What Football changes would you reverse, if any ??

[Clarets4me]

The great game has constantly evolved over the years, with rule changes and re-organisations. Looking at a post on another thread, it reminded me that we're now 36 years on from the change from two points for a win, to three points...and there's two generations of fans who won't remember Barrow, Southport and Workington as League Clubs...

This is a summary of the major changes over the last 50 years...

1965-66 - Substitutions allowed, only one on the bench, over the years it's gone to two, then five, then seven...

1981-82 - Three points for a win introduced..to encourage attacking play

1986-87 - Automatic relegation from the Football League introduced to replace the re-election system..

1987 - Play Offs introduced, and various formats tried until settling on our current system in 1991...

1992-93 - Back pass law amended, so that keepers could no longer pick up the ball..

In general, I think they've all improved the game, what do you think ? Would you go back on any of these ?

n.b: Don't let the fact that if 2 points for a win had still been in place when B*****ds won the Premier League, they'd have missed out on goal difference to Man Utd and finished second, cloud your judgement too much !! Oh, and Preston were one of the four Clubs who suffered the indignity of having to apply for re-election in that final season !

[Dyched]

Im not old enough to remember before all these rules came in. The only one I disagree with is the number of subs. 5 on the bench it plenty.

[minnieclaret]

3 points for a win definitely the best change.
The abundance of subs, both on the bench and available, has played into the hands of the wealthier clubs. They can afford to sit expensive players down, the smaller clubs cannot. A return to three on the bench, two available would be better for football and would make managers think more.

[SonofPog]

None.

Don't mind the current subs rule, but would like say, 3 out 7 have to be under 23s and one of your subs has to from those players. Something like that. To encourage academy players to mix with the 1st team and get game time.

[Dazzler]

In my opinion the offside rule needs updating.
The offside rule change in 1925 didn't go far enough.
For a player to be called offside 40 yards or so from goal is ridiculous.

[HatfieldClaret]

Totally agree Dazzler, the offside rule is too woolly and ifs and buts. It needs to be clearer and more black and white, so my wife can understand it.

The handball rule was changed and I think fairer but now needs tweaking so you can't score with your hand.

[morpheus2]

Without the 3 points for a win change, if you put all the relevant seasons in the points convertor App, we would have had 4 more promotions and been Champions of England 6 more times.

[South West Claret.]

Without the 3 points for a win change, if you put all the relevant seasons in the points convertor App, we would have had 4 more promotions and been Champions of England 6 more times.

Really you sure?

[Lord Beamish]

One rule change, and I don't know when it happened, is the one where the 'Keeper can take a goal kick from whatever side of the goal he chooses; not just the one the ball went out of touch on.
It has led to it being a Time Wasters Charter. Time after time, in an attempt to control the flow of the game, you see a 'Keeper pick the ball up off the running track, walk past the near post, amble slowly to the opposite side of his six yard box and then do his painstaking routine of putting the ball down, taking his paces backward, tapping his studs on the post; all of which time has seen 30-40 seconds elapse.
It doesn't make much of a spectator sport, does it?

[ClaretEngineer]

I'd add 0 points for a 0-0 draw. Or possibly 1 point for a no score draw, 2 points for a score draw and 3 for a win.

As Lord Beamish Esq. points out, some emendation of the rules for goal kicks, possibly a time restraint.

[Ashingtonclaret46]

One rule change, and I don't know when it happened, is the one where the 'Keeper can take a goal kick from whatever side of the goal he chooses; not just the one the ball went out of touch on.
It has led to it being a Time Wasters Charter. Time after time, in an attempt to control the flow of the game, you see a 'Keeper pick the ball up off the running track, walk past the near post, amble slowly to the opposite side of his six yard box and then do his painstaking routine of putting the ball down, taking his paces backward, tapping his studs on the post; all of which time has seen 30-40 seconds elapse.
It doesn't make much of a spectator sport, does it?

When this was introduced, those running the game thought that it would speed things up!!

The messing around with the offside law to make the game better for the World Cup when it took place in the USA has been something which has not improved the game at all. They said that more goals would be scored because it would favour the attacker --that hasn't happened. It has just caused more confusion amongst players, officials and fans as was witnessed in several of our own matches this season with goals being allowed when players in offside positions were involved in the goals. Fans not knowing that, with the latest tinkering brought in this season, a free kick for offside can be given against a player in his own half if he was in his opponent's half when the ball was first played.
The offside law which had been in place for around 70 years was still open to debate, however, its application was much more understandable and part of a team's defensive tactics.

[TheFamilyCat]

Without the 3 points for a win change, if you put all the relevant seasons in the points convertor App, we would have had 4 more promotions and been Champions of England 6 more times.

I presume you mean if it had always been 3 points for a win instead of 2?

[Belgianclaret]

Brexit

[bfcmik]

I'd add 0 points for a 0-0 draw. Or possibly 1 point for a no score draw, 2 points for a score draw and 3 for a win.

1 point for 0-0
2 points for score draw
4 points for win

Leaves some incentive for going for that extra goal.

[gc14]

I still can't get used to 1 player passing back from a kick-off !

[wilks_bfc]

I still can't get used to 1 player passing back from a kick-off !

Pointless rule
I'm not sure what it's meant to achieve

[gc14]

Probably to do with the 'throw-in betting' with players launching it out of play after 5 seconds of the game ..

[john'sroseyspecs]

Football minimum wage! But as much chance of that happening as me flying to the moon or Jezza being pm.

[minnieclaret]

A fourth sub to be allowed in extra time for remainder of this year's FA Cup.
Yellow card sin bins to be trialled in junior football.
Video refs in next season's FA Cup.
All in the article:
http://www.skysports.com/share/10788885" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Woodleyclaret]

1 kicks off as a ref I was always taught rule that the ball had to travel forwards it's full circumference into the opposition's half .Now we get the nonsense of kickoffs actually playing the ball backwards at kick off a barmy change that needs reversing
2.Offside rule .revert to old one .Certainly linesmen don't understand changes as evidenced at Wembley when Saints opener was disallowed.

[Paul Waine]

1 point for 0-0
2 points for score draw
4 points for win

Leaves some incentive for going for that extra goal.

1 pt for 0-0;
2 pts for score draw
and 5 points for win.

You don't want the two teams agreeing that they can "share the points" with 1-1. Also need the total points for a win to be higher than shared points for score draw.

[Paul Waine]

Re-think the off-side rule, again.

Can't be off-side except in the opposition penalty area. Every team would need an "Andre Gray" - well up field and ready to shoot on sight.

[Paul Waine]

We've missed the abolition of the maximum wage from the list of changes. That's probably had a bigger impact on Burnley than any other First Division club.

I'm not sure how I'd fix it these days (FFP doesn't work). How would we make football a competition between teams - rather than a financial "arms race" where the "billionaire clubs" will always come top? Does it make any footballer a better footballer when he's paid £100,000 per week? Should any club (thinking of Chelsea) be allowed to "buy up" all the young talent and then loan them out to other clubs? Maybe there should be a maximum number of player registrations? Maybe no club should be allowed to loan out players to other clubs? I'm not sure how financial restrictions would work. Maybe the balance can be achieved by requiring a club that pays more than £X in players wages to put the amount equal to the excess into a pool that is shared between clubs in divisions below? And, maybe when the amount rises beyond the next ceiling the club is required to pay double the excess into the pool? Re buying up extra players, maybe the players outside the 1st team squad MUST be loaned out on a "first pick basis" to other clubs, including clubs in the same league, and the "owning club" receives no loan fee and continues to pay all the player's wages.

I'm thinking that would make the "super rich" clubs re-think their financial models.

UTC

[Paul Waine]

Football minimum wage! But as much chance of that happening as me flying to the moon or Jezza being pm.

Did you mean "minimum" J?

[john'sroseyspecs]

Did you mean "minimum" J?

Oh yeah! Think I've achieved minimum brain cells

[Garforth Claret]

elur edisffo eht

[ClaretTony]

In terms of goalkeeper changes, there was one made around 1970. Prior to then a goalkeeper in possession of the ball had to bounce it every four paces taken. It might seem strange now but a number of goalkeepers were caught out after the change had been made.

[bfcmik]

In terms of goalkeeper changes, there was one made around 1970. Prior to then a goalkeeper in possession of the ball had to bounce it every four paces taken. It might seem strange now but a number of goalkeepers were caught out after the change had been made.

I think Tony Waiters was in goal for our first game under the new rules and conceded a couple of goals from free kicks awarded because of the change. I think it ended 0-5 to Liverpool?

[ClaretTony]

I think Tony Waiters was in goal for our first game under the new rules and conceded a couple of goals from free kicks awarded because of the change. I think it ended 0-5 to Liverpool?

Waiters had come out of retirement having been coaching at Liverpool. Not sure whether that was the first or second season with the rule.

We lost the game 2-1.

[South West Claret.]

5 subs favours the richer clubs so I would therefore favour 1 sub only.

[groove]

I would reverse the changes made to the European competitons. Back to a good old knock out with just the champions playing in the European cup. European nights just aren't the same now the whole competition has been diluted.

[duncandisorderly]

The points system is fine as it is. Doubling the number of points gained for a score draw is open to massive abuse.

I'd be open to the idea of a bonus point for scoring more than 3 goals, maybe, as it encourages attacking play at both ends, so that could in effect lead to 2 points for a 4-4 draw and some interesting shenanigans as the season draws to a close.

[CaptJohn]

1) Change the offside line from the halfway line to mid way inside each half (I think that catching guys offside on the halfway line prevents a lot of free flowing football.)
2) Yellow card would result in ten minutes in the sin-bin the same as rugby union.
3) Introduce a TV review system for referees for big decisions. (Again the same as for rugby union)
4) Introduce a 5 point system for matches. There will be two points at stake for each half and a bonus point available for a team that wins both halves. This would make the game more exciting as teams would know that they have to treat each half as a match and react accordingly. Think of the way games would pan out.

[scrambledclaret]

Bring back the golden goal in cup competitions!