If you stop the clock during each stoppage, the game would go on for hours upon
hours which would result in much more conservative and boring soccer. The 4th
official determines the amount of added time at the end of the game as he is on
the sideline usually measuring the length of unusually long stoppages. Having no stoppages forces teams to be more risky, chase the game, and attack
more. In the end it makes for more exciting soccer.
The time keeping in soccer drives me crazy. It is so arbitrary. Why can't
there be a clock that is controlled by remote by the referee? The fans could
actually see the the clock stop when play is stooped. The stoppage time thing
is very suspect.
I disagree with all those rule changes, people who want the rules changed, just
don't understand the sport they are watching. American League baseball is
sooo much better than National league because of the DH rule, having a pitcher
hit, is an automatic out most of the time.
Soccer needs to ditch the forward moving clock (along with stoppage time).
It's the 21st century folks! And stop telling everyone with a differing
opinion about soccer rules that they are too stupid to understand the game. The
NFL (a far superior on field product) is constantly changing and altering
it's rules while the game evolves. Why can't soccer evolve too? Games that end in a tie are terrible as well. Why not have at least a 5
minute overtime and/or penalty kicks, even if the game points earned aren't
as much as an outright win in regulation. It would add so much more excitement
to the contest.
@Dave Duncan"If a defender lets an opposing player get behind
him, that's his fault."Let's get rid of it in American
Football too...the whole "line of scrimmage thing" is dumb. After all,
*players should be able to choose their spot on the field whether they are
offense or defense.*
In Soccer--- Leave the Off-side rule alone!! As explained here by several
others, it DOES actually improve the game and speed it up.BUT....
the "margin of error" to score or not score is WAY TOO THIN. This
results in "the better team" being defeated TOO-OFTEN, due to some
microscopic error or absolute FLUKE in play or shots-on-goal.Plus I
think 98% of Americans would agree (if you could get them to care enough to vote
;^)that soccer needs to be changed to create much higher scoring!! And I
don't mean to make each goal worth 6 points --like football. It's not
"the score itself" that matters. It's the NUMBER OF TIMES that a
score happens!!To make the game more "statistically" valid
-- so that the "better team" almost always wins, and to stimulate
fanbase interest in the game, they need to do something to increase scoring
(enlarge the size of the goal, etc.)If soccer games had final scores
of more like 18-9 or 26-12 (still at ONE point per goal), Americans would FLOOD
to the game by the millions!
Soccer needs clock stoppages when players go down rather than "stoppage
time" so the length of play is not subject to human discretion. A player
that is down long enough to be checked out by the referee needs to leave the
game for a period of time. And soccer should have unlimited substitutions as
does basketball. Speaking of substitutions, baseball should allow a player to
come back in after having been subbed out as well.
Eliminating the offsides in soccer will result in four forwards and four
defenders hanging out inside the penalty area the entire game, and the remaining
midfielders kicking long balls in from the half line. It would be boring, and
take the skill out of the game.
Soccer's rules are just fine the way they are. If soccer scored goals at
7pts each like football does, no one would be saying there is no scoring. The
only improvement I'd make to soccer is adding another on-field ref ... two
on-field refs and 2 AR's.Baseball needs to let the team batting
put 2 players out on the field to make things more interesting ... full contact
baseball would be much more fun. hahahaha
Let me first state that I did not play sports much as a youth because I did not
have the coordination or strength that others near my age in my small Utah home
town had and they did not have the patience to put up with me. So I am not a big
sports fan.However, my six children, who all grew up in Texas all played
sports, some more than others, mostly they played soccer. Several were
officials. So I have seen many amateur soccer games, but only a few professional
ones. I would much rather watch soccer than baseball or basketball, American
football and soccer come out about even.Regarding the offside rule in
soccer, having read the youth soccer rule book years ago, I can say that it is
or was a very wordy rule; but the thing that I found most perplexing was the
final statement which basically said if the official thought it was offside it
could be called offside. That just seemed wrong to me, especially with youth
officials some of whom did not truly understand the rule.
People fail to recognize that the offsides rule in soccer makes the game faster
and provides more opportunities to scores, it was created to shorten the
physical space that players use on the field, quicken the speed of play, and
allow for counterattacks. Without the offsides rule; players would stretch the
field out and the pace of the game would become more conservative. People who hate the 0-0 tie should recognize that this scoreline occurs in
less than 10% of all soccer games. In the 2010 world cup 2.44 goals were scored
per game meaning a goal was produced around every 48 minutes of open play.
Considering that a soccer broadcast only goes for 105 minutes (no commercials).
That's comparable to the rate at which touchdowns are scored in football (1
every 41 minutes). Given the points breakdown (3 for win, 1 for a
tie, 0 for loss) ties add a second dimension to the game. I think
the fact of the matter is this: some people prefer one sport over the other, and
that's OK. Fans decide the demand for a game and soccer seams to be doing
I'd love to see European style inbounding in the NBA. As soon as the ref
calls the direction, the team with possession can just grab the ball and throw
it inbound and get the game moving. It would move the game along more quickly,
and add excitement as teams have to get in position much more quickly.
Soccer/Football is the great game. However, it usually is like "watching
water drip". The World Cup every foour years puts excitement back into the
game. Nevertheless, the referee has unlimited power to control who scores that
one "golden goal". There are allegations in Europe that referees have
been paid off. No surprise! The incident in the Cup quals in 2009 between
Ireland and France is a case in point. Thierry Henry caught the ball in one
hand, switched it to another, threw it to his "boot" and then passed in
front of the goal for the goal in Paris which knocked out Ireland. The Swedish
referee did the Sgt. Schultz routine and stated that he "saw nothing".
A larger goal should be mandatory with 6 ft 9 goaltenders as well as increased
pressure for goal line technology to obviate a horrific German goal in the last
world cup which bounced out and was disallowed. The game is great but the
referees are open to "dishonesty".
Offsides is part of what makes soccer, soccer. I have played, and can play, all
positions. I finished playing competitive soccer as a defender. Offisdes
isn't that a man beat you, it's about knowing that he is making a run
and pulling up to put him into an offsides position. And trust me, when you
watch RSL games and they talk about how risky it is to try and put a forward
into an offsides position, IT IS! Take away offsides and you take away a key
strategy that a lot of teams put into place. I for one hated all of the changes
suggested. I love soccer the way it is and love watching/attending the games. I
use to hate watching soccer when I was little, but love to watch now that
I'm not playing anymore.
Offsides in soccer is stupid. If a defender lets an opposing player get behind
him, that's his fault. Players should be able to choose their spot on the
field whether they are offense or defense.
I think basketball needs a rule change to fix the end of the game, which
devolves into something which isn't really basketball. The leading team
tries to run out the clock by stalling and playing keep-a-way rather than
basketball. The team that's behind tries to drag out the clock by fouling
immediately every time the leading team inbounds and hoping they miss their free
throws. The last few minutes become drawn-out, bitter, hostile,
unsportsmanlike, and painful to watch.As a start, maybe whenever the
offense is fouled in the fourth quarter they could have the option to have half
their shot clock subtracted from the game clock. That would reduce the incentive
for immediate fouls and help the game progress towards its end.For
the NCAA this needs to be combined with shortening the shot clock to reduce
stalling; even 30s is probably too long for a college men's game. Maybe 30s
for high school, 27s for college, and 24s for NBA?
No off-sides would ruin the game.
As far as I know, almost all sports have variations in the rules between the
professional and amateur versions. Why not leave it at that for golf and the
"belly putter"? The professionals can be banned from using that type of
putter, just as they're banned from using golf cars, while the amateurs are
not prohibited. That looks like a win-win situation to me.
I would love to see a shot clock in Utah high school basketball. Anyone that
saw the Brighton/Lone Peak game would agree.
Having played soccer on my High School team I kinda 'get' the game. It
is great fun to play and too boring to watch! I never watch it, so any change
that would make it more enjoyable to watch would be welcome.For
Americans soccer is just another boring sport, for most of the rest of the world
they choose a team based on culture and politics making it an entirely different
"Fans" do like, or at least understand and appreciate, 0-0 ties or one
goal matches. "Fans" get the game. It's strange to me that people
who don't understand or support soccer would even chime in with the asinine
suggestions mentioned. I can't stand baseball and choose not to watch it
but I at least appreciate that I don't know enough about it to answer a
poll about rule changes.And, sorry Mike, but a sports reporter who
thinks it's "offsides" should perhaps stick to football (the other
one, the one played with your hands).