Martin Samuel replies: Which nit picking rules would you like to see scrapped?

After becoming increasingly frustrated with nit picking officials, Martin Samuel said that referees were getting the big calls wrong because their thoughts were taken up with ensuring they kept to the letter of the law on the game's trivialities.

The seven times winner of Sports Writer of the Year said that modern-day officialdom was built on bogus priorities and asked which nit picking rules you would like to see scrapped, a question you responded to in your droves. Below, Samuel replies to a selection of your comments.

MS: Before we start this week, I would just like to establish some ground rules. Many thanks to all who contributed, and some great points were made, but I did ask what nit picking, irritating, little rules would you like to see abolished. Offside is not nit picking, people, nor is the fact that away goals count double in Europe. These are basic tenets of the game. Also, I was looking to take rules away, not add more, so those with proposals for widening sanctions against cheats, divers and dirty players will also need to call back later. We need some parameters here. Apologies to all those who wrote with big ideas, but these will have to wait for another day. Today, we are concerned with the minor, the useless, the redundant. I will open proceedings by proposing that all matches begin with the ceremonial beheading of the fourth official and go from there.

The caution for celebrating a goal must go. The idea that the act could provoke a riot is ridiculous - you could make the same claim about scoring the goal itself. Nogbad T. Bad.

MS: And scoring is the point of the game. As long as you keep your trousers on and the fun stays between consenting adults, what is the problem?

Get rid of some of the throw-in rules. Who cares how many feet you have on the ground or whether the ball comes from behind your head? Just throw the darned thing. If some people can throw the ball 70 yards, so what? Andy Watt.

MS: So what? So if you can throw the ball 70 yards it becomes a huge advantage and teams will aim for touch as they do in rugby. Poor idea. Next.

Just keep your shirt on if you score. It is not hard. I don't feel the need to whip mine off every time I achieve something. Adam Michie.

MS: What, even if you achieve it in front of 76,000 people, Adam?

No substitutions to be allowed once the fourth official has indicated how much time is left at end of the game. It is a total time wasting tactic. Steven McLean.

MS: This is rule addition, not removal, but even so it would not work. There could be five minutes of injury time and a player could be genuinely injured, as happened to Patrice Evra at Manchester United last night. What would you do then? Make United play the last three minutes of a Champions League semi-final against Barcelona with ten men because someone, somewhere had abused the rule in a previous match. There would then be an incentive to kick people. Even if you made the rule change ‘no tactical substitutions allowed beyond 90 minutes’ that would be abused because players would be made to pretend they were injured. As long as the correct time is added on, there is no gain anyway.

Scrap throw ins. Take a leaf from futsal’s book and use a kick in instead. Wasn't the throw in an afterthought in the original rulebook anyway? V. Iking.

MS: Long ball hell, ahoy.

Why do players have to leave the field after treatment? It only serves to waste time. Whatmighthavebeen Gooner.

MS: Again a case of a small group spoiling it for everyone, as my schoolteacher used to say. This rule came in to stop players time-wasting by feigning injury, now of course it is more likely to punish a player that is genuinely hurt by preventing him returning to the field. Particularly irritating when the player concerned has been the victim of a foul as he is therefore punished as well as injured. Returning to the pitch should be at the discretion of the referee. Fouled players should be allowed back on instantly, if they have to leave at all.

Now that we have transfer windows, I don't see the point of players being cup-tied. It's not like a club can just buy a player to help them win a final. Will.

MS: Never thought about this before Will but, actually, you are right.

I would suggest that the 45 minutes each way be scrapped in favour of two minutes each way. That would make time for something less boring. Martyn Davies.

MS: West Ham United season ticket holder, obviously.

The ludicrous shuffling queue to shake hands before a match. You don't shake hands with someone you're about to go to war against. After the match is the time to shake hands, then everyone heads down the pub to compare scars. Richard C.

MS: And what about the Premier League anthem and the Champions League anthem, Richard? I don’t know about you, but I am never sure whether to stand to attention or not. Maybe we should just turn to a big pile of money and salute it.

OK, this isn't a nit-picking rule rather than one of the cornerstones of European competition, but I think that the away goal rule should be scrapped as soon as possible. Tom.

MS: And this is my point, you see. You can’t just start your own debates. Well, you can, but you can’t expect me to answer in the time allotted. Tom, when you see a panel that says ‘Debate: should the European away goal rule be scrapped?’ that is the green light, pal. You’re on. When you see one that says ‘what nit picking rules would you like to see scrapped’ we’re looking for the mundane and trivial. By the way, I think you’re wrong.

Comments

[Adam]

Making a player leave the pitch after he has been injured. I think it was meant to deter play acting/wasting time but in reality it just adds to the time wasting having to wait for the player to leave the pitch. In the majority of occasions you are penalising a team by reducing them to ten men for their player being fouled! Curiously, when a goalkeeper is injured, he is never asked to leave the pitch.

[Iain]

Move free kicks 10 yards forward if any intimidation/ backchat shown to the referee. Red card any player found to be guilty of simulation in the penalty box - they are trying to create a goal scoring opportunity (penalty) - same as if a defender fouls a forward in a clear goal scoring opportunity he gets sent off! Where's the difference? Tactical substitutions not allowed in injury time - 4th official to allow only if player is injured. Injured player needing time to recover to be allowed to be replaced by sub until recovered - unfair that team with injured player is being penalised and not team fouling.

[del]

the active inactive offside rule. why it can't be simply be the offside rule we were use to in the past is beyond me.

[paula marsh]

If the refs blows up for a foul he should have descretion to keep the fouled player on the pitch after receiving treatment from trainer. Any advantage gained by the 'fouled' team is lost when the ref sends the player to the touchline. the current ruling unfairly gives advantage to the fouling team. Come on refs - use common sense!! or am i asking too much??

[Oliver]

As a referee (boo, hiss!!) just to answer that question about the studs, and what the hell it is we are looking for?!

Well it isn't anything to do with loose studs, and even if a player is missing a stud or two it doesn't make a boot dangerous, with regards to what we are checking for.

It is basically sharp or serrated edges, which could injure other players.

So hope that answers the question (!).

Personally, silly rule, from a refereeing point of view is Red Card for denying obvious goal scoring opportunity. I feel that if the penalty is scored player shouldn't be sent off (why punish the team twice) but if penalty is missed then player can stay on. Or even just give the penalty and no red card. It is the law most refs dislike the most.

[monsieur rioux]

Posted by: Jonweezer
"Why should players who have received yellow cards be banned from cup finals...I can understand banning a player if he picks up a straight red in the semis for a dangerous challenge or something along those lines but otherwise it seems like too big a punishment for a relatively small crime..."

--------------------------------

Agreed. There ought to be account taken of how many games or minutes played per card. Or a sort of amnesty (scrap a card) where a player has kept his nose clean for 2 or 3 games.

It is possible to get a yellow card in every game played, get suspended and keep getting cards and be eligible for a final. Whereas another player gets a card, then goes some games without one but gets one in the semi.

The cheater plays while the more honest one doesn't.

[monsieur rioux]

No substitutions to be allowed once the fourth official has indicated how much time is left at end of the game. It is a total time wasting tactic. Steven McLean.

MS: ...it would not work. There could be five minutes of injury time and a player could be genuinely injured, as happened to Patrice Evra at Manchester United last night. What would you do then? ...There would then be an incentive to kick people... As long as the correct time is added on, there is no gain anyway.
---------------------------------

It most certainly could work.
It's simple. Anyone injured who is unable to play for the last few minutes is deemed not fit enough to play the next game. Just like a concussed rugby player has a mandatory period where he cannot play, so should the footballer who is so injured that he can't hobble around for a minute or so.

As for adding time on, that doesn't help the team whose momentum has been disrupted because the other team is wasting time.

I would actually ban subs in the last ten minutes (except for injury-with the proviso the departing player isn't fit for the next game) unless the team losing wants to make a change (because that is NOT done to waste time) - and then the other team is allowed to respond by making a change. The team winning the match has no need to change something so late.

Subs were brought in to allow replacement of an injured player and then for tactical changes, not wasting time and destroying momentum.

[Alan]

Back to 2 subs including a goalkeeper and scrap the offside rule.

[Phil Aronson]

I think a 4th substitution should be allowed for when a game goes into extra time.

[akinbola fatoye]

The 10 yard rule for free kicks does not work. Players in wall always move towards the ball before the kick is taken. Why not abolish the wall.

[Richard Block]

Forget changes to these petty rules. Introduce video replay review on controversial calls. 2 per team per half. No more diving. No more ridiculous offside calls. Penalties that are penalties.

[Lee - Brighton]

I don't think they are looking for loose studs are they? If they are they're not doing a very good job at it! I always thought they were looking for sharp edges on the studs that could be used for sinister purposes. They never check the tightness of the studs to make sure they're secure - they barely touch them to be honest, just a cursory waft of the hand. With pre-moulded blades being so popular these days I can't imagine many of them have the old screw-ins anymore.

[seth taylor]

Bruno, the way you worded your question made me laugh "... have they ever found it..."!!!! :-)

What they do is check to make sure that any studs have not fallen out of the boot. Studs lying around on a pitch can be pretty dangerous. So what they are supposed to do is run their hand over the boots to ensure that the studs are not lose and will not fall out. A referee can abandoned a match if any studs are lying around on a pitch, or if anyone comes on to the pitch missing some studs from their boots!

[Stephen Griffiths]

No more sendings off for "raising your hands"
It is not violent conduct.
Pushing someone with the force of a 5yo girl is not violent conduct.
Jostling like someone in a January sale is not violent conduct
Punching someone is violent conduct.

[Mr Stromboli]

Having to pass the ball forward at the kick off is pointless.

[Bruno]

Why does the fourth official, and before the advent of that key figure the lino, inspect the soles of the boots of subs as they come on to the field of play ? WHAT ARE THEY LOOKING FOR ? AND HAVE THEY EVER FOUND IT ?
We should be told !

[Julius Blumfeld]

Fussiest and worst rule?

Easy

The 3 yellow card = suspension rule when it is applied to Finals. I have no problem with the rule generally, but it is ridiculous to apply it to Finals:

1. It is extremely harsh. A player can miss the highlight of his entire life for a dubiously awarded yellow. Think Gascoigne.

2. Arbitrary in application - missing a final is a far worse punishment than missing an earlier round. Yet the offence is the same.

3. Bad for the public - viewers are denied the chance to see the best teams play each other.

Julius

[Jonweezer]

Why should players who have received yellow cards be banned from cup finals (such as Roy Keane and Paul Scholes in 99'). I can understand banning a player if he picks up a straight red in the semis for a dangerous challenge or something along those lines but otherwise it seems like too big a punishment for a relatively small crime, and don’t the fans want to see the best players available on the biggest stage (whether it be the Champions League final or the Football League Trophy)

[Lee - Brighton]

I've always thought it was strange when players take off their shirt when they score. It just seems out of place to the joy of scoring a goal. Shouting, screaming, hugging team-mates, jumping in the crowd, even funny dances I can understand but taking off the shirt is an odd one, just as if a player was to take off a boot and wave it around their head. Bizarre. More choreographed moves please boys, but no Bebeto-baby-cradling routines thanks.