Laws Of The Game: What Changes Would You Make?

[Tannochsidebear 2,429]

I have thought for years that subs should be allowed on and off at will, via the 4th official who at the moment gets paid for pretty much nothing. I would like to see a trial of each side having their 7 subs which can come on and off to suit, as long as the player goes off the park first at the 4th officials approval. The game is no longer stopped for substitutions, and the game can become more tactical as a manager can bench specialist players who can go on to take free kicks for example then come back off. When down a goal they can throw attacking players on, then take them back off if defensive options are required.

 

I do not see it as being difficult to administer from the 4th officials standpoint as he is in charge of allowing these to happen, so obviously he would not allow this to happen if the play was right in front of him. It would also mean that a player going off has to be at the touchline ready to go off, not taking 30 seconds to go off milking the crowd, or timewasting. Injured players can go off anywhere at a natural break in play but can only re-enter play at the 4th officials approval at the centre line.

 

I would also like to see each side get one tactical time-out per game, lasting say 90 seconds. If your team is right under the cosh, or are not adjusting to a tactical switch from the opposition, the manager can call a time-out to get his instructions to his team. While I admit this stops the play, it could become a useful tactical tool to have and make the game more interesting. I would reduce the half time interval to 10 minutes to compensate for this. I still cant see why 15 minutes is needed to change ends, get a drink and some tactical talk.

[Scott7 6,172]

I like the ten minute half time - that's what it used to be - but not the rest of it Tsb.

[Hildy 0]

I have thought for years that subs should be allowed on and off at will, via the 4th official who at the moment gets paid for pretty much nothing. I would like to see a trial of each side having their 7 subs which can come on and off to suit, as long as the player goes off the park first at the 4th officials approval. The game is no longer stopped for substitutions, and the game can become more tactical as a manager can bench specialist players who can go on to take free kicks for example then come back off. When down a goal they can throw attacking players on, then take them back off if defensive options are required.

 

I do not see it as being difficult to administer from the 4th officials standpoint as he is in charge of allowing these to happen, so obviously he would not allow this to happen if the play was right in front of him. It would also mean that a player going off has to be at the touchline ready to go off, not taking 30 seconds to go off milking the crowd, or timewasting. Injured players can go off anywhere at a natural break in play but can only re-enter play at the 4th officials approval at the centre line.

 

I would also like to see each side get one tactical time-out per game, lasting say 90 seconds. If your team is right under the cosh, or are not adjusting to a tactical switch from the opposition, the manager can call a time-out to get his instructions to his team. While I admit this stops the play, it could become a useful tactical tool to have and make the game more interesting. I would reduce the half time interval to 10 minutes to compensate for this. I still cant see why 15 minutes is needed to change ends, get a drink and some tactical talk.

I don't agree with timeouts at all.

 

Coaches and managers have plenty of time to prepare their players beforehand and at half-time. Timeouts would be used to stop the flow of the game when one team was getting on top, which from a spectating point of view is frustrating and annoying.

 

I'm glad you can see where I am coming from with regard to substitutes. There is no need to stop the game at all. The fourth official can take care of this.

[Hildy 0]

I like the ten minute half time - that's what it used to be - but not the rest of it Tsb.

I don't see a return to a shorter break at half-time happening. I'd like it to but it's highly unlikely.

 

This period is used for television advertising and looking after guests in hospitality.

[Juancornetto 1]

If FIFA want to capture the US's prolonged interest, they'll have to do something about the play acting and feigning of injury. None of their sports have a problem with this although they wear enough body armour in the NFL. From speaking to a few colleagues over there, it's always brought up that European "soccer" players spend most of their time rolling around and trying to get their opponents into trouble and it's kind of hard to disagree with them.

 

We've become normalised to what is basically cheating over the years and it's now seen as part of the game. Instant replays of incidents and zero tolerance of offences would be my suggestion.

[Tannochsidebear 2,429]

Any replay that shows a clear dive (zero contact) should result in a 3 game ban and a 2 weeks wages fine. The same for anyone who is already going to ground before the contact comes in, or who sticks their leg out to ensure contact as they are going to ground.

 

Players feigning injury when there was no contact should get the same.

 

This doesnt help the ref at the time, but it should cut out a lot of it if the punishment was severe.

[Mountain Bear 0]

We could learn a lot from rugby with regards to making the game flow, and maintaining discipline of players. Things like treating injuries while the game continues, and sin bins etc. I think they also have a better time-keeping system, and stop the clock on occasions, although fuck knows why sometimes.

 

You rarely hear people moaning about rugby referees, even though it seems a more complicated game. TV replays have probably helped in this respect, but we all know FIFA love all rule changes to be applicable to all levels of the game.

 

You obviously don't listen to Peter Wright (ex Scotland front row and commentator on Radio Scotland).

 

The scrummage is a random penalty generator and some of the rules are so difficult to apply consistently that even the better refs struggle.

 

The big difference is that the players respect the referee's decision and if they don't they find themselves 10m closer to their own line.

 

I do like the TMO (video ref) though. I also like the player's line call challenges in tennis.

 

Give a manager 1 chance to request a video review of a decision per game. If they're right, then the decision is overturned and they keep their challenge.

[Mountain Bear 0]

I'd get rid of draws. If it's all square after 90mins, remove a player from each side every 2 minutes until one side scores to win the game.

[the wasp 0]

I'd get rid of draws. If it's all square after 90mins, remove a player from each side every 2 minutes until one side scores to win the game.

 

I absolutely hate draws,ties.Soccer and Ice hockey are about the only two team sports(i think) where it happens.It can happen in the NFL but its extremely rare.

Maybe it's one of the reasons I love baseball so much they just play,and play until there's a winner. "GO JAYS GO":celebrate2:

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

We could learn a lot from rugby with regards to making the game flow, and maintaining discipline of players. Things like treating injuries while the game continues, and sin bins etc. I think they also have a better time-keeping system, and stop the clock on occasions, although fuck knows why sometimes.

 

You rarely hear people moaning about rugby referees, even though it seems a more complicated game. TV replays have probably helped in this respect, but we all know FIFA love all rule changes to be applicable to all levels of the game.

Aye, rugby is well known for being a free flowing sport right enough.