The Rules of Football

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

irishbluebird

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2011
3,729
3,906
113
Cardiff
Do you get confused sometimes with the current football rules?

For example. When did it become okay to haul a player down in the penalty area without caution, yet if this happens outside the box it’s a free kick with a possible yellow or red thrown in as well?

For me one of the most archaic regulations is the award of an indirect free kick for offside. Now offsides are always in the defending teams half and more often towards their goal area. Who is going to score a direct shot into the opposition’s goal from there?

So I thought this could be a close season topic to discuss. What rules do you think should be changed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: clingo
I don't like that defenders are allowed to shield the ball out of play. Anywhere else in the pitch a player deliberately blocking an opponent is a foul. Let's make it a foul anywhere on the pitch. Could be lots of penalties for us to miss!
 
I don't like that defenders are allowed to shield the ball out of play. Anywhere else in the pitch a player deliberately blocking an opponent is a foul. Let's make it a foul anywhere on the pitch. Could be lots of penalties for us to miss!
One of my bug bears cling.
Its obstruction. If you touch the ball and have controlled it you can shield the ball. If you haven't touched it you're just obstructing the opposition.

I'd also like to see the offside rule changed. AGAIN.
Rather than if any bit is off side you're offside I'd rather it be that if any bit of you is on side, you're onside. A striker tends to be leaning towards the goal making their run so his / her feet are likely to be onside whereas their head mightnt be.

I was also confused by VAR on the weekend. Palace v Bournmouth (isn't Gary O'Neil doing a good job).
Andersen produces a well timed 6 inch jab, breaking the nose of Lerma. Aparently that's legal as there was no swinging arm.<doh>

https://www.skysports.com/watch/vid...res-joachim-andersen-punch-on-jefferson-lerma
 
Such fine margins for offside decisions but if your big toe is deemed offside that is plain ludicrous. Not only that the game is all about excitement and goals so to be cancelling goals for the sake of a couple of centimetres is ridiculous. Then again as I also support Spurs what do I know about excitement and goals???

I don't know what the solution is but as it stands it is killing the game.

Good suggestion Remote. It puts the emphasis back on trying to score. The other alternative is no offside. Goal hangers rule. <ok>

As for the Andersen/Lerma incident, lesson to players, develop a very short back swing to your punch = no red card.

Bournemouth fans understandably spitting feathers but they have another year in the Prem despite their ridiculously small ground. 11k capacity and then at least 500 no shows every home game.
 
Benefit of doubt should go to the attacking team in offside decisions.
Hate linesmen doing nothing when there’s a blatant foul or throw in right in front of them.
Hate refs being swayed by players feigning injury and screaming on impact
Goalkeepers taking the mick with time wasting
Refs failing to give 2nd yellows for similar fouls and their inconsistency
Not having the correct added on time. It’s not rocket science for the 4th official stopping his watch for every stop in play and after a goal
 
One of my bug bears cling.
Its obstruction. If you touch the ball and have controlled it you can shield the ball. If you haven't touched it you're just obstructing the opposition.

I'd also like to see the offside rule changed. AGAIN.
Rather than if any bit is off side you're offside I'd rather it be that if any bit of you is on side, you're onside. A striker tends to be leaning towards the goal making their run so his / her feet are likely to be onside whereas their head mightnt be.

I was also confused by VAR on the weekend. Palace v Bournmouth (isn't Gary O'Neil doing a good job).
Andersen produces a well timed 6 inch jab, breaking the nose of Lerma. Aparently that's legal as there was no swinging arm.<doh>

https://www.skysports.com/watch/vid...res-joachim-andersen-punch-on-jefferson-lerma
Bring in an extra line on the pitch (like on a subbuteo pitch) so anything before that line can't be offside and once you are past the extra line, then Remote's suggestion of ANY bit of you being onside comes into play.

Stop all this high line/offside malarky just inside the halfway line...

Also, go back to just 3 subs (with potentially the concussion sub still being allowed on top of needed).
Stop clubs having bloated squads.
 
So the commentator in the Barnsley v Sheff Weds match has just said that the sending off should not have been given because it’s the play/off final. So it’s a different rule to the rest if the season?

Agreed Irish. The problem for me is it wasn't a red card offence in a million years - yellow fair enough but nowhere near the need for a red.

He should have been told by VAR to review at pitchside - if he'd looked at it again he'd have seen it was reckless play (yellow) not dangerous play (red).
 
  • Like
Reactions: irishbluebird
Agreed Irish. The problem for me is it wasn't a red card offence in a million years - yellow fair enough but nowhere near the need for a red.

He should have been told by VAR to review at pitchside - if he'd looked at it again he'd have seen it was reckless play (yellow) not dangerous play (red).

Totally agree Sparkey. Never a red. So it begs the question; what is the point of VAR?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluefromBridgend
I hate the rule that Bristol City, no matter how blatant the foul or handball in the box is against them, must never under any circumstances be awarded a penalty.
The rule doesn’t apply to any opposition team.

That rule has been in place for 3 seasons now and I want it to be scrapped.
 
I hate the rule that Bristol City, no matter how blatant the foul or handball in the box is against them, must never under any circumstances be awarded a penalty.
The rule doesn’t apply to any opposition team.

That rule has been in place for 3 seasons now and I want it to be scrapped.
Actually I think that's one of the rules that the authorities have got right <whistle>
 
I hate the rule that Bristol City, no matter how blatant the foul or handball in the box is against them, must never under any circumstances be awarded a penalty.
The rule doesn’t apply to any opposition team.

That rule has been in place for 3 seasons now and I want it to be scrapped.

Seems pretty fair to me. <ok>

Of course, the other rule is that when we are given a penalty we miss it. <doh>
 
I hate the rule that Bristol City, no matter how blatant the foul or handball in the box is against them, must never under any circumstances be awarded a penalty.
The rule doesn’t apply to any opposition team.

That rule has been in place for 3 seasons now and I want it to be scrapped.
So when Marlon Romeo is blatantly pulled to the ground by a Bristol City defender it’s ok for the ref to ignore it then?