Blue Cards for Sin-Bins

[hebangsthedrums]

I wonder if its one of those where as personnel/regimes change, each new one wants to make its mark by implementing new rules.

ie when you get a new boss at work and they want to change things just because.

Few decades of that and we end up with overly complex rules, rather than improved enforcement of the rules that worked well for ages.

 

TBH it still annoys me when offside changed from any attacking player in an offsiede position would cause a flag immediately to 'interfering with play' and phase x/y/z or whatever it is now.

Just added a layer of subjectivity that might only cause a few issues in the PL, but what about down the park or Sunday league... 

[J. James]

This is another sop to weak refs who are afraid to yellow card players for intimidation and dissent.

A better rule change if they must would be another rugby one - mouth off and its ten meters, keep mouthing and its another ten something tells me the gobbing off would stop if the free kick was 5 meters outside the box and more mouth mean it was upgraded to a penalty...

 

But this is really not needed at all, yellow cards are there to be shown for dissent and a weak/ inept ref would still be useless if they had a veritable rainbow of cards..

 

Stop complicating our simple game!

[Vlad the Fox]

54 minutes ago, BertFill said:

Absolutely. This should be the rule.

 

I don't actually mind the blue card idea. But I'd prefer rugby's ten yard rule. Slightest complaint about a free kick and it moves ten yards towards the goal. If that takes it into the box then it becomes a penalty.

 

Anything to stop the spoilt whiny millionaires getting in the ref's face all the time.

They did this some years back but it seemed to get forgot about halfway through the season and refs just stopped doing it. I agree though, however I’d make the slight alteration that the ball can be moved forward up to 10 yards. For example moving the ball forward from 28 yards to 18 from the goal may not be such an advantage for the free kick taker being so close, so if the player chooses he can bring it forward just 5 yards for example to 23 and giving him a better chance of getting the ball up and down over the wall.

[Super_horns]

10 minutes ago, J. James said:

This is another sop to weak refs who are afraid to yellow card players for intimidation and dissent.

A better rule change if they must would be another rugby one - mouth off and its ten meters, keep mouthing and its another ten something tells me the gobbing off would stop if the free kick was 5 meters outside the box and more mouth mean it was upgraded to a penalty...

 

!

They tried that for a bit but soon got scrapped .

 

Think teams tried to take advantage of it as they will this.

 

Probably be a few “injuries “ for example!

 

 

 

Edited 8 February by Super_horns

[J. James]

2 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

They tried that for a bit but soon got scrapped .

 

 

Oh, i didn't know that, ta.

So they CAN actually scrap things that aren't working and/or are almost universally hated then... err... Three letters beginning with V?

[Super_horns]

4 minutes ago, J. James said:

Oh, i didn't know that, ta.

So they CAN actually scrap things that aren't working and/or are almost universally hated then... err... Three letters beginning with V?

Well they messed up that by getting people think it would bring perfection and there would be no worries about subjective decisions not being consistent.

[sylofox]

You can just see 15 mins to go this will take 5 mins but only 2 added. Yes I agree with but it's a joke.

[Lillehamring]

1 hour ago, woollett the bullet said:

Nah ,not for me thanks  ,don't  try to reinvent the wheel ,(goes  for var too ).

How about  this rule  implemented  ,

Penalties can only be taken by the actual player a foul was committed against  ? Hand ball a a side. 

It would be interesting  watching a defender who was pushed/ pulled who had come up for a corner take the pen.

Also it might prevent the formality of a ' specialist ' pen taker scoring and stop them from bagging 12 goals a season- 10 of them penalties  

Or just go back to indirect free kicks for obstruction given that a lot of these 'contact' fouls really aren't anything more than obstruction....

[Lillehamring]

1 hour ago, foxfanazer said:

Further Americanisation of our game. No thanks

Huh?  Only really Ice Hockey that has sinbinning, and i'd argue that that's as much a european sport as american.

[Lillehamring]

1 hour ago, BertFill said:

Absolutely. This should be the rule.

 

I don't actually mind the blue card idea. But I'd prefer rugby's ten yard rule. Slightest complaint about a free kick and it moves ten yards towards the goal. If that takes it into the box then it becomes a penalty.

 

Anything to stop the spoilt whiny millionaires getting in the ref's face all the time.

Didn't we have that rule at some point - probably another rule that never got actioned and so disappeared

[sylofox]

Let's be honest this won't happen at OT or other grounds of similar clubs. The refs need to have bollocks and the backing.

 

But let's be honest they have neither  when it comes to u

S n manure.

[Lillehamring]

1 hour ago, Fear Of The Fox said:

If they really want to improve the game they need to bring back straight red cards for simulation inside the box. Also straight red cards for players demanding a yellow card after they got fouled. 

I have no recollection of either of these things being a straight red?

[davieG]

49 minutes ago, hebangsthedrums said:

I wonder if its one of those where as personnel/regimes change, each new one wants to make its mark by implementing new rules.

ie when you get a new boss at work and they want to change things just because.

Few decades of that and we end up with overly complex rules, rather than improved enforcement of the rules that worked well for ages.

 

TBH it still annoys me when offside changed from any attacking player in an offsiede position would cause a flag immediately to 'interfering with play' and phase x/y/z or whatever it is now.

Just added a layer of subjectivity that might only cause a few issues in the PL, but what about down the park or Sunday league... 

yeah didn’t it used to be the player receiving the ball had to be offside when they received it

[Lillehamring]

If the FA had any balls they'd just introduce fines for dissent - nothing'll stop a player mouthing off quicker than losing a weeks wages.

[J. James]

10 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

Well they messed up that by getting people think it would bring perfection and there would be no worries about subjective decisions not being consistent.

Lol, yeah that they did, they could improve the bloody thing by transmitting the conversation between the ref and the tmo.. Sorry.. 4th official, so that we spectators can hear the reasoning, again as happens in rugby, but that would be like hearing politicians telling the truth.. No no no, we dont want the rabble to interfere with our power.

But this is a blue pill.. Sorry.. Card thread not f*%#ing Var

[Chelmofox]

Who wants this? I’ve never been at a game and said ‘if they only had a blue card then this would have been great!!’. The worst thing you can do is ruin the in match experience. 
 

Introduce retrospective bans if the offence warrants it. Bruno Fernandez will stop his shitty behaviour pretty quickly if he has a 1 match ban every time he dives like a twat. 

[Mr Weller 2]

2 hours ago, Foxmeister said:

 

The great thing about football when I was growing up was the game was the same in a primary school game as it was in the World Cup. For me, the further it moves away from that the worse it will become.

But it’s become better since then

[Mr Weller 2]

20 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

Who wants this? I’ve never been at a game and said ‘if they only had a blue card then this would have been great!!’. The worst thing you can do is ruin the in match experience. 
 

Introduce retrospective bans if the offence warrants it. Bruno Fernandez will stop his shitty behaviour pretty quickly if he has a 1 match ban every time he dives like a twat. 

Well you’ve never sat next to me. I’ve been arguing the case for at least looking at this for years. Mostly to prevent games being ruined by a player being sent off for two minor yellow card offences but also to stop teams deliberately taking a yellow to bring down a breakaway in mid-flow.

[Mr Weller 2]

2 minutes ago, Mr Weller 2 said:

But it’s become better since then

And they introduced one sub in the 60s, ended the back pass a decade later and allowed a couple of subs after that. They also moved from 2 to 3 points for a win. Were they all bad ideas then?

[Lillehamring]

23 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

Who wants this? I’ve never been at a game and said ‘if they only had a blue card then this would have been great!!’. The worst thing you can do is ruin the in match experience. 
 

Introduce retrospective bans if the offence warrants it. Bruno Fernandez will stop his shitty behaviour pretty quickly if he has a 1 match ban every time he dives like a twat. 

Well, no, but the idea would be to act as a deterrent - no one wants to see players sinbinned, they just want to see fewer tactical fouls and less dissent.

[hebangsthedrums]

39 minutes ago, davieG said:

yeah didn’t it used to be the player receiving the ball had to be offside when they received it

Hmm not sure about that, I meant when it was even if the player receiving the ball was onside, if any other attacking player was past the last defender was still offside

[J. James]

The answers obvious really...

[Super_horns]

Remember dissent can be punished already or are refs too scared about ruining games if they sent someone off and this is seen as a half way house?

 

As for fouls well if it’s that bad and cyclical  send the player off .

 

 They will soon learn as Billing of Bournemouth might have done at the weekend.

 

If it was to be used in the PL clubs would have to vote for it .. 

Which I suspect they wouldn’t.

Very much at a trial basis now .

FIFA have said they won’t use it yet

 

 

Edited 9 February by Super_horns

[Chelmofox]

13 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

Well, no, but the idea would be to act as a deterrent - no one wants to see players sinbinned, they just want to see fewer tactical fouls and less dissent.

This can be done already. And we could introduce retrospective measures in the event incidents were missed on field. 

[trabuch]

The rules of football had been pretty flawless for 100+ years. I wish they'd stop ****ing about with them. I blame Sky. 

Edited 9 February by trabuch