What rule changes would you make to sport?

Sport is often notoriously reluctant to make rule changes, for fear of damaging the essential nature of the game. What changes would you make, however, to improve any game of your choice?

Two that spring to mind for me are:

Cricket

Thaughbaer rightly mentions in another thread how the conditions in cricket can have a huge influence on the game. This is particularly true in test cricket, where the pitch can deteriorate a lot over 5 days and become much harder to bat on. It is therefore often an advantage to bat first, when the pitch is in much better condition. To give an example, scores of over 400 are quite common in first innings, but are much rarer in the fourth.

In cricket, you toss a coin to decide who starts. If you win the toss, you can decide to either bat or bowl. I have seen 3 match test series between quite balanced sides where one captain has won the toss each time, and this has effectively decided the entire series.

As thaughbaer also notes, the home side often has the advantage that the groundsman will prepare the pitch to suit the particular skills of the home side.

So, to help negate both of these, I would award the choice of batting and bowling in the first test to the away side, and then rotate after this.

Football (that's Pro-Soccerball to our American friends 😉)

I would make the penalty for handling the ball on the line to prevent a goal a penalty goal, and not a penalty kick and the sending off of the player. This is only where the offence would clearly have stopped the ball from going in the goal.

I think the current rule is wrong for 3 reasons:

1 If the ball was definitely going in the goal, then the current rule does not do what it should, which is to return the situation to what would have been the case if the infringement had not occurred. Penalty kicks are quite often saved, and being reduced to 10 men (particularly towards the end of the game) is not as much of a disadvantage as it might seem, as the team can simply go defensive.

2 Defenders who stick their hand out in these circumstances are often acting instinctively, in a split second decision, rather that making a calculated attempt to cheat. I think sending off in these circumstances is harsh, particularly when a deliberate (non-violent) trip, which is really cheating, normally incurs only a yellow card.

3 If the player is sent off early in a game, and the penalty is missed, then the character of the game is often changed, as the team reverts to a more defensive formation. Games which were open and attacking suddenly become defensive and attritional.

Do you agree? What would you change?

I would make an adjustment to what happens when there is a claim for a penalty in soccer.

The player who may or may have been fouled inside the penalty box [and no one else] has to make a formal appeal with a specific signal to the referee asking for a decision. The referee then either awards the penalty or gives the player who appealed a yellow card.

Originally posted by FMF
I would make an adjustment to what happens when there is a claim for a penalty in soccer.

The player who may or may have been fouled inside the penalty box [and no one else] has to make a formal appeal with a specific signal to the referee asking for a decision. The referee then either awards the penalty or gives the player who appealed a yellow card.

SOCCER i see you are Americanised
😴😴😴

Originally posted by phil3000
SOCCER i see you are Americanised
😴😴😴

No, I wouldn't say so. But most people here that I am addressing are American. I used the word "soccer" deliberately.

What rule changes would you make to sport?

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Cricket

Agree about the toss arrangements.

I think if the batsman at the non-striker's end leaves his crease before the ball is bowled then it should be permissible [and completely acceptable] to run him out ["mankading"] without any warning: just adjudicate it like a stumping or run out.

Now, as far as I know this dismissal is legal, but apparently umpires pressure fielding side captains to withdraw the appeal. I propose that the appeal cannot be withdrawn, and the umpire must give the non-striker out if he is out, and that a generation of this application of the rule will erase the unjustifiable "unsporting" label that has attached itself to "mankading".

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/604156.html

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Cricket

Here is an interesting one...

"Permit two run-outs off the same delivery"

http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/625340.html

What do you reckon?

I'd make the playing of, the talking of, the watching of, golf, a capital offence.

In "soccer" remove the result of a draw. If the scores are level after 90 minutes, each manager must remove two players from the field and then sudden death. Repeat this cycle after every 5 minutes.

In "soccer" introduce some form of video review. Maybe like tennis. Give the manager 2 blue cards which he can hand to the 4th official during the game.

Originally posted by thaughbaer
In "soccer" remove the result of a draw. If the scores are level after 90 minutes, each manager must remove two players from the field and then sudden death. Repeat this cycle after every 5 minutes.

Oooh no. I am a dissenter on this one. 🙂

I'll accept it in cup/knockout games, perhaps.

In a 'league' campaign I think scraping a draw ~ being held to a draw ~ being denied the three points ~ grabbing a point ~ it's all just as fundamental as the draw is in first class cricket.

Originally posted by thaughbaer
In "soccer" introduce some form of video review. Maybe like tennis. Give the manager 2 blue cards which he can hand to the 4th official during the game.

Good one.

What about a video review & 'jury' system on - say - the following Monday to decide on off the ball incidents and other serious matters that can be clearly seen but were not seen during the match: a bit like what they have in Aussie Rules?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I'd make the playing of, the talking of, the watching of, golf, a capital offence.

What about in soccer [among compatriots I'd refer to it as Association Football, but I don't feel as though I am among compatriots], if all "throw ins" were actually free kicks taken from the appropriate point on the touchline?

Originally posted by FMF
Oooh no. I am a dissenter on this one. 🙂

I don't mind that. I won't be presenting these ideas to the FA. The kind of rule changes I'd like to see in any game would be about giving the fans more value for money and making the game more exciting to watch. That's why I enjoy the IPL so much because it brings glitz and the format induces action.

Originally posted by FMF
What about in soccer [among compatriots I'd refer to it as Association Football, but I don't feel as though I am among compatriots], if all "throw ins" were actually free kicks taken from the appropriate point on the touchline?

There are entire tracts of our coastline dedicated to hitting small balls into holes with sticks, its ludicrous.

The worst thing about soccer and you need have no fear, we also refer to it as such, is inconsistency with decisions and arguing with the referee. You do not see this in rugby and it is not tolerated in cricket either.

The opponents of video footage say that it will slow the game down, which of course is a nonsense, you can get a decision in seconds. In the case of penalty decisions and excessive challenges which result in a card being shown, its a simple matter to refer it to another off field official who shall look at video footage, this should take the pressure from the referee as the decision is effectively taken from his hands. All he would need to do was to refer it. This in fact adds to the tension and thus the enjoyment of the game as in IPL 20/20 when anticipation is created waiting for the decision to be announced.

In basketball, I think the fouled player should shoot free throws and his team keep the ball.