New Fifa rule which will screw Nedved (1 Viewer)

Zizou

Senior Member
Apr 21, 2003
3,967
#1
FIFA Ponder New Rule To Dissuade Feigning Injuries

FIFA president Sepp Blatter has revealed that the governing body are considering implementing a new rule in a bid to dissuade players from feigning injury.

The new policy, which was suggested by Polish legend Zbigniew Boniek, would enforce all players that require treatment to stay off the pitch for two minutes.

Blatter explained: "Mr Boniek has proposed that if a player is injured - or not injured and asking for help - he has to wait at least two minutes before he can re-enter the field of play.

"Most of the time these injuries are not really injuries and as soon as they get to the touchline - the magic line I call it - he is well again. It's not good for football, it's cheating. They just lie down when they are tired or perhaps if the team is not doing well and to give the coach some time to give some instructions."


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

Well I hope Nedved stops acting now or we will play our matches with half the time in 10 men!
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,859
#2
Actually it's a good idea. But not without consequences, given the competitive nature of the game, players who are lightly injured will try to keep playing at all cost, so as not to look bad to their coach and that can affect their health..
 
OP
OP
Zizou

Zizou

Senior Member
Apr 21, 2003
3,967
#3
I think it's a good idea which will stop players from faking injuries. Lately we have seen far too many players falling on the ground only to pressure opponents from throwing the ball out so to stop some counter attack.
 

KB824

Senior Member
Sep 16, 2003
31,538
#4
So......................................................



Are they going to call this the Nedved Rule or the Totti Rule?
 

dpforever

Prediction Game Champ 2003 & 2005
Jan 12, 2002
3,794
#5
Brilliant idea by Boniek, I think it should be implemented as soon as possible ..

If a player is really injured then the time it usually takes for treatement (usually just spraying the muscle, ankle, etc.) is around 2 minutes, so it wouldn't matter but if a player is faking it then he would have to re-consider .. that way we will have 'flowing football' in its true essense without time-wasting or unnecessary interruptions .. like in the old days
 
Jul 12, 2002
5,666
#6
I've never liked the rule that you can come off the pitch and come back on. I've never done it myself. I always thought that if you were injured, then you should not play any more. The rule should be, if you have to come off the field, then you must be substituted.
 

KB824

Senior Member
Sep 16, 2003
31,538
#7
++ [ originally posted by Rickenbacker2 ] ++
I've never liked the rule that you can come off the pitch and come back on. I've never done it myself. I always thought that if you were injured, then you should not play any more. The rule should be, if you have to come off the field, then you must be substituted.

If they do that, then they should increase the number of substitutions to 4.
 

mikhail

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2003
9,575
#9
Speaking of this whole issue, I watched a match last week (League of Ireland), where the referee refused to let a striker be treated when he was injured (hamstring). He go up, hobbled back onside, and then collapsed again. The ref only let a physio onto the pitch when this guy's teammate went down under another tackle, and even then tried to stop the poor guy getting treatment. He was immediately subbed off.

the ref, in case you're wondering, was the worst I've ever seen in my life. I half expected him to book the player for being injured.
 

KB824

Senior Member
Sep 16, 2003
31,538
#10
++ [ originally posted by Rickenbacker2 ] ++


Why?

Because more often than not, substitutions are usually done to solidify defense, or to add an extra attacker, than to replace an injured player.

In fact, that is probably the least used motive for a substitution, because 95% of these guys aren't nearly as injured as they appear to be.

I just feel that if you have to use a substitution on an injury, it can handcuff the manager in regards to strategic substitutions.

Of course, that extra substitution can ONLY be used in the case of an injury, and there should probably be a time constraint on when that substitution can be made, possibly no later than the 70th minute, so as to deter coaches from telling their player to "exaggerate" an injury just to bring someone else in.

Just a thought.
 

mikhail

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2003
9,575
#11
Sorry to go on a tangent again, but that puts me in mind of the MLS, where you can sub your keeper even if you've made your three subs. A few months back, one smart manager moved an out-field player into goal, and then subbed him for another attacker, then swapped the keeper and the new sub again. So he got a fourth sub for free thanks to a dumb rule.

It's hard to enforce exceptions. Who decideds if a guy is injured? The club's physio?

"Yeah, sure he's injured ref. Can't you see, his hair-gel is starting to run."
 

KB824

Senior Member
Sep 16, 2003
31,538
#12
++ [ originally posted by mikhail ] ++
Sorry to go on a tangent again, but that puts me in mind of the MLS, where you can sub your keeper even if you've made your three subs. A few months back, one smart manager moved an out-field player into goal, and then subbed him for another attacker, then swapped the keeper and the new sub again. So he got a fourth sub for free thanks to a dumb rule.

It's hard to enforce exceptions. Who decideds if a guy is injured? The club's physio?

"Yeah, sure he's injured ref. Can't you see, his hair-gel is starting to run."


Man, you love these tangents.

The MLS did this for one simple reason: Americans will only see a game if there is a lot of offense involved. If the Milan-Juve game from acouple of weeks ago were played here, the match would have been crucified as being low scoring. That's just the way we are. It's a stupid rule, I agree.

I would assume that it would be a judgement call by the Ref to decide if he is sufficiently injured.

Oh, why the hell did I bring this up?

Forget it. It was a stupid idea on my part. At least I can admit my faults.

And by the way, if you are using tea-tree based gel, and that stuff gets in your eyes................................ouch.:D
 

Zambrotta

Senior Member
Nov 16, 2001
2,421
#13
Absolutely brilliant idea.
I'm getting sick of all this running off and back on the pitch all the time. And all this giving away throws will stop aswell, I've really got tired of that the latest year.
I really hope this goes through.
 
Jul 12, 2002
5,666
#14
++ [ originally posted by USA Juventini ] ++
Because more often than not, substitutions are usually done to solidify defense, or to add an extra attacker, than to replace an injured player.

In fact, that is probably the least used motive for a substitution, because 95% of these guys aren't nearly as injured as they appear to be.

I just feel that if you have to use a substitution on an injury, it can handcuff the manager in regards to strategic substitutions.

Of course, that extra substitution can ONLY be used in the case of an injury, and there should probably be a time constraint on when that substitution can be made, possibly no later than the 70th minute, so as to deter coaches from telling their player to "exaggerate" an injury just to bring someone else in.

Just a thought.
I disagree. If you limit players to one injury per game, as in, "If you are injured, and have to be taken off then your day is done", then they will not go down for no reason. Thus, only the truly injured players will be taken off and they will be subbed. If a manager has to use a substitution on a injury, thn so be it. It will force managers to be more creative in their tactics and force players to become more versatile.

Seems to me like it would be the perfect solution.
 

Hydde

Duke NUKEM
Mar 6, 2003
36,778
#15
It would be a good idea... because even I dont like when nedved is in the floor doing his shows!!. It scare everyone.

OIn this way he will stop to do that.. because IMo that is his biggest negative attribute
 

Dj Juve

Senior Member
Jul 12, 2002
9,597
#17
i say go for it




but one thing, this rule could abrupt the game a bit, wont be free flowing. Players will argue about this and that and demand to go in ect.

but go for it
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)