poll regarding proposed changes

will try this one!
part 1 ref points .. stopping the clock

• from a penalty being awarded to the spot-kick being taken

• from a goal being scored until the match resumes from the kick-off

• from asking an injured player if he requires treatment to play restarting

• from the referee showing a yellow or red card to play resuming

• from the signal of a substitution to play restarting

• from a referee starting to pace a free-kick to when it is taken

part 2

• passing to yourself at a free-kick, corner and goal-kick

• a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee's watch

• allowing the goal-kick to be taken even if the ball is moving

• a goal-kick being taken on the same side that the ball went out on

• a "clearer and more consistent definition" of handball

• a player who scores a goal or stops a goal with his hands gets a red card

• a keeper who handles a backpass or throw-in from a team-mate concedes a penalty

• the referee can award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line

• referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play

• a penalty kick is either scored or missed/saved and players cannot follow up to score to stop encroachment into the penalty area

with 10 choices possible 8 votes last 4 are the more controversial as they are real game changers

IMO .. Number 10 is in contradiction to 60 mins football ? 29 mins and 58 secs
1)a goal kick is taken and ball stay 's in play for 5 mins as attacking side tries to score to equalise
2) side in lead fouls player or kicks into touch or ....

 

Football is fine without intervention, except the lack of censure for cheating, which is exempt there.

The ref can add thirty minutes on go a game if he chooses, speed up goal kick, throw ins, book players for time wasting ... Many of the suggestions are totally impractical for football below pro level leading to two tied rules = different games.

It is all a nonsense from alleged stakeholders in football. Some of the suggestions are so ridiculous that they have to have come from people who have never Coached, Managed or played. There should be more fulfilling things to do with their time.

 

Whilst I can go along with some of what you say I think timewasting works both ways ! but there is no finite line from game to game so clearing this up would be good.

STOP THE CLOCK .......... from goal to restart .. but with a strong provisio regarding the time! for example after more than 1 ( 2 ) minute the kick off may be taken
substitution 1 minute per sub? from point the game stops. except in case of injury up to 2 minutes from when 4th official holds up the board.

the other 4 simply stop the clock

RULES
STADIUM CLOCK start and stop
handball clarification
keeper handling a back pass/ throw in = penalty

 

Size of pitch/posts/length of game apart football has the same rules U11's to the adults game. It is not necessary to change the rules of football because the elite cheat/time waste and for the benefit of TV.

The referee has adequate laws to use if instructed to.

 

They are crap ideas. Waste time book the players. Idea for FIFA, UEFA and the other gravy trainers clamp down on diving.

 

To be fair, while they are for the main part nonsense, a clearer definition or application of the handball rule is desperately needed. Most pundits don't even know that the offence is 'deliberate handball', I remember Schmeichel banging on saying the rule says nothing about intention, when he was completely wrong.

 

The rules are clear and specific.

 

But the application of it isn't clear, specific nor consistent.

 

An entirely different thing. I would challenge anybody to read the detailed handball description and fail to understand it. Children understand the rule, its specific and easy to understand ... Referees make errors, rules are subjective (still simple to understand) that's the game ..

 

Actually it's not an entirely different thing - I mentioned the application of the rule in my original post. What you're talking about is irrelevant if referees implement the rule differently.

Cliftonville in being total pedant shocker

 

BCFCRob in missing a point and posting childlike smilie ..

Referees will make mistakes. That is human and it is also because of football rules being subjective, football is also played at speed, And on ... That is the game.

A way to eliminate some errors would be to create rules that deal in absolutes (no subjectives). Any contact with the hand/arm is a free kick/penalty, any contact during the game with an opponent is a free kick/penalty ... That thankfully is not the game ...Yet.

 

How am I missing the point? I raised my own point and you're talking about something completely different! Standard response, read the post, seemingly turn your nose up, talk for several paragraphs about fluff that is irrelevant and rarely actually address the point.

Your point about referee's making mistakes, that's fine. But I'm not referring to mistakes. I'm referring to flat out different interpretation of the rules. If a player blocks the ball with his arm in front of his face, is it handball? In my opinion it shouldn't be, but many ref's seemingly have differing views. If the ball hits a players hand it should only be a foul if intentional or reckless in my opinion. If the players hands are by their side it should never be a handball offence.

Do you not agree that there is a problem with inconsistent implementation of the rule?

 

that's cliftonville for you ...consistent

cannot agree, it is probably more likely that a [deliberate ]hand ball can be achieved like this especially in a wall and free kick etc

 

You are still failing to grasp the point regarding absolutes. .

Do you not agree that there is a problem with inconsistent implementation of the rule?

No. Error is part of football. Football is beautiful and at times messy. That's the game, accept it. It is not necessary to change the rules of football because the elite cheat/time waste/do not respect the rules, only at footballs zenith is the view different. Support the referee - Respect.

If a player blocks the ball with his arm in front of his face, is it handball? No unless it is hand to ball, but error will occur. That's the game.

If the ball hits a players hand it should only be a foul if intentional or reckless in my opinion. If the players hands are by their side it should never be a handball offence ... Yes, but error will occur unless rules become black and white absolutes.

Referees who fail to implement rules properly and consistently are subject to demotion. Coaches, Managers and players behaviour should also be under scrutiny.

 

I'm fully aware of what an absolute is.

So, in your opinion, we shouldn't clarify what is a vague rule in practice, given that ref's implement it to such a varied degree that no one really knows what the actual correct implementation is, purely because 'errors happen'. Top logic that.

You have a good point about error adding to the excitement of the game to be fair but absolutely not in this instance, it's farcical at times.

 

The rules are not vague. A child can understand them. Indeed children do understand them as rules alter from U10 to adults rules at U11.

Given that ref's implement it to such a varied degree that no one really knows what the actual correct implementation ... I would entirely disagree that refereeing standards are poor. Refereeing standards are very high and are under constant review. There rest of us are not.

The rules of football create that exciting game. These rules create error, because in a invasion game of speed and contact most rules cannot be black and white. Accept it, get on with it, respect the ref ... Only the tiny minority at the top can't ..

 

This is like pulling teeth. No, the rule is not vague. I didn't say it was. But the implementation of it is. And that matters just as much. And at no point did I say refereeing standards are poor. Yet another tangent while dodging the point.

 

I will be involved in football this week and throughout the summer and on. I will see nobody weeing themselves because the referee makes an error. That attitude continues generally throughout all of football except at its peak.

I do not feel that football should change because of those at its peak behave poorly. Rule changes are not necessary and in the case of handball the only conceivable change would be to any contact is an offence - Not necessary, or of benefit to the good of the game.

Children can understand the rules, but the children playing at the top won't.

 

Cliftonville, I completely agree with you, particularly on the referee performance issue, they get far too much stick in what is a very difficult job, but no one mentioned that but yourself.

If you don't think the rule or interpretation of it needs clarifying then we have to agree to disagree, but with the way it's implemented differently by different referee's, it's about as clear as mud to me. And before you say it, an absolute rule is not necessary, contrary to your beliefs. Guidance is.

 

On occasions people will see a differing interpretation of a ruling due to its subjectivity. Football has numerous rules that allow interpretation via the use of language such as advantage, deliberate, or reckless ... It has to .. Its in the nature of football.

The handball ruling is backed up by guidance to interpret. It is hard to see how apart from abandoning the rule in favour of any contact be it deliberate or non it can be clarified further. That development would not benefit players ..

Players behaviour and the undermining of refs is an issue and these ideas don't address that, except by dumbing down the authority of the ref further. No surprises it is not about improvement of football for the millions who play at all. This swathe of ideas is unnecessary and is more about corporate interests and making the game faster/more exciting for TV's viewers ... Unfortunately a consistent from FIFA.