Good football rules that were binned

RobinLFC

Cries when Liverpool doesn't get praised
Joined
May 20, 2014
Messages
12,271
Location
Belgium
Supports
Liverpool
These are definitely the most infuriating offsides. I too think that if you've had to move way from goal to collect the ball then there's no advantage. Though if that was added as a rule, it probably makes a convoluted rule even more convoluted. It's a rule that seems to get more bloated every season.
Wait what? Of course there is an advantage, you can come from behind the CB who never sees you coming to collect the ball from deep.
 

André Dominguez

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2017
Messages
3,646
Location
Lisbon
Supports
Benfica, Académica
A good rule that was binned was the max. 3 foreigners per team rule

It all started to go down after that rule went away and after Bosman of course
I totally agree!

That rule only helped players & agents to make more money. The Bosman rule should be only about contract ending, because what happened before in terms of contract ending was abusive from the clubs part.

The three foreign rule break was just good for the big clubs, who can basically concentrate a lot of talent in the same squad. If they could had only 3 foreign players, small clubs could actually have quality players and the leagues + euopean competitions would be much more balanced.
 

Catch

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 15, 2017
Messages
26
This has been trialled at some sunday league levels for the past year or so, though unfortunately, the game does stop for each one. Probably good for a pub league player to have a breather, but if it was to ever be rolled out at the top level, subs should just happen quickly when the ball is out of play, and the onus is on the team making the sub to get players off and on the pitch quickly, and not have the game completely halt until they do.

I think that should be the case with all subs anyway, whether rolling or not. The whole 'walk slowly from the opposite touchline' tactic is the worst. Either stop the clock, or wait for a stoppage and get your subs on quickly.
thats good to hear, but its for the ref to get play started again straight away rather than wait for it to happen.
 

Nick7

Full Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
12,534
Location
Ireland
This has been trialled at some sunday league levels for the past year or so, though unfortunately, the game does stop for each one. Probably good for a pub league player to have a breather, but if it was to ever be rolled out at the top level, subs should just happen quickly when the ball is out of play, and the onus is on the team making the sub to get players off and on the pitch quickly, and not have the game completely halt until they do.

I think that should be the case with all subs anyway, whether rolling or not. The whole 'walk slowly from the opposite touchline' tactic is the worst. Either stop the clock, or wait for a stoppage and get your subs on quickly.
We did that at youth level. It was fine, but we were kids so we didn't know about time wasting and all that nonsense. Rolling subs with adults would definitely need to have the clock stopped.

I used to take my teams free kicks and I was subbed on in one game just to take a free kick, scored it and subbed straight back off :lol:
 

OnlyTwoDaSilvas

Gullible
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
18,142
Location
The Mathews Bridge
Wait what? Of course there is an advantage, you can come from behind the CB who never sees you coming to collect the ball from deep.
The offside rule was to prevent goal hanging. If you're running away from goal and away from the defenders, there's no advantage being gained to forge any sort of direct goal scoring opportunity in that phase of play. 99% of the time, they happen nowhere near goal, usually from a long clearance and a centre forward slowly ambling back. They're rather frequent in amateur football, from a player who has bombed forward, slowly retreats back to catch his breath, then runs away from goal to challenge for a clearance. Then everyone yells at him for being a lazy shite.

To me they're an offside-but-not-really, but rules is rules.
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,012
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
Golden goal was fecking shite i'm glad they got rid of it. It was basically playground next goal wins bullshit. In professional football the game shouldn't end just because someone might have scored a flukey goal, you should always have a chance to equalize.

Silver goal wasn't a bad compromise though.

Daylight offsides should be a rule though, its ridiculous that your feet can be inline with the defenders but your arm or knee can be offside. Stupid, you can't score with your arm so wheres the advantage?
 

diarm

Full Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
10,757
Location
Cork
Nobody watches football to see a well organised offside trap. It's a farce how much it is refereed in favour of the defending side.

I agree with those calling for the daylight idea to be made a rule and to scrap offside when receiving the ball in an onside position. We want to see goals and good attacking play - not more whistle blowing by referees.

While we're at it, can we introduce a rule where by any defender who moves his body out of the line he was running in to "shield" the ball from an attacker, is pinged for doing what he's doing. Which is obstructing.
 

OnlyTwoDaSilvas

Gullible
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
18,142
Location
The Mathews Bridge
Daylight offsides should be a rule though, its ridiculous that your feet can be inline with the defenders but your arm or knee can be offside. Stupid, you can't score with your arm so wheres the advantage?
You can't officially be offside with your arm. Only a part of your body that can play the ball. Not sure how a linesman manages to judge that in real time though, but when Sky Sports draw the line, it should disregard arms.

I agree though. The one against Huddersfield with the wonky VAR lines where Juan Mata's kneecap was offside was mad. As someone said earlier, it should be like goal line technology, the whole of the body should be offside, not just a knee!
 

Sunny Jim

Full Member
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
26,888
Location
Warsaw...that's too far away from Edinburgh...
I'm not sure about ''daylight" offsides, but to me offside has become a little too literal at the cost of common sense in the modern game. There are few situations where the strikers chin, top of head, arm etc. jutting slightly beyond the defensive line is going to be a significant advantage to the attacking team. If an attacking player's furthest forward foot is level with the defender's furthest backwards foot that would be good enough for me regardless of what the rest of the body was doing in the vast majority of circumstances.
Good post. I could swear some good goals were disallowed beacasue the attackers body was tilted so it crossed the offside line set by defender's feet. Idiotic to say the least.
 

Slevs

likes to play with penises
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
22,106
Location
Boyo
I can remember in Sunday league for a bit we had a rule where you couldn't be offside from a pass in your own half.

Did that get up any further?
Currently, you can't be offside in your own half. So imagine lukaku is right at the end of our half and is technically further than anyone else, if someone passes to him, he wouldn't be called offside.
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
25,101
Currently, you can't be offside in your own half. So imagine lukaku is right at the end of our half and is technically further than anyone else, if someone passes to him, he wouldn't be called offside.
That isn't what he said though.

He said you couldn't be offside from a PASS in your own half. So you could have Scholes / Beckham launching long balls over the top every time and never be offside.

Stupid rule.
 

Slevs

likes to play with penises
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
22,106
Location
Boyo
That isn't what he said though.

He said you couldn't be offside from a PASS in your own half. So you could have Scholes / Beckham launching long balls over the top every time and never be offside.

Stupid rule.
I know what he said. It's obviously not implemented but there's a similar rule regarding offsides and your own half, which I mentioned.
 

AaronRedDevil

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2018
Messages
3,484
How is aggregate unfair? Do you mean away goal?
Yes. Both team play away and home. So it's fair game. The better team often doesn't go through which makes zero sense. Lot of teams were robbed of that rule.
 

OnlyTwoDaSilvas

Gullible
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
18,142
Location
The Mathews Bridge
While we're at it, can we introduce a rule where by any defender who moves his body out of the line he was running in to "shield" the ball from an attacker, is pinged for doing what he's doing. Which is obstructing.
I'd agree, but Pogba is probably the best in the world at it. It's crazy how far he gets away form the ball whilst 'shielding' it and is rarely penalised. Let's keep that one lenient for now :wenger:
 

worldinmotion66

Full Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
1,540
Yes. Both team play away and home. So it's fair game. The better team often doesn't go through which makes zero sense. Lot of teams were robbed of that rule.
Away teams used to park the bus and hope for a clean sheet to gain advantage in the second leg at home. This rule almost forces teams to go toe-to-toe as away goals now hold more value.
 

worldinmotion66

Full Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
1,540
What about the American style penalty shootout? I always find that much more entertaining.
 

Kasper

Full Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
2,496
Supports
Hansa Rostock / Bradford City
Golden goal is a weird one. Some people claim that it made games a lot better and exciting in extra time but I remember a lot lot really dull games where both teams were extremely scared to attack because they didn't want to open up to risk to concede. So my gut says that it was a good decision to reverse the rule.
 

Bola

New Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2018
Messages
1,205
Penalise blocking/ grabbing on corners and set pieces; I.e. when players are not even looking at the ball and are just trying to impead their opponent like an NFL gane

The Prem went to town on it early in the season a couple of years ago, but it petered out.
 

worldinmotion66

Full Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
1,540
You mean the one where a ring of fire is randomly placed on one side of the goalie, but if the kicker misses, the kicking team loses a goal?
No, the one where Dianna Ross takes every penalty and breaks the goal in two even when she misses, because she gets a goal awarded anyway for great hair and an enthusiastic running style.
 

The Cat

Doesn't know his own mobile number
Joined
May 18, 2017
Messages
5,478
Location
Fighting the good fight in South Wales.
That isn't what he said though.

He said you couldn't be offside from a PASS in your own half. So you could have Scholes / Beckham launching long balls over the top every time and never be offside.

Stupid rule.
Yes it was. We tried to exploit it and found it wasn't even much advantage when you had posession.
 

SadlerMUFC

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
2,776
Location
Niagara Falls, Canada
Completely agree with this, can never understand the offsides for 'coming back from an offside position'.

There is no advantage at all, I've seen offsides where the ball is collected in their own half because they were in the opposition half behind the last man when it was kicked. It's absurd
Exactly. In hockey they changed the offside so that if everyone checks back in it negates the offside and keeps the game flow going. I know hockey and football offsides are different, but it's the same principle. Just keep the flow of the game going...
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,012
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
You can't officially be offside with your arm. Only a part of your body that can play the ball. Not sure how a linesman manages to judge that in real time though, but when Sky Sports draw the line, it should disregard arms.

I agree though. The one against Huddersfield with the wonky VAR lines where Juan Mata's kneecap was offside was mad. As someone said earlier, it should be like goal line technology, the whole of the body should be offside, not just a knee!
Good thing that isn't the rule then eh?
Fair enough i didn't mean an arm sticking out it was poorly worded, i meant when someones feet are in line with the defenders but their body is leaning forward. I've seen those given as offside, similar to this one.




Fair enough in a lot of them maybe the attackers head is offside, but honestly again not sure how thats seen as advantage.
 

VintageWhatnots

Full Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2015
Messages
412
Location
Greater Manchester
Of course there is an advantage. Getting a run to the ball gives an advantage over a more stationary defender. That’s why you see strikers start behind defenders on goal kicks.
The defender could just as easily be running on the example I gave?

The point of the offside rule is not to stop attacking its to stop goal hanging. A player who ends up in a not offside position (particularly, if it's in or near their own half) clearly isn't goal hanging.
 

M Utd

Full Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2018
Messages
249
There were quite a few positive innovations in the late '90s and early '00s which didn't last long but I feel should have been given more of a chance to bed in.

Moving the ball forwards for dissent - I thought this was a superb idea at the time but many people claimed it often put the attacking team at a disadvantage as some free kick specialists would prefer to shoot from a further distance. Surely this could be easily solved by giving the attacking side the option of whether to move it forward or not. You could even give the players the option of moving the ball 10 metres in whichever direction they prefer.

Golden Goal - This was pure drama. It only lasted a few years but in that time there was Ahn, Trezeguet and Blanc all scoring iconic golden goals. There was a criticism that it made extra time period too defensive but that doesn't seem to have changed much since the rule was scrapped.

"Daylight" offsides - While never officially a rule, in the early '00s Premier League officials were directed to only give offside if there was a clear distance between the attacker and the defender when the ball was passed. For me, this was much better. Gave more of an advantage to the striker and just made it so much easier for the officials to do their jobs. I'm hoping that we'll go back to this when VAR causes a large number of good goals to be disallowed by marginal offside decisions going against the forwards.

Are there any others you guys can think of?
I'm older than some and miss the old offside. Back then you were either offside or not. We had none of this "It's in the 2nd, 3rd or 25th phase of play". I know it's supports the attackers more but back then the back four operated in tandem and for those who like that sort of thing watching a back line step up to play the opposition was a thing of beauty. I've been doing coaching recently and run the line a few times. My god that's changed. No wonder there are more errors in the game (Or perhaps they are just discussed more on multiple platforms).
My post is a little tongue in cheek but in some ways it was a simpler time.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
14,814
The defender could just as easily be running on the example I gave?

The point of the offside rule is not to stop attacking its to stop goal hanging. A player who ends up in a not offside position (particularly, if it's in or near their own half) clearly isn't goal hanging.
Well yeah but a player in an offside position clearly has a running start. That’s why they do it and it’s the main reason defenders win most headers.
 

RedDevil@84

Full Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
11,075
Golden goal was horrible. So was that useless Silver goal.
Away rule should also go.
 

Trizy

New Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2014
Messages
12,009
Golden goal in theory was epic drama filled extra time. In reality, both teams were terrified to concede so risked little.

Daylight offside I kinda like. The whole offside has gone mad. Everyone has the knives out for the lines man if he gets it wrong because we have the benefit of a million slow motion cameras. Its a difficult job and if I'm being honest I'd say they guess half of them to be safe.
 

Josep Dowling

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
4,724
Can someone please confirm does the offside rule mention anything about benefiting the attacking player?

I always hear this from pundits and other fans but can’t see how this is true. Otherwise why would VAR rule a player offside for having their hand beyond the last defender?

I think it should come down to the attackers feet are beyond the last defender, with linesman only waving offside when it’s obvious. It’s worked well in the World Cup when there were no English officials. Then the officials from the ‘best league in the world’ can’t do something so basic when it has been tested.
 

Josep Dowling

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
4,724
The offside rule was to prevent goal hanging. If you're running away from goal and away from the defenders, there's no advantage being gained to forge any sort of direct goal scoring opportunity in that phase of play. 99% of the time, they happen nowhere near goal, usually from a long clearance and a centre forward slowly ambling back. They're rather frequent in amateur football, from a player who has bombed forward, slowly retreats back to catch his breath, then runs away from goal to challenge for a clearance. Then everyone yells at him for being a lazy shite.

To me they're an offside-but-not-really, but rules is rules.
Don’t agree with you. You would end up with the very best strikers like Aguero drifting behind the defenders only to rush onside when the ball is pinged over to him. I think it would give a massive advantage to the very best attackers. The rules need adjusting but I agree with this rule.
 

Pexbo

Online influencer who has never watched Star Wars
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
48,377
Location
Brizzle
Was it in some American tournament where they replaced penalties with a scenario where the player would start from the half way line and carry the ball towards goal and the goalkeeper could come off his line. Basically a one on one situation.

I thought it was brilliant.
 

VintageWhatnots

Full Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2015
Messages
412
Location
Greater Manchester
Well yeah but a player in an offside position clearly has a running start. That’s why they do it and it’s the main reason defenders win most headers.
But we're not just talking about crosses into the box, this happens near the half way line. The attacker could just as easily run from an onside position, to gain that same advantage.

The rule isn't designed to stop players having an advantage, it is designed to stop a player hanging around at the top end of the field just waiting for a ball to be smashed up to him.

Apart from the fact that running to get to a ball first isn't an unfair advantage, that is playing football