I would change the red card rule (football)

[omnomnom]

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.

I completely disagree with the "rugby is a simple sport" thing tbh. The difference between the sports is the ref wont take any **** and if a player acts like an idiot he's walking. Football refs in this country think they are celebrities and try to be mates with the players as opposed to refereeing the game. Pundits also dont help...they should be there for their opinion and to educate the people watching yet the majority dont know the laws of the game. I was listening to the Arsenal game on the radio just the other day and they were debating whether it was a red or not and claimed because Luiz didnt make a a tackle it means it isnt a red.

The refs are mic'ed up we just dont hear whats being said but i imagine that more to do with the players more then anything.


Just ref using the actual laws of the game.

 

[Moothead2]

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.

Someone's clearly never watch La Liga

 

[james.miller]

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.

Isn't that what it's for? particularly bad offences?

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.

Removing a teammate from the pitch sounds like a good way to achieve that.

 

[Shamikebab]

Someone's clearly never watch La Liga

Or you know, any other league. Even Leipzig dived all the time when we played them.

 

[opethdisciple]

They'd be nothing to stop a team getting a lesser player to absolutely smash somebody, before they subbed them off for a better player.

Well no because if the foul is been bad enough by the ref, it would be a straight red and no sub would be allowed to replace them. The team would go down by 1 player.

 

[HangTime]

I think your proposal is a bit inconsistent... you say you want to get rid of red cards and use subs.... but still want to have red cards if it's "particularly bad". That's kind of the point of the red card, maybe the question is more about the threshold to get a red card. Straight reds are supposed to be for violent conduct, endangering an opponent, professional fouls etc.

Your roman army analogy, well, they did decimation right? The punishment for the unit was to have 1 in 10 men killed. Which is kind of what a red card is, the only difference is you don't draw lots for it because the culprit can be easily identified/attributed to.

 

[fez]

I completely disagree with the "rugby is a simple sport" thing tbh. The difference between the sports is the ref wont take any **** and if a player acts like an idiot he's walking.

Rugby has far far easier decisions to make 9/10 and the stakes are usually a lot lower. Football is 100x richer than Rugby. There is no "did he make contact" call in Rugby and they don't check backward passes etc to the mm.

The refs don't take any **** but they are also dealing with players that have the ability to vent their anger and frustration every 5 seconds rather than being wound up over 90 constantly with no outlet.

Football refs in this country think they are celebrities and try to be mates with the players as opposed to refereeing the game. Pundits also dont help...they should be there for their opinion and to educate the people watching yet the majority dont know the laws of the game. I was listening to the Arsenal game on the radio just the other day and they were debating whether it was a red or not and claimed because Luiz didnt make a a tackle it means it isnt a red.

To be fair the rules of the game are constantly changing and up for interpretation. I guess thats part of the reason some channels have an ex-ref to make sense of it. Some refs do seem to love the attention though. Thats unsurprising really. Every sport I have played seemed to attract people who like the feeling of power they get from being able to make **** decisions and not be questioned. Clearly makes them feel powerful to be the law for 90 minutes.

The refs are mic'ed up we just dont hear whats being said but i imagine that more to do with the players more then anything.

I imagine thats 100% why they don't. The language would be horrendous. You can hear it quite often now that there aren't crowds to drown it out. That sort of thing certainly would be easier to stamp out.