Dear american football...

[xc84]

I do have to give Nasa and XC credit

Thank you.

 

[Millhouse]

You'll laugh at the first part of this but I think the answer is to cut down on physicality and punish divers. I like the card system but what gets a card on a given day is up to that specific ref and where the foul takes place. A yellow card is given for a cynical challenge while straight red is a dangerous challenge. If a player compiles 3 or 4 non yellow card worthy fouls it should equate to the receiving a yellow card. You see some refs do this but not all after calling a foul for the 4th time brandish a yellow card and point to all the spots that player has committed fouls but not always.

Fouls called in the midfield are 50:50 but contact in the box is decidedly pro defenders. Liverpool have one of the worst in Martin Skrtel who will drape himself over players and he's far from the only one. If you really want to push scoring, call fouls the same in the box as you would in midfield. You would see a ton more PK's and also defenders having to play looser in the box. If you do that it would also make it more conceivable for a team to come back from a multi goal deficit. The flip side, which everyone wants, is to call fouls and brandish cards for dives in the box. Less rugby style grappling and oscar worthy diving in the box would make the game higher scoring and less detestable in general.

The one caveat with more fouls/cards is players get suspended for accumulation. With bigger "read deeper roster" clubs it would be easier to overcome, but a 3 game suspension for a team in relegation battle could be the difference in staying up or not. End game, it would favor the richer clubs.

Penalty kicks are too easy. It will always result in crappy teams preferring to hunker down and take their chances in a shootout (in games with shootouts). It will always result in dives. Calling for better enforcement of diving is easier said than done during the game. I think long suspensions after the fact could make a big difference but to fix it during the game, you have to reduce the incentive to dive.

Refs know how easy it is to score on a PK so they are reluctant to call less egregious fouls - knowing that the PK is almost a sure goal, they will only call it if they think the foul has the same odds of preventing a goal.

make it a free kick, let teams place it wherever they want outside the box, limit the guys in a wall, whatever. everyone prefers a good free kick over a pk.

Refs will call more fouls if they don't feel like they're deciding that the other team would've scored. We'll have fewer sure thing PKs but i think scoring in regular play would go up.

 

[BlazeOrange]

You'll laugh at the first part of this but I think the answer is to cut down on physicality and punish divers. I like the card system but what gets a card on a given day is up to that specific ref and where the foul takes place. A yellow card is given for a cynical challenge while straight red is a dangerous challenge. If a player compiles 3 or 4 non yellow card worthy fouls it should equate to the receiving a yellow card. You see some refs do this but not all after calling a foul for the 4th time brandish a yellow card and point to all the spots that player has committed fouls but not always.

Fouls called in the midfield are 50:50 but contact in the box is decidedly pro defenders. Liverpool have one of the worst in Martin Skrtel who will drape himself over players and he's far from the only one. If you really want to push scoring, call fouls the same in the box as you would in midfield. You would see a ton more PK's and also defenders having to play looser in the box. If you do that it would also make it more conceivable for a team to come back from a multi goal deficit. The flip side, which everyone wants, is to call fouls and brandish cards for dives in the box. Less rugby style grappling and oscar worthy diving in the box would make the game higher scoring and less detestable in general.

The one caveat with more fouls/cards is players get suspended for accumulation. With bigger "read deeper roster" clubs it would be easier to overcome, but a 3 game suspension for a team in relegation battle could be the difference in staying up or not. End game, it would favor the richer clubs.

It seems that the available penalties are either too harsh or too mild. Seeing "a ton more PK's" would not be popular because that would become the overriding factor in the outcome of the game. Yellow cards don't have an immediate consequence other than a free kick, which sometimes creates a nice scoring opportunity but often doesn't. Accumulating them or getting a red card leads to a large suspension that can affect entire seasons. Question: When a player is kicked out of a game, I believe his team has to finish the game short-handed - does that carry on into the ensuing suspension? Or can the team insert another player to fill the spot?

Maybe some sort of penalty box for minor infractions would work, with the time of the sentence adjusted for the game - like 5- and 10-minute shorthanded periods, depending on the infraction or location of the foul. It would increase scoring chances while keeping a semblance of the game and lead to reductions in holding, diving, etc.

 

[ImperialOrange]

It seems that the available penalties are either too harsh or too mild. Seeing "a ton more PK's" would not be popular because that would become the overriding factor in the outcome of the game. Yellow cards don't have an immediate consequence other than a free kick, which sometimes creates a nice scoring opportunity but often doesn't. Accumulating them or getting a red card leads to a large suspension that can affect entire seasons. Question: When a player is kicked out of a game, I believe his team has to finish the game short-handed - does that carry on into the ensuing suspension? Or can the team insert another player to fill the spot?

Maybe some sort of penalty box for minor infractions would work, with the time of the sentence adjusted for the game - like 5- and 10-minute shorthanded periods, depending on the infraction or location of the foul. It would increase scoring chances while keeping a semblance of the game and lead to reductions in holding, diving, etc.

The thing is yellow card accumulation, 10 by midway or 15 by 3/4 through the season also incur a suspension. I like that teams are forced to finish a man down after a red card. For the ensuing games they can select a full 11 BUT the suspended player can not be selected as a starter or on the bench as a sub until the suspension is over.

IF they started calling the game differently it would initially result in an influx of PK's but eventually defenders would play differently to avoid giving the almost sure goal and let it play out. It's better to give up a scoring chance than a sure thing. Think goal tending in basketball. Eventually, in theory, you would see more scoring chances play out vs players getting hacked down. It may or may not increase scoring but it would create more chances and a more open game.

 

[Millhouse]

The thing is yellow card accumulation, 10 by midway or 15 by 3/4 through the season also incur a suspension. I like that teams are forced to finish a man down after a red card. For the ensuing games they can select a full 11 BUT the suspended player can not be selected as a starter or on the bench as a sub until the suspension is over.

IF they started calling the game differently it would initially result in an influx of PK's but eventually defenders would play differently to avoid giving the almost sure goal and let it play out. It's better to give up a scoring chance than a sure thing. Think goal tending in basketball. Eventually, in theory, you would see more scoring chances play out vs players getting hacked down. It may or may not increase scoring but it would create more chances and a more open game.

expecting refs to call the same rules differently never lasts. look at hockey after the lockout. you have to make changes outside their control

 

[CanadianSU]

The difference is the bigger rink in the Olympics makes the game faster. It gives the finesse players more room to skate and gain speed. There really isn't alot of room once all 11 guys get into the offensive zone.

Disagree. It promotes trap hockey. 5 guys in the neutral zone.


Ie: latvia vs Canada...

We only beat latvia 2-1 because they clogged up the neutral zone the whole game.

 

[Millhouse]

Disagree. It promotes trap hockey. 5 guys in the neutral zone.


Ie: latvia vs Canada...

We only beat latvia 2-1 because they clogged up the neutral zone the whole game.

you only beat latvia 2-1 because GIRGENSONS

it's so nice to say gerg-anything and not be sad

 

[ImperialOrange]

Penalty kicks are too easy. It will always result in crappy teams preferring to hunker down and take their chances in a shootout (in games with shootouts). It will always result in dives. Calling for better enforcement of diving is easier said than done during the game. I think long suspensions after the fact could make a big difference but to fix it during the game, you have to reduce the incentive to dive.

Refs know how easy it is to score on a PK so they are reluctant to call less egregious fouls - knowing that the PK is almost a sure goal, they will only call it if they think the foul has the same odds of preventing a goal.

make it a free kick, let teams place it wherever they want outside the box, limit the guys in a wall, whatever. everyone prefers a good free kick over a pk.

Refs will call more fouls if they don't feel like they're deciding that the other team would've scored. We'll have fewer sure thing PKs but i think scoring in regular play would go up.

In league matches there isn't penalty shoot outs. Only world cup and champions league finals.

I'm talking in match PK's which would eventually change how defenders played and open up the game. I don't have an issue with the game as it is now but if you want more scoring chances and fewer fouls that would be a means to that end.

 

[CanadianSU]

you only beat latvia 2-1 because GIRGENSONS

No actually the goalie Gudlevskis... And Ted Nolans trap!

 

[jekelish]

That all makes sense but I'm just saying if there were some sort of rule change that made the game more wide open and the scoring jumped (and I realize this is a massive hypothetical at this point) -- but would it be well-received?

I can tell you right now it absolutely would not be well received, because the only people who have an issue with the scoring are Americans. You could say we could try it for MLS but then that would have us playing a different game than the rest of the world, so it would be like having a CFL team try to come in and play in the NFL when the World Cup rolls around. Just would never work.