I think they're necessary. Personally, I feel football is held back by staying the same. I think changes are needed to make the game better and more entertaining. I don't know what those are and drastic ones cannot happen overnight but there are some simpler things that could be done. I expect most of you to disagree with this as you probably want things to remain as they are. I expect so because I believe the football world is very conservative.

I'd like to read your thoughts about this and what you think should change.

My first thought concerns the field. As players have become more athletic the field has been made to look narrower because they're able to cover big areas more quickly than they did before. So I believe if fields were wider the extra space would really help the game in speed and rhythm.

Another one is about substitutions. I don't see why they have to be limited to three... what's the point? give more freedom to the coaches and make it so that even players that have come off the field can be brought on again.

I don't think these are big changes. They would not change the nature of the game and I believe they'd make it better... what do you think?

Computer chip to detect whether the ball has crossed the line of goal or not.

I can't agree. This isn't America where we have to try and make it more exciting, more goals, whatever. The pitch limitations are fine as they are, in my opinion.


There's nothing more boring than the end of games when substitutions keep being made. Imagine if you could make as many as you want. There would just be far too much time-wasting. The point of having 3 is to make the game more tactical and such. It's a bit stupid if you can essentially just bring on a group of attackers whenevr you get a free kick, then when you take the lead bring on 7 defenders or something. It'd turn into the NFL.


No referees. Prison rules football. At least you don't have mistakes ruining every game.

I think chips in the balls is a good idea from X-Off. That saves the time wasting aspect of having to go to video reviews and stuff.

1. Abolish the ridiculous rule of yellow-carding a player for removing his shirt after scoring.

2. Video monitor at the side of the pitch, each manager gets to challenge the referee's decision thrice during each game.

3. Failing to do implement the above, use video evidence to ban divers and other cheats after matches.

4. Scrap the away goals rule in European competitions.

5. Change the CL format. Every champion from every league should qualify for the group stages automatically, wether they're from Spain or San Marino. And a maximum of three entrants per country.

6. Effective playing time, ie. instead of added time, simply stop the clock whenever a team is preparing to take a free kick, a corner etc. In other words, as long as the ball is stationary, you stop the clock. As soon as it's kicked into play, the time resumes.

I agree with the others but the problem with this is that games would last forever. I imagine the ball is only in play about 60% of the time maximum.

Oh, one thing I'd like to take from rugby is how they do the injuries. If somene is injured on the field, so what? The trainer comes on and treats him and the game continues. If you run into him, that's your own fault. It cuts out time-wasting on injuries so there's no point in diving around, you're just leaving your team a man down.

I'd say you can only have one challenge. If you get it right, you keep it, wrong you lose it.

You can use it to challenge ghost goals and penalties only (Falsely given or not given i.e. Maicon's handball in the derby or Englands misfortune in the WC). No free kick challenges and certainly no throw in challenges.

Stricter punishment for diving and time-wasting post game is a must.

I've said it for a while now, the game is nowhere near as entertaining as it used to be. The WC was a clear example of that, hence the reason I've got into other sports in the past few years.

I sit through so many dross games from all over the globe that its rare to see a decent game on TV, the North London Derby the other night was a welcome change.

The only way I can see putting emphasis back into attack is rewarding teams with an extra point, or something like that if they were to beat a team by 3 goals or more (obviously this would only really be for league formats), similar to what they have in rugby now. All I hear nowadays is "at the end of the day what matters is the result, not the performance"... Ok, great, real entertaining.

Sure going to the stadium I still love the game but watching it on TV, it's losing its appeal very, very fast in all honesty.

I'd love video challenges. I think it would help the game sooooo much... I mean, you don't only get more decisions right but you get to shut up the players and coaches who protest all the time like idiots!!! You don't think it's right, f_cker? Then challenge it and shut the f_ck up!!! Ahh... I'd love it!



That's what I was expecting from more people actually. Yeah this isn't the US... unfortunately! What they're doing over there is right... why shouldn't the game become more exciting? You say it like it's a bad thing. I'm not asking to add a 3-point line in football, pitch expansion would not even be noticeable.


I did not mean it like that... but it would be funny. I meant why only 3 and not 6? And of course something should be done to limit time wasting like not allowing changes too close to each other with time limitations or something.


That would be just perfect.

Hmm, well, maybe not during throw-ins and free-kicks, but for injuries, straight after goals etc (ie, when the ball is out of play for at least a minute) I think it would be a vast improvement.

Yeah that wouldn't be so bad.

Video challenges of what? Fouls? Yellow cards? Red cards? Penalties? Even if you have a video of the incident it's not always crystal clear what to decide. I'm all for Goal-Line technology though.



Oh yeah, and we call out a "Hammer time" after every goal and try to kill the fans with stupid techno beats after every nice pass or so. Yeah, great entertainment.
Pitch expansion? No, thanks. The small pitch is the very reason for the great football we're seeing these days. It would be much slower had the expansed the pitch some time ago.


Why is one half half 45 minutes long and not 30, why do teams get to take 5 penalties in a PK-shootoout? Because you gotta name some number...

There couldn't ever be a more prominent time for this thread!

I don't know but video replays are absolutely needed... I don't need a better example than the one in the biggest game in football with the refs missing Zidane's headbutt on Materazzi and get saved by the replay...


What's with the sarcasm? And where have you seen anything close to that in US sports?


Well if you think what we're watching is great football then we're never going to agree on anything regarding this issue... I obviously think football nowadays is far from great.


OK then name another... a player was awarded only two free throws if he was fouled taking a shot beyond the three point line 30 years ago in basketball... now that is considered stupid... why are you so against changes, what do you fear so much?


Indeed a video replay would have resulted in Marcelo seeing another red for stepping on whoever it was that was lying in front of him.

Yeah, I think the game would be better if we start Madrid with 10 men and Barca with 11, we all know that's how it's going to end, and it's far more entertaining when it's like it.

No they should start with 11 it's fair. They should see the red for going in a challenge with their studs on an opponent's leg without even looking at what they're doing... that's fair too.

That's one single incident. But there's others, penalties etc, which aren't as easy to solve as this one. And it's the vast majority of decisions.


I don't even like the rising importance of the "Show aspect" in football. Why does car dealer Müller have to present a corner? Why do advertising boards in football stadiums ask me to send them SMS? Why do I have to watch a guy in a giant bottle of coke trying to score during half times?
I don't want dunking contests, I don't want people waiting for "the great half time ads" when they watch football. This is football, not a circus!


Footballs players are fitter, better trained in tactics and much more disciplined than any of their predecessors. They score less goals than in the past, but the reason is kinda obvious. Defending became more important in the last decades - and better.
If you wanna change these developments you ahve to turn back the wheel of time and ask for worse players.



I'm not afraid of changes in any way. Like I said, I support the goal-line technology. I would also support a rule to prevent players from simulating injuries. But why should I vote for changes only because they're changes? Also, you make it look like any change was a good idea. But what about the Golden Goal or the "Three points for a win" rule for example? Those turned out to be very stupid changes...

3 points for a win was a good change, in my opinion. Golden Goal was stupid though, away goals too.

Well, the goal of "Three points for a win" was to see more goals, because a win was more important now. What actually happened was more 1:0 wins, because teams became increasingly afraid of a draw. So, I can't see, why this rule is a success.

I just don't think 2 draws is worth the same as a win. It's bad enough now, but with 2 points for a win, a draw is still a great result. Both teams shouldn't be able to get a great result in my opinion. Whereas now a draw is just okay, neither team is usually happy unless it's big club vs small club.

Come on now, especially when it comes to penalties things become clear in most cases when watching the replays. How would that hurt football in any way? Of course not everything would be resolved but even if you got half of those debatable penalty or no penalty claims sorted out it'd be a huge improvement.


I have no idea what you're talking about here. I don't know what any of that has to do with what I'm saying.


OK I will do that but until I discover that wheel of time I will project the field expansion as the solution. Like you said players are now fitter so the result is they're able to cover up more space more quickly... why not expand the field and create more spaces for attacks? what's so bad with that idea? why not test it in non-professional level and see if it works?

Well I think there's no reason talking about this issue, us two and that's because you think today's football is great and I don't. So you see no reason why anything should change and I see plenty...


No I'm not doing that. On the contrary you make it look like any change is a bad idea.

Well, maybe the problem simply doesn't bother me enough. It's not a big problem for me at all I think.



Well, yeah. Was a bit weird I think.




Before I start to argue. What would be the benefit of a field expansion? More space IMO means more boring football. Just watch a match in non-professional football, were the players aren't as athletic as the pros. That's certainly not what I wanna see...


Seriously, what in particular don't you like?


I just mentioned some changes I'd like to see in my earlier post.

It's a shame they won't bring in any diving punishments after games or even during games players rarely seen to get booked even if they get caught. Though I suppose Barca would be fucked so it'll never happen.

You have no problem with wrong penalty decisions in every other game and players mobbing the ref protesting about them? really? I can't think of a more annoying thing in any sport...


I don't think the current field size with non-professional footballers would be the same as expanded field size with professionals in any way.


the two things I mentioned above (wrong decisions, mobbing of the refs), diving, acting, defenses easily shutting down... I'm sure I can think of more but that's enough for me.