting yesterday :pac:

Maximus Alexander

I actually really like the idea of the black card in GAA. It might be the perfect way to tackle diving. The offender can be thrown off the pitch without completely destroying the rest of the match, it would certainly make you think twice.

Diving is one of the big scourges on the game in my opinion and, as popular as it is, is probably one of the major barriers to it growing any further.

uggybear

When the defender has possession of the ball there should no slowing down the game by passing the ball back towards the goalkeeper when he has all the time in the world to clear it except when he is the last man on the last line of the defence between himself and the striker
(if you know what I mean)

pickarooney

uggybear wrote: »

When the defender has possession of the ball there should slowing down the flow of the game by passing back towards the goalkeeper when he has all the time in the world to clear it except when he is the last man standing in the defence
(if you know what I mean)

Nope... too many missing words

uggybear

pickarooney wrote: »

Nope... too many missing words

Edited it now so that it would make more sense

GavRedKing

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I actually really like the idea of the black card in GAA. It might be the perfect way to tackle diving. The offender can be thrown off the pitch without completely destroying the rest of the match, it would certainly make you think twice.

Diving is one of the big scourges on the game in my opinion and, as popular as it is, is probably one of the major barriers to it growing any further.

Outside of running/walking, its probably the most actively pursued and easiest sports on the planet to take up.

The game, arguably cant be grown any further.

pickarooney

GavRedKing wrote: »

Outside of running/walking, its probably the most actively pursued and easiest sports on the planet to take up.

The game, arguably cant be grown any further.

There are billions of people who have little or no interest in the game, at least as regards participating. The biggest potential market, the US, despite sending 200,000 fans to Brazil, more than any other country, still has huge potential for growth which is hampered by the ludicrous play-acting of top professionals.

I haven't watched much of them outside of the last few world cups, but I can't say I've ever seen an American player dive or feign injury. It seems antithetical to them and stands greatly to their credit.

Maximus Alexander

^

What he said.

ETA, as that was a pointless post: Whenever I meet people who don't like football, and express to them that I'm surprised they don't like it since I think it's a wonderful game and it's not that dissimilar to [insert field sport here] which they love, the primary reason given is the play acting, diving and general 'sissy' image that football has.

I'd argue that until everyone on Earth is a fan, any sport can continue to grow. It just needs to be nurtured. Anyway, I wouldn't propose tackling diving (no pun intended) purely for the sake of the sport's image. Even among existing fans diving is a pox. It slows down the flow of the game, as well as influencing results when the referee makes the wrong call. If you stop players diving, you improve the game.

Boskowski

pickarooney wrote: »

Ah here, only yesterday you were defending Müller after his cock-acting against Portugal.

I was ,but everything I said here is in line with what I said yesterday. I don't think mueller was simulating. He got a hand in the face at full pace. If he doesn't go down the ref will simply ignore it. What happened after that is pepes doing alone. But let's not drag this offtopic.

enda1

The captain being the only person allowed talk to the ref would be impractical. It works in rugby because everyone's within spitting distance of the ref at all times, but in soccer with maybe a keeper being captain and the incident happening in the opposite box, it's not practical. Maybe instead it's only 1 person allowed speak to the ref at any one time?

I'd most certainly like to bring in automatic offside triggers* (if they could be developed) and retrospective action for diving/simulation. The goal-line technology has already proved marvellous in awarding a very difficult to call incident in the France Honduras match.

*The ref would be informed that someone is offside, but the ref would decide themselves if that player was interfering.

Nerdlingr

If you need to leave the field for treatment or if the physio is called on, you have to stay off the field for a minmum of 1 minute before being left back on.
Or something like that.

enda1

Nerdlingr wrote: »

If you need to leave the field for treatment or if the physio is called on, you have to stay off the field for a minmum of 1 minute before being left back on.
Or something like that.

The player gets (further) penalised because an opposition player injures them??

RoryMac

Nerdlingr wrote: »

If you need to leave the field for treatment or if the physio is called on, you have to stay off the field for a minmum of 1 minute before being left back on.
Or something like that.

In a lot of causes that would penalise a team & player that may have been fouled, what would you do if a keeper was injured?

Maximus Alexander

RoryMac wrote: »

In a lot of causes that would penalise a team & player that may have been fouled, what would you do if a keeper was injured?

Give John O'Shea the gloves. :pac:

Richard Hillman

I agree with Sin bins for certain yellows. Cynical fouls when a team are counter attacking a scourge on the sport. Giving a free kick away and getting a yellow card is mostly a win for the infringing team. It should never be the case of the the infringing team coming out better for commiting a foul.

RoryMac

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

Give John O'Shea the gloves. :pac:

Last man back/fly keepers!

Nerdlingr

enda1 wrote: »

The player gets (further) penalised because an opposition player injures them??

If a player is injured they're going to need treatment anyway. If they're not injured just get up and get on with it because you know your team is gonna be a man down for the next 60 seconds or so. It would put the responsibility back on the players to do the right thing or suffer the consequences.
(May need a bit of fine tuning!!:D)

Keepers would be exempt.

Chucky the tree

Ferris_Bueller wrote: »

I have noticed in the past year or so the diving and exaggerating injuries has become so bad, it really is off putting to the sport at this stage, I think something needs to be done in the next few years to cut it out. Not sure what exactly as it can be hard to define either of the above, but my god am I sick of seeing big 6"2 athletes go down screaming only to be back up 30 seconds later.

The one way to stop exaggerating injuries I think is to keep players on the sidelines for the duration of time they spend on the ground. For example, if a player gets treatment for two minutes then he has to spend two minutes on the sideline before he is allowed onto the pitch. Obviously sucks for people who are genuinely injured.

Will I Amnt

Chucky the tree wrote: »

The one way to stop exaggerating injuries I think is to keep players on the sidelines for the duration of time they spend on the ground. For example, if a player gets treatment for two minutes then he has to spend two minutes on the sideline before he is allowed onto the pitch. Obviously sucks for people who are genuinely injured.

That's a terrible idea. Punish players for getting injured? Really?

Chucky the tree

Will I Amnt wrote: »

That's a terrible idea. Punish players for getting injured? Really?

If you wan to stop people faking injuries then yes, that's the only way to do it really.

Reekwind

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If you wan to stop people faking injuries then yes, that's the only way to do it really.

So someone is on the receiving end of a crunching tackle and they are punished by being taken off the pitch for a time? Really?

Will I Amnt

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If you wan to stop people faking injuries then yes, that's the only way to do it really.

Apart from the ridiculousness of the whole idea, what would that do in the case of Müller yesterday?
Put him on the sideline for the 5 or 6 seconds it would take to execute the free kick he has cheated his way to?

Chucky the tree

Reekwind wrote: »

So someone is on the receiving end of a crunching tackle and they are punished by being taken off the pitch for a time? Really?

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If you wan to stop people faking injuries then yes, that's the only way to do it really.

.

Chucky the tree

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Apart from the ridiculousness of the whole idea, what would that do in the case of Müller yesterday?
Put him on the sideline for the 5 or 6 seconds it would take to execute the free kick he has cheated his way to?

Compared to punishing him by doing nothing?

Will I Amnt

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Compared to punishing him by doing nothing?

How about looking at the incident after a game and banning him for the next 3 fixtures?
How you think your way is the only way...

Chucky the tree

Will I Amnt wrote: »

How about looking at the incident after a game and banning him for the next 3 fixtures?
How you think your way is the only way...

He was hit in the face though. You think banning someone who was hit in the face for 3 games isn't ridiculous?

Reekwind

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If you wan to stop people faking injuries then yes, that's the only way to do it really.

I'm going to try again because you clearly didn't pick up on the insinuation in my original post:

It is absolutely mad to prioritise the prevention of simulation or exaggeration (two very different things) above the basic integrity of the laws and referees. The purpose of the latter is to ensure that players who commit offences are punished. Yet you would essentially be punishing players for fouls that other players have committed. And that's unacceptable. Any system that punishes the innocent en route to getting at the guilty is badly, badly broken.

So if your way is indeed the only way then I'll gladly keep the current system. It may have its flaws but at least it's not completely insane. Punishing divers is not that high a priority that it requires completely subverting the purpose of laws and referees.

He was hit in the face though. You think banning someone who was hit in the face for 3 games isn't ridiculous?

This is of course a valid point.

Diving (ie simulation) should of course be retrospectively challenged. But it's near-impossible to gauge beyond doubt whether a player moving at speed has dived or merely exaggerated the impact of contact. Fred's opening game dive could probably be called beyond all doubt by a panel of experts but Muller took a hand to the face. No panel could prove that he dived, never mind pass a three game sentence on its basis.

Nerdlingr

Will I Amnt wrote: »

Apart from the ridiculousness of the whole idea, what would that do in the case of Müller yesterday?
Put him on the sideline for the 5 or 6 seconds it would take to execute the free kick he has cheated his way to?

The Ref didnt blow for a foul on Muller in the first instance. He let play go on. He only stopped the game and awarded a free when pepe performed his head-butt.

Chucky the tree

Reekwind wrote: »

I'm going to try again because you clearly didn't pick up on the insinuation in my original post:

It is absolutely mad to prioritise the prevention of simulation or exaggeration (two very different things) above the basic integrity of the laws and referees. The purpose of the latter is to ensure that players who commit offences are punished. Yet you would essentially be punishing players for fouls that other players have committed. And that's unacceptable. Any system that punishes the innocent en route to getting at the guilty is badly, badly broken.

So if your way is indeed the only way then I'll gladly keep the current system. It may have its flaws but at least it's not completely insane. Punishing divers is not that high a priority that it requires completely subverting the purpose of laws and referees
.

I never said it was something I'd want implemented. I just said it's really the best way of doing it if people wanted it stamped out.

Guy:Incognito

Mr.Crinklewood wrote: »

Ban short corners.

Couple this with a no mans land area around the corner flag where anything goes. Lets see players try run the clock down in the corner with that.


Make body checking against the rules at all times, not exempt when your trying to let the ball run out for a goal kick. It seems fine to pretty much assault an attacker who has the cheek to try get to the ball at the minute.

Nerdlingr

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Couple this with a no mans land area around the corner flag where anything goes. Lets see players try run the clock down in the corner with that.


Make body checking against the rules at all times, not exempt when your trying to let the ball run out for a goal kick. It seems fine to pretty much assault an attacker who has the cheek to try get to the ball at the minute.

Thats a rule at the moment but no-one ever implements it.

RichardoKhan

10 yards further forward for free kicks if player gives back chat to the ref. Also allow managers one call per half to query a decision with video evidence IE Peno's, sending offs, offside rulings etc. Once used up can not use again until next half

Guy:Incognito

Nerdlingr wrote: »

Thats a rule at the moment but no-one ever implements it.

That's what I was getting at. I didn't actually think you were allowed foul players in certain areas of the pitch, even if the refs seem to

Will I Amnt

Chucky the tree wrote: »

He was hit in the face though. You think banning someone who was hit in the face for 3 games isn't ridiculous?

If he was brushed in the face like yesterday and went down holding his face and rolling around then no it's not ridiculous. It would make him think before doing it again.
It's an infinitely better idea than yours.

pickarooney

Reekwind wrote: »

So someone is on the receiving end of a crunching tackle and they are punished by being taken off the pitch for a time? Really?

Surely their health is the most important thing and they should be required to get a check-over and the all clear before retaking the field?

enda1

pickarooney wrote: »

Surely their health is the most important thing and they should be required to get a check-over and the all clear before retaking the field?

For a head injury I can understand, but in terms of all other health, the player is responsible for that himself and can chose to continue with a limp if he wants.

Reekwind

pickarooney wrote: »

Surely their health is the most important thing and they should be required to get a check-over and the all clear before retaking the field?

Chucky's argument was that players should get treated on the pitch (as normal) and then be sent off for the amount of time that treatment took. That latter time off the pitch would effectively be punishment for needing treatment.

(The fact that this would encourage quicker, and less thorough, treatments to injured players is one of the lesser arguments against that suggestion.)

Morpork

For me the best way to eliminate simulation and cheating is to bring in a "Challenge" system. The manager or captain can ask for a challenge to a ref's decision 3 times per half or game, which goes to video review. It would help with other situations such as a goal scored from an offside, or determining if a handball was really a handball.

RoryMac

Morpork wrote: »

For me the best way to eliminate simulation and cheating is to bring in a "Challenge" system. The manager or captain can ask for a challenge to a ref's decision 3 times per half or game, which goes to video review. It would help with other situations such as a goal scored from an offside, or determining if a handball was really a handball.

The video review would be great for offside, handballs etc but when it comes to diving & simulation I really don't think it will eliminate cheating.

Everyone seems to have a different view on how much contact is enough to warrant a foul or to bring a player down, every week we see arguments about decisions with slow motion replays showing the slightest touch and plenty of people deem this enough for a penalty/free. The people reviewing the videos will also have differing views

I'm not arguing against challenges to video review as it would undoubtedly help but we will still be having the same arguments if it is introduced

Boskowski

Will I Amnt wrote: »

If he was brushed in the face like yesterday and went down holding his face and rolling around then no it's not ridiculous. It would make him think before doing it again.
It's an infinitely better idea than yours.

Jesus man Mueller really angered you didn't he? Maybe you should look at the replay again cos I can't remember any rolling around. In fact I thought he sat down on his ar5e held his face and was back up within a couple seconds?

Also How you are telling from your armchair that he was only brushed is almost psychic. In fact you should consider a career in remote refereeing.

If you were on about Fred different story but seriously I'd wager not even an independent expert panel could tell for sure how severe the contact was but you obviously know for sure...

thelad95

I don't want to de-rail this thread but anyway..

I can't understand people slating Muller. He went down like he'd been shot alright but there is no excuse for what Pepe did. The referee hadn't even given a free kick for Muller's play-acting.

Sirsok

With the amount of television cameras recording every game how hard would it to be to have another official to just watch the game and give the ref the scissor through their earpiece, would eradicate the need for them useless officials sometimes on the end line.... Jesus the fourth official can watch the screen, it would just eliminate some really really ****ty calls.

Will I Amnt

Boskowski wrote: »

Jesus man Mueller really angered you didn't he? Maybe you should look at the replay again cos I can't remember any rolling around. In fact I thought he sat down on his ar5e held his face and was back up within a couple seconds?

Also How you are telling from your armchair that he was only brushed is almost psychic. In fact you should consider a career in remote refereeing.

If you were on about Fred different story but seriously I'd wager not even an independent expert panel could tell for sure how severe the contact was but you obviously know for sure...

Not at all, I like Müller, don't understand the hate for him. It's the way a certain few are blindly defending him that's annoying.

I seen the incident 4 or 5 times with replays yesterday, no need to be psychic. I've no interest in arguing it anymore with someone so blinkered and biased so this is my last post on the matter. That's not a sleight on your charachter, I can be that way myself at times as do most people here. We can agree to disagree.

CSF

Nothing to be said for the introduction of a scrum?

RustDaz

madra dubh wrote: »

Can we improve soccer by adding a few rule changes. I feel soccer needs a shake up here are a few things I would like to change.
1. Sin bin for yellow card
2. Siting similar use as in rugby but also to stop faking injury from fouls.
3. Red card for shirt off after scoring. This would stop it instantly
4. Only captain can approach the ref
5. No passing back into your own half
6. No offside rule????? Not sure
What do you think

Go home Stalin you're Drunk

thelad95

What about limiting offside rulings to just in the box? Never going to happen but would make parking the bus harder.