For a while know I have been thinking that there is something badly wrong with the laws of football, and this season's clampdown by officials at corners and freekicks has only clarified this further.

I think that most of the following will be familiar to football fans:
- That’s a foul! It would have been given outside the box.
- That’s a ridiculously soft penalty, it is a foul though.
- If the referee gives that as a penalty then there will be 20 a game.
- We had a three on two break there and all we get now is a freekick miles from goal with virtually no chance of scoring (and from the other team’s point of view – well done son, good foul, taking one for the team, worth a yellow card).

I think that is because there are two fundamental flaws in the laws:
- The laws seek to punish the offender rather than compensating the offended (eg a player cynically stopping a counter-attack gets a yellow card, the other team ends up with a far lower chance of scoring than they had previously).
- The compensation that the fouled team receives is dependent solely on the geography of the pitch with no regard to the situation of the foul.

This results in penalties being given (probably an 80 per cent-plus chance of scoring) for relatively innocuous fouls in the box (eg the two penalties we conceded at Reading) and freekicks being given (possibly less than 10 per cent chance of scoring) for denying a goalscoring opportunity (eg think if Tim Klose had been blown up for fouling Daryl Murphy in the recent match).

This is perverse, and results in the familiar comments I referred to earlier.

I believe that football should make some revolutionary changes to the rules and bring it more in line with sports such as rugby union and American football where the fouled team ends up with a higher chance of scoring than before the foul.
- End the geographical jeopardy.
- Bring in something that is between a penalty and freekick (perhaps a free shot from the edge of the penalty arc, or perhaps allowing the fouled team to run from halfway with as many players as they want, and only allowing two defenders in their half for say eight seconds).
- Then, for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity give a penalty (eg current red card) for a cynical foul, give the new intermediate punishment (eg current yellow card), for anything else give a freekick – and yes I do mean also in the penalty area.
- Only give red and yellow cards for dangerous tackles, cynical challenges, don’t give them for genuine attempts to defend.

These changes would improve the game greatly in my view, I would be interested to see if you agree ?

iaintaylorx added 14:28 - Sep 15 I agree. The new refereeing law has really ruined the game and it's a joke! There's all this 'unnatural position' but then 'accidental handball'. Diving is a massive thing. If a player clearly dives or if the FA deem it to be a dive, it should be looked at and given out 3-5 match bans, that'd soon stop it all!
1

carsey added 15:46 - Sep 15 Tinkering with the rules is neither necessary nor helpful because players and coaches will find ways to bend them or use them to their advantage eg the goal kick used to be taken from the side the ball went out of play. The law was changed so it could be taken either side of the 6 yard box in theory to hurry things up but keepers can slow things down by walking across the goal to their "favoured side". The idea of moving a free kick 10 yards further on if players didn't retreat failed because eventually the kick is too close to the box to be hit properly by the taker and the referees wouldn't give a penalty if it ended up in the area. Referees have it in their power under the current laws to deal with anything that happens on the pitch the problem is they won't/don't because the power lays with the leagues who tell them not to. How many times do you see a player not booked for something in the first 5 - 10 minutes because the game has only just started and the so called experts say it would ruin the game as a spectacle if someone were sent off. Rubbish if players knew referees were going to stick to the rules for 90 minutes and apply them correctly penalties and diving would stop. Managers wouldn't like it but it would stop.

2

BlueRaider added 16:28 - Sep 15 Carsey - I think you have missed the point of my blog, I agree with your point about the goal kick rule, but the blog is more about the disproportionality of sanctions with the offence, especially when compared to other sports.
0

Ferguson added 17:34 - Sep 15 The rules are fine - it's enforcement and refereeing that's the issue. Just as a matter if interest, are there any verifiable stats which show decisions given in favour of Premier or recently ex-Premier sides as against those given against them, in similar circumstances, when playing lower division sides or sides with less recent or any Premier pedigree ? The phrase commonly known by supporters that gets me most is " He's used to better protection than that (from officials) in the Premier...." Not saying there's any bias of course.

0

edwardeberneezer added 14:03 - Sep 16 Well written,I felt physically sick after that Reading game.Both teams were fouling in their own penalty areas,I think the ref should give penalties every time,so what if score is 10-8,18 goals for the fans would be great.Managers would soon adjust their tactics to become follow him,mark him well but don't bloody touch him in the penalty area. Football died that night in Reading. COYB

0

chrisp added 07:04 - Sep 20 The final penalty in the game was a definite What is galling is that both teams had been doing the same all match and got away with it It was an injustice to give a pen 5 minutes into stoppage time against one team If a referee blows his whistle and points to the spot for every corner video replays would show at least one rugby tackle and maybe if they did that it would stop But they won't because every other country does it and we would lose out unless it happens all over the world So it is now part of the game we should learn to accept it however mad it makes us

0

Blogs 295 bloggers