Philosoraptor
Well-Known Member
Slightly wrong with the grip, they changed the mass etc of the javelin.
Intriguing stuff.
Intriguing stuff.
Rules you would change (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter tommydazzle
- Start date
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
They did ban allowing people to do somersaults in the long jump. Only reason Fosbury Flop got allowed was because he kept it secret until competition and on the day there was reason in the rulebook they could disqualify him.
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
Not really :happy:
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Yep. Mainly for all those scientists/chemists and labs taken up testing athletes rather than finding cures for diseases. Priorities.
I was going to suggest maybe they'd have to declare they wre taking them, but then you'd still have to do the testing which negates my point. So do what you like. You might die by the age of 30 but if you've willing to do that so you can run the 100m in 5 seconds so be it.
Wyken Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Football refs should have microphones like they do for Rugby.
Any dissent from the player is a straight yellow (which they don't do often enough) and could language is a red.
It worked well in a match in Australia, time it was enforced.
Sent from my G8441 using Tapatalk
Any dissent from the player is a straight yellow (which they don't do often enough) and could language is a red.
It worked well in a match in Australia, time it was enforced.
Sent from my G8441 using Tapatalk
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
There's been a couple of examples in recent cricket games where the ball hit the stumps but did not dislodge the bails.
If it touches the stumps, it should be out.
It does not matter how thin an edge you get to be caught, so it should not matter how thin the stumps get hit to be bowled.
If it touches the stumps, it should be out.
It does not matter how thin an edge you get to be caught, so it should not matter how thin the stumps get hit to be bowled.
ccfc92
Well-Known Member
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
In football, players should be able to be substituted and then come back on later.
If this happens it should not count against the number of substitutions allowed.
Of course, there'd need to be rules on how many times this could happen to prevent hundreds of substitutions as a time-wasting measure.
If this happens it should not count against the number of substitutions allowed.
Of course, there'd need to be rules on how many times this could happen to prevent hundreds of substitutions as a time-wasting measure.
skyblueinBaku
Well-Known Member
The only player entitled to speak to a match official should be a team's captain. Any other player speaking to a match official should get a yellow card.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Maybe make it that there is no break in play to do it, like line changes in ice hockey. So while you're making the change it's not wasting time and you could have a player out of position for a short time.
tommydazzle
Well-Known Member
Don't like all this shepherding the ball out by not playing it, seems like obstruction to me. Not sure how you could counter it though. Maybe allow very robust shoulder charges.
Frank Sidebottom
Well-Known Member
I think all football semi finals should be played on a special cross shaped pitch at the same time. With 2 teams playing North to South and 2 teams playing West to East simultaneously with only 1 ball.
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
In sport or in everyday life?
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
I played in a game were I beat the opening bat and the ball went through the stumps as they hadn’t put them in close enough he then went on to make a decent score.
The Great Eastern
Well-Known Member
The grass roots league I'm involved with in Norfolk does just this. Called a ro-ro substitution and works well when a player is either knackered and needs a breather or is going into one and needs 5 minutes to cool his head down or get sent off.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Another couple:
In cricket, why do you change the batter if they cross before a catch is taken? Surely it being caught should nullify any action they take and the incoming batsman faces the next ball.
Football: I think the player fouled should be the one to have to take the penalty. If it's not a foul (say handball, even though I've stated above i'd prefer all handballs to be indirect free kicks) it's taken by the last playerof the attacking team to touch the ball.
In cricket, why do you change the batter if they cross before a catch is taken? Surely it being caught should nullify any action they take and the incoming batsman faces the next ball.
Football: I think the player fouled should be the one to have to take the penalty. If it's not a foul (say handball, even though I've stated above i'd prefer all handballs to be indirect free kicks) it's taken by the last playerof the attacking team to touch the ball.
CrawleySkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Football: Physio should be allowed on the pitch during open play. Would stop players feigning injuries or wasting time. None of this kicking the ball out of play business, all it does is stop an opposition counter attack. Any serious injuries, play would stop as it does now.
One I’ve also never understood with the rules as they currently are... if a player goes down with cramp, why on earth should the game be stopped?
One I’ve also never understood with the rules as they currently are... if a player goes down with cramp, why on earth should the game be stopped?
ccfctommy
Well-Known Member
F1 qualifying.
Sack the cars off and have the racers race on foot two laps of the track in full gear to determine grid position. It'll be a ratings winner.
More brilliant ideas.
Tag Team boxing.
Foot-snooker. Snooker played using footballs on a grass pitch. It'll take off!
Theres more!
Sack the cars off and have the racers race on foot two laps of the track in full gear to determine grid position. It'll be a ratings winner.
More brilliant ideas.
Tag Team boxing.
Foot-snooker. Snooker played using footballs on a grass pitch. It'll take off!
Theres more!
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
I really like the idea of foot snooker as an accompaniment to FootGolf.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
In the recent Bangladesh vs West Indies cricket match, I felt bad for the Bangladesh batsman who could not get his century because the run chase total was reached when he had scored 94 with 3 balls left in the over.
So I'd introduce a rule that any player having 90 or more runs be allowed to bat out the final over.
So I'd introduce a rule that any player having 90 or more runs be allowed to bat out the final over.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Here's an idea I got while watching close offside calls in the Women's World Cup.
VAR denied a couple of goals where it looked like a player was offside by just a couple of inches.
Change the offside rule to more benefit attackers by adding "a player can only be offside if both feet are offside".
In other words, so long as one foot is in line or behind the last defender, it's not offside.
VAR denied a couple of goals where it looked like a player was offside by just a couple of inches.
Change the offside rule to more benefit attackers by adding "a player can only be offside if both feet are offside".
In other words, so long as one foot is in line or behind the last defender, it's not offside.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
That's how it used to be - as long as part of you was behind the line you were on - no idea why they changed it.
Unfortunately all it does then is change the emphasis of where the margin is - what if their other foot is really close to the offside line but the heel may/may not be offside?
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
That would be ok.
My whole idea is to allow a striker who is bursting through a line of defenders a couple of extra seconds leeway when they react faster than the defenders.
Currently the striker is being punished for reacting faster.
The classic example was Ellen White's second 'goal' for England against the USA.
Paul Anthony
Well-Known Member
I have a feeling there are going to be an increasing number of calls for a change to the offside rule this season, what with VAR coming into the Premier League.
OffenhamSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
If there’s clear space between the last defender and the attacker they’re offside. If any part of the body, leg, arm, etc is still in line, they’re on. Easy!
skybluesam66
Well-Known Member
Level was always onside
you can now be both ahead of and behind the last defender at the same time, and be offside - surely that is level
Now you can only be level if you are exactly the same shape and size as the last defender and in the exact same position
you can now be both ahead of and behind the last defender at the same time, and be offside - surely that is level
Now you can only be level if you are exactly the same shape and size as the last defender and in the exact same position
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Not just the stock cars. All short circuit racing is the same. The grading system makes for good racing.
Now then now then
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
I'm also thinking 'handball' should only be below the elbow.
Allow players to touch the ball with the arm or shoulder above the elbow.
Seems like a fair compromise.
Sometimes it's very difficult to avoid the ball bouncing up and hitting the upper arm.
Seen it so many times in recent games.
Allow players to touch the ball with the arm or shoulder above the elbow.
Seems like a fair compromise.
Sometimes it's very difficult to avoid the ball bouncing up and hitting the upper arm.
Seen it so many times in recent games.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
But they seem to be treating it like the photo-finish of a 100mm sprint, where even if one person's nose crosses the line first, they win.
I'd make the deciding body part the rearmost foot.
The downside is it would probably be too difficult for officials to judge, so it would require VAR.
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
The 100mm sprint? Is that a thing nowadays? Might be good at that.