I would change the red card rule (football)

opethdisciple

opethdisciple

opethdisciple

Soldato
Joined
18 May 2010
Posts
22,904
Location
London
If I was going to make a change to football I would make a change to the red card rule.

A red card destroys the game in my opinion. In the modern game it is rare for the team down to 10 to get anything out of the game.

What should happen then?

So given a red card situation:

1. The player getting sent off should be substituted. Using up one of the sub allocation.

This keeps the game at 11 vs 11 which keeps the spectacle and sporting factor and doesn't penalise the entire team due to the actions of one player or a poor decision.

Imagine a big game like a Champions League final getting sent off for something soft, you ruin the game, the spectacle all the effort to get that far and all the fans money they paid to come and be entertained.

2. If the red card offence is particularly bad then yes the player should be sent off and the team should go down by 1 number.

In the Roman army when it came to discipline they would punish everyone for the actions of individuals. This would really make the individual feel bad and they would have the whole club come down upon them after the game.

Alternatively to the above, you could have 3 yellows to get a red.

You can get a straight red if it is a bad action but I feel red cards spoil the game so they need to balance this out more.
 
The substitute idea is not really a punishment for clubs like City who have a bench chock full of talent, it'll only hurt teams with small squads or a lack of depth. Football is a team sport so that's why the team get punished.
 
mmj_uk said:
The substitute idea is not really a punishment for clubs like City who have a bench chock full of talent, it'll only hurt teams with small squads or a lack of depth. Football is a team sport so that's why the team get punished.
Click to expand...
Yeah i would go along with that.... top clubs have so mutch depth, it would hurt smaller clubs with week in, week out defenders.
 
All footballers are diving cheating hoorbags. Sooner they clear up the feigning injury, challenges that are 'players using their experience' i.e cheating / fouling. Professional fouls i.e cheating fouling / not football and maybe actually earning their ludicrous wages (at the higher levels of the game) then maybe they can be half taken seriously. Actually punish referees for making crap decisions. Sending someone off who didn't deserve it, not mentioning any arsenal wolves match players of course, disadvantage that team for the rest of the game which could ultimately cost a manager their job. A red card being rescinded means nothing after the event. E.g son when his inoccuous challenge resulted in breaking the Everton boys ankle two years ago (hope I can mention that match)
Football really needs to be started again. Far too much rolling about at the slightest touch but they're quite happy to throw themselves about with their arms in the air pleading they're innocence. Rotten from top to bottom.
 
Ridiculous idea to scrap red card it's there to stop too many and dangerous fouls.

What I would change is consistency among the referees I.e. sometimes you can get away with 10 fouls, other times not even one.

Of course it depends on what's happened previously in the game and maybe even what game it is I.e. a final. But should these factors affect the decision?

Also players do get punished for diving, so can't really stop them doing it if they still continue. Of course it is an embarrassment, as you don't get such play acting in typical casual 5aside football etc. So why should it happen anywhere else. I also thought referees should be punished initially but whats that really going to achieve. They're human after all. One thing that needs to change is the abuse referees receive from players. We need a rugby style system where the viewers at home can hear what the referees are saying. And any abuse needs to be punished with a yellow or red card.
 
I played futsal at uni where you could get a blue card for a technical foul (eg time wasting, talking back to the ref, etc). They also trialled this in Brazil in 11 a side years ago. A blue card, depending on the rules, meant either a 10 minute sin bin or a forced sub.

To me that makes sense. There's nothing worse than a game being ruined because a player gets a second yellow for saying something stupid to the ref - sin binning or a sub is enough of a punishment in that scenario. But they need to keep red cards for bad tackles and professional fouls.
 
We have to accept that football is a really complex sport and doesn't fit nicely into a set of rules that cover all eventualities. This is the problem. The rules work in the majority of cases but then sometimes they don't. If there weren't a strict set of rules and refs were allowed to interpret how they wished at every turn then people would just be complaining for a different reason.

There were some special "ideas" from people on the BBC chat during the United game last night. One suggestion was that offside should be treated like the goal line so that in order to be offside you have to have the entirety of your body beyond the last defender.... Great idea... So how are we going to decide when the attacker is completely clear of the last defender. Perhaps some sort of system that allows us to check the relative position of 2 players.

Another person wanted a cricket style system when you get a single referral a bit like cricket. You keep it if you are correct. Yet again, utterly baffling. So United refer the Southampton goal and the Martial penalty and get both decisions in our favour. That doesn't fix anything. Perhaps you lose your referral on a very marginal call and then 4 horrendous decisions go against you and you can't refer.

They are piecemeal trying to adapt the rules into a fair framework but you simply can't make every decision correct in a game like football.
 
Derek W said:
All footballers are diving cheating hoorbags.
Click to expand...

There is no living entity in this entire universe more dishonest than a Premier League footballer. Deterrence is the only possible answer. Refs should carry a dice with them, you are judged to have dived, he rolls a dice, the number on the dice is the number of goals your team automatically concedes. I personally have pretty much lost all interest in football in recent years because of the utterly rampant cheating, really am sick of it.
 
manic111 said:
I played futsal at uni where you could get a blue card for a technical foul (eg time wasting, talking back to the ref, etc). They also trialled this in Brazil in 11 a side years ago. A blue card, depending on the rules, meant either a 10 minute sin bin or a forced sub.

To me that makes sense. There's nothing worse than a game being ruined because a player gets a second yellow for saying something stupid to the ref - sin binning or a sub is enough of a punishment in that scenario. But they need to keep red cards for bad tackles and professional fouls.
Click to expand...

then players should learn some respect for the refs like in Rugby. Rules should not be created / rewrittne because of a bunch of chavs getting paid 200K / week think they can tell the ref to go **** himself anytime they don't like a call.
 
Bubo said:
There is no living entity in this entire universe more dishonest than a Premier League footballer. Deterrence is the only possible answer. Refs should carry a dice with them, you are judged to have dived, he rolls a dice, the number on the dice is the number of goals your team automatically concedes. I personally have pretty much lost all interest in football in recent years because of the utterly rampant cheating, really am sick of it.
Click to expand...

What happens when there is contact between two players? The difference between a dive and a foul in the modern game is miniscule. Its literally only "did they make any contact". You can't know how much the contact made has effected the player in a lot of cases and quite often a player that doesn't go down doesn't get a foul.

I used to play a lot of hockey and i'm quite tall. The opposition would just barge into you, miss the tackle but the result was usually that you would be off balance after the tackle but still with the ball and then their mate comes in and takes the ball off you or eases you off it. No foul given.

And lets be honest, footballers are probably pretty middling when in comes to cheating. Politicians, business leaders, anyone who is very wealthy. There are far worse liars and cheats knocking about.
 
wildman said:
then players should learn some respect for the refs like in Rugby. Rules should not be created / rewrittne because of a bunch of chavs getting paid 200K / week think they can tell the ref to go **** himself anytime they don't like a call.
Click to expand...
What?

The point is that the rule as it currently stands is detrimental to the fans as much as anyone else. Forcing the player to be subbed and perhaps even banning him for the next game or two would punish him without detrimenting the match as a whole by making it 10 v 11.

I agree that footballers aren't great with respect although it is MUCH better now than it was a few years ago, but I'm not sure why you think a red card is more appropriate than an enforced sub in that situation, which is what this discussion is about
 
I think some of these ideas are mental. As soon as you take away the threat of a red card then you're opening yourself up to calculated cheating. As soon as there's no longer a severe punishment for denying a goal scoring opportunity you'll have defenders rugby tackling attackers every time they're breaking through on goal. As soon as you scrap 2nd yellows you'll have your Burnley's of this world fouling the opposition for 90 minutes just to break the game up.

You'd have thought that we'd learn our lessons by now. Stop trying to fiddle about with the laws of the game. Almost every time we tweak something to improve that 1 in 1000 situation, we end up making things worse.
 
I do agree that the ref should be mic'ed up and they should start disciplining players for their behaviour. I guess the counter argument is that you want the passion from the players and its very high stakes. They would probably get used to not being able to call the ref a **** ***** ****** ***** quite quickly though.

Rugby (which seems to be held up as some parallel sport to football for some reason) doesn't have these issues because its a much simpler sport and you can smash the **** out of someone who is annoying you. A lot of their VAR decisions are a lot more clear cut than ours. The ones they get wrong are unsurprisingly the calls that are super marginal or up for interpretation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom