Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

What one thing would you change about football?



Sep 1, 2010
6,419
That would ruin football. Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Tottenham would all be able to pay more because of the clubs' history. Thus ensuring they will always get the better players because newcastle, villa, everton, sunderland etc. can't afford to match their wages. The better players then ensure they finish higher, thus meaning the following year they continue to have a higher wage cap than opponents, ensuring a status quo that is like has happened in Scotland and various leagues where Champions League qualification gives one/two clubs in the country a huge financial boost that gives them the unfair advantage over every other team. Top teams stay as top teams, bottom teams stay as bottom teams.

Well, that is pretty much what is what is happening now anyway. The points system could have many variations edging to a fairer system of course but i think wages are getting out of hand
 








fly high

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2011
1,599
in a house
Any player shielding the ball near the corner flag in the last few minutes can be legally kicked in the arse by an opponent.

unless it's one of ours, like against Newcastle.
 






Acker79

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 15, 2008
31,921
Brighton
Well, that is pretty much what is what is happening now anyway. The points system could have many variations edging to a fairer system of course but i think wages are getting out of hand

Not really. The old established top teams of liverpool utd and arsenal were joined by chelsea because someone came in with the money to bring in quality players, and then those four were joined by man city when they got owners who could afford to pay for better players. Capping wages based on previous success protects the established order and prevents this from happening any more. The chances of, say, Bolton, being bought by a rich man who pays the money to bring in the better players that brings them into the top group are completely eliminated. They won't ever be able to pay the wages needed to bring in the players needed if wages are capped in your system.
 




Tony Meolas Loan Spell

Slut Faced Whores
Jul 15, 2004
18,068
Vamanos Pest
Alan Balls suggestion of having a team of officials.

Eg the same team of linesman and referee to stick with each other for the rest of the season. They will soon build up an understanding.

At the moment its three (well four) strangers meeting for the first time every time.

Working as a team officiating can only get better.
 




Monsieur Le Plonk

Lethargy in motion
Apr 22, 2009
1,860
By a lake
Swearing at the referee following a decision should result in a 20 minute period in the sin bin. Problem sorted.
 


Lord Bamber

Legendary Chairman
Feb 23, 2009
4,366
Heaven
Revert back to only 1 live TV game a season, FA Cup final and England internationals. That would cure the wage demand and increase the attendances again.

Showing the age at which you grew up in. Back in the day you lived for the live games which all seemed to come in May.

Cup Final. European Cup Final. Home Internationals with England in.

Happy days
 








PHCgull

Gus-ambivalent User
Mar 5, 2009
1,309
every team starts at the extra prelimary in the fa cup it would be amazing imangine afc uckfield v manchester united with afc uckfield at home

i reckon we could do them at the oaks, and the Raj Dutt would be absolutely BUZZING before that one...
 






halbpro

Well-known member
Jan 25, 2012
2,899
Brighton
I'd love to see more clarification of the advantage rule. It would be tricky to implement, but there doesn't seem to be a consistent period for it to be applied right now. If you lose the advantage after ten seconds does play get pulled back? Twenty seconds? However, losing that flexibility may be an issue.

I'd also like to see more penalty in an injury situation. If you go down injured and have a physio called on you have to leave the pitch, but whoever caused the injury doesn't. However, that again might be tricky to get working and could lead to far more diving. I mean if you've got a winger who can't get past a left back (for example) someone else could dive at a tackle from the left back, they both come off for a minute or two and then there's a great gaping hole in the defense.
 




drew

Drew
Oct 3, 2006
23,404
Burgess Hill
I'd like to see 30 mins each half and run by a clock. Players and fans would then know exactly how much time is left.

It would do away with time wasting at a stroke, if the ball is dead, the clock stops. It works well in other sports and
ironically, you would get more play in a game than under the present rules.
Why not keep it at 45 minutes with independent time keeping.

Alan Balls suggestion of having a team of officials.

Eg the same team of linesman and referee to stick with each other for the rest of the season. They will soon build up an understanding.

At the moment its three (well four) strangers meeting for the first time every time.

Working as a team officiating can only get better.

You seem to suggest that the refs/assistant refs have never met. Don't you think that over the course of several seasons they get to know each other. Also, by not having them work in teams you can avoid collusion and corruption.

Swearing at the referee following a decision should result in a 20 minute period in the sin bin. Problem sorted.

You would still need the refs to implement it and in the past, when they already have the power to send off players for language they don't.
 










Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here