Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 35 of 35
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    DarvAze DoolAb
    Posts
    36,813
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Real Madrid View Post
    you need 10 refs instead of three for all of these happening
    Not really. Technology has already solved most of these challenges in other sports for years now.

    Of course we can start by giving those two useless behind-the-goal referees more responsibilities.


  2. Likes Mahdi liked this post
  3. #32
    Mahdi's Avatar
    Mahdi is offline News Team
    ISP Managers Team
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Mjunik
    Posts
    6,597
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bache Tehroon View Post
    - There should be no offside if the offside player is less than 2 meters in offside (hard to implement but very much possible)

    - There should be no offside if the passer has already beaten the offside trap (2 attackers vs. 1 defender or goalkeeper)

    - backpasses from the opponent's half to own half should be illegal.

    - A team should be given a maximum of 4-5 minutes to have a shot at the opponent's goal. If no shot, a penalty is given to the opponent.
    This is Ali Asghari supporting football. I would make Parvin or whoever coach of that team then.

    - I really wish there was some sort of an extra reward for goals scored from outside the box. They make the game a lot more beautiful. Maybe count them as 2 goals? But that could also backfire in the form of teams not giving a shit about close buildups anymore.

    .
    they consider the 3 point shot a stupid thing in the NBA and shooting in basketball is actually a skill unlike in football where shots from afar are less skill but more luck.

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    DarvAze DoolAb
    Posts
    36,813
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Mahdi View Post
    This is Ali Asghari supporting football. I would make Parvin or whoever coach of that team then.



    they consider the 3 point shot a stupid thing in the NBA and shooting in basketball is actually a skill unlike in football where shots from afar are less skill but more luck.
    The idea is to cause more action. That's what a 90 minute game needs more than anything. People's need for stimulation has surged so high that investing 2 hours into a game of football has become a 'questionable' choice. This wasn't the case in the 80s or 90s.

    Football is becoming just another sport. That never used to be the case in the past.


  5. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Behind the Gates of Bernabeu
    Posts
    42,369
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bache Tehroon View Post
    The idea is to cause more action. That's what a 90 minute game needs more than anything. People's need for stimulation has surged so high that investing 2 hours into a game of football has become a 'questionable' choice. This wasn't the case in the 80s or 90s.

    Football is becoming just another sport. That never used to be the case in the past.
    .
    .
    .
    not sure if you were serious about offside rules but if you were then it just makes the game more boring. In this case you can't press anymore as you should leave your defenders mark their direct men in their own half . second of all it make the game as one of the most unstructured sport of all time , no offside means you need no game plan ..
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Anyways, I watched something related to this while ago and I had to look for it to find it , so here it is, No offside rule already been experienced and failed

    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

  6. #35
    Mahdi's Avatar
    Mahdi is offline News Team
    ISP Managers Team
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Mjunik
    Posts
    6,597
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bache Tehroon View Post
    Now onto tournament-related rants/ideas:

    I see Mahdi's point about national football (border-based football) being a bit ridiculous, but humans are instinctively identity-driven creatures. What is the alternative? Race-based football?! Religion-based football?

    If the idea is to add more drama/fun to national games and also make the atmosphere more inclusive, then I think pairing teams of different strength is a funny/good idea! Mix the teams of two nations together and let them play as one team against another pair. Do this based on rankings (1 strong + 1 weak) and draw of luck. This sounds completely ridiculous but I have a strong feeling it will actually happen sometime in the future.

    If the idea of national football is to play the best possible football, then it's pretty much futile because there simply cannot be enough chemistry between players to match club-level football.
    I'm not saying that they are ridiculous. I'm just saying that the tournament in terms of importance is overrated. Importance as in canonical importance though. I understand that it is a big deal to win a tournament that happens only every 4 years, but the football is in general the worst to watch in terms of quality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bache Tehroon View Post
    The idea is to cause more action. That's what a 90 minute game needs more than anything. People's need for stimulation has surged so high that investing 2 hours into a game of football has become a 'questionable' choice. This wasn't the case in the 80s or 90s.

    Football is becoming just another sport. That never used to be the case in the past.
    Actually football in the 80s was much more boring than now. Try to watch a game from the 80s and you fall asleep. You were just younger and more excitable. Only in England there was more action. But they were just kicking the ball forward.

 

 
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •