Kids are already 4v4, 6v6, 8v8 and 11v11 depending on age. What exactly is changing?

Switching to 4 quarters would do nothing to appeal to anyone. All it would do is be a pathetic attempt to redo a global game with an American gimmick. Not one American who doesn't like soccer today would suddenly be into it because it was now 4 quarters.

Any tweak of offsides would be dumb. It's a giant ass field and it would get so stretched, fitness would suffer and the beauty of working in tight spaces would go away. Actually, the whole game would go away bc no one would watch it anymore.

gambochaman said:

---

I pretty much hate most of these:

1. MLS Style shootout instead of PK shootout....Don't hate it but don't love it. Goalie has a better chance to make an impact.
2. No offsides - NO, NO, NO... completely changes the dynamic of the game and the way a team defends.
3. Four quarters instead of two halves...This is not about the betterment of the game. This is about advertising money. More opportunities to have commercials.
4. Penalty box...aka 'orange card'. player sits out 10 minutes for repeated fouls or bad fouls that dont quite amount to a red - They do this in indoor (blue card). Can have a big impact in indoor but don't see it being as big a deal in outdoor. How many times does a team play a man down while someone is being treated. Would be no different. Maybe changes your tactics for a few minutes but not enough to make a huge impact on the game.
5. last 10 minutes the clock stops for any game stoppage. I would be good with this. I actually wouldn't be apposed to the clock stopping anytime the game stops (injury, out of bounds, etc...) and to do away with injury time added on at the end of the game. That's how we played in high school except the scorboard guys didn't stop on throwins unless the ball got cleared over the stands.
6. Only captain can speak to ref. I do like this...good with this. would add that anyone not wearing the armband or associated with the incident that approaches the ref will automatically be carded.
7. Max number of fouls (the basketball foul out rule)...Not sure about this. if the ref is doing his job a player committing too many fouls will be "fouled out" via double yellows. Think it would be too much effort to track the number of fouls for 22 players.
8. Cap players to a max number of games per year to increase performance and thus quality. Don't think a rule should exist that dictates the way a manager rotates his squad. No other sport does this.
9. 8vs8 for kids and ages over 45...why?
10. More subs and substitutions hockey style without stopping the game. I would be good with managers getting more subs at their disposal but the hockey style doesn't make since for outdoor.


what say you peeps? I personally like the game the way it is but I admit that I am very change averse...just seems like they want to 'americanize' the rules to be more like football, basketball, hockey

---

Dwide Schrude said:

---

Those are a bit extreme. In my mind you really only need three changes/additions:

1. Let the referee stop the clock at his discretion (substitutions, long fouls, arguments, etc.)
2. Red cards eject the player but a new player can be substituted; it does count against your three subs
3. All PK calls are reviewed

---

disagree with #2. I think any team receiving a red needs more punishment than being forced to sub a player.

I could get on board with instant replay for high-stakes calls. Booth review after a penalty is called, a goal is scored, or a goal is disallowed.

An interesting hypo came up during the Everton v. Bournmouth match on Saturday: in one of Bournmouth's goals, there was basically a scramble at the goal line. After review, the ball clearly crossed the entire end line before being deflected back and put into the net. I think I would be ok with using instant replay to disallow the goal even though the refs missed the call in real time.

Folks who want replay of big calls are going to get their wish. Howard Webb just took a job with MLS/PRO and it will be to implement a VAR system. Thats a Video Assistant Referee. He is moving to NYC so its highly possible he will be the VAR in the same way that all NFL booth reviews are done by a single person or entity in a room in NYC. The model will have the look at offside/onside for goals and fouls/misconduct at the request of the referee.

Its already being implemented in other leagues and FIFA wants it for the next WC.

I don't think that's a bad idea. Getting offsides calls/no-calls right on goals would be fantastic, same with red-card worthy fouls that the ref didn't get a good look at when it happened.

As long as the replays take less than a minute or two, I think it'll be a good change.

and dont disrupt the flow of the game

ie. for offsides, the assistant would raise the flag, but the ref would allow the play to continue

the call comes to the ref via earpiece

if the play results in a goal, and offsides is confirmed, then the goal is waved off.

gambochaman said:

---

and dont disrupt the flow of the game

---

The details will obviously be complicated and take time to work into the game. For now, as I understand it, the goal line technology just causes a bracelet to vibrate if the whole ball crosses the whole line. Working out how (and who) will call for booth reviews will take more effort to streamline the process in a way that doesn't interrupt the flow of the game while increasing accuracy of calls.

It got used in the club World Cup in Japan in December. It was not exactly flawless or fast. There are lots of issues to work out.

Why does the entire team have to suffer for one player's mistake? I know you can ask this question ad naseum, but 10 v 11 is a huge disadvantage and completely changes the dynamic of the game.

VAR was used last night in the Portland-RSL preseason match. Diego Chara for Portland led with a forearm/elbow to the face of a RSL player who was taking a shot just outside the penalty area. The ref either didn't see it or did and made no call. The play resulted in a save and corner for RSL. While the corner was being set up the video booth called down and the referee went over to watch the play and make the call. He came back out, called both captains over to tell them the decision then called Chara over, told him and then showed the red card. Nobody was upset, more laughing and a case of what the hell just happened. RSL players seemed to be telling Chara they were sorry he was sent off. The restart was changed from corner to DFK at the spot of the foul. RSL scored on the resulting kick. It took several minutes to happen, from the time the initial corner was held up until the card was shown and kick respotted. The game clock ran the entire time.

Edit: Here's the game footage from last night. The buildup to the play happens at roughly 37:45 on the game clock and the foul itself about 10 seconds later.

mathguy86 said:

---

VAR was used last night in the Portland-RSL preseason match. Diego Chara for Portland led with a forearm/elbow to the face of a RSL player who was taking a shot just outside the penalty area. The ref either didn't see it or did and made no call. The play resulted in a save and corner for RSL. While the corner was being set up the video booth called down and the referee went over to watch the play and make the call. He came back out, called both captains over to tell them the decision then called Chara over, told him and then showed the red card. Nobody was upset, more laughing and a case of what the hell just happened. RSL players seemed to be telling Chara they were sorry he was sent off. The restart was changed from corner to DFK at the spot of the foul. RSL scored on the resulting kick. It took several minutes to happen, from the time the initial corner was held up until the card was shown and kick respotted. The game clock ran the entire time.

---

Sounds silly.

Dwide Schrude said:

---

Why does the entire team have to suffer for one player's mistake? I know you can ask this question ad naseum, but 10 v 11 is a huge disadvantage and completely changes the dynamic of the game.

---

It's a team sport?

yeah seriously...in team sports the whole team always suffers when one of them makes a mistake...

well..why should all 11 players have to move back ten yards when just one lineman was holding?

well..why should all 5 players have to have points count against them when just one committed a technical foul?

well...why should all 6 players suffer when only one was sent to the penalty box?

etc
etc
etc

Yeah, I get all that. My point is that having one less player is a HUGE detriment to the team and to the people watching the games. The punishment doesn't fit the crime.

A red card is a sign that something really really bad just happened. A punch was thrown, a foul that carries intent to injure, an intentional handling that prevents a goal, a denial of a goal scoring opportunity by grabbing someone and pulling them to the ground to prevent a clear shot on goal, spitting on someone, etc. Its such a bad and deliberate act that you lose the right to continue and your team takes a portion of the penalty.

You want to stay at 11? Dont do those really bad things.

Or dont do something bad enough to get a yellow card and then be dumb enough to not understand you did something bad and repeat the bad behavior.

A lot of sports have had a sin bin and they still have viewers.

It's the whole point of a red card.

Interesting. There is no doubt that he deserves the red card, but I wonder how they are going to enforce the ball going from a corner to a free kick like that. What if a lot occurs after a missed red card, I bet it could end up being minutes of play sometimes, no?

Ultimately, he deserves the red and there should have been a free kick, so it would be hard for Portland to argue against it.

Except in watching the video several times, I'm convinced that the VAR goofed. Chapa was well inside the penalty area when he committed the foul and the player he hit appears to be inside it was well. The restart should not have been a DFK just outside the area. It should have been a PK. I know of several former national referees who saw this and who have said exactly the same thing. So it took more than 4 minutes and they got it wrong. Or partially right at best.