ESOCommunity

momuuu wrote:

almalek wrote:

Show hidden quotes

momuuu wrote:

almalek wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the rules need a revamp actually. Teams and players are too professional and have found many 'bug abuses' that are really OP. Suggestions to change it:

1) True playing time. Delaying is way too effective, even extra time fails to account for it. Play 30 minutes twice, with the clock only running when the ball is rolling. Continuous fouls are too effective at bringing the game to a standstill and that's extremely unfun/frustrating (and the only boring part of the final)
2) Yellow card means you get a ~10 minute penalty. It's too easy to just ruin a promising attack by making a foul. There's 4-5 defenders and 3 midfielders that can just make a foul on purpose to prevent an attack. A yellow card matters some but people have become professional enough to just get one yellow card. With substitutes you can prevent more than 10 attacks by just tanking a yellow card. In practise, it has few consequences. It just makes it too hard to actually set up an attack. You see this way too often, promising attack and then it's just destroyed by a lame foul.
3) Maybe it'd be better to play 10 vs 10. Players are so fit and good that the pitch appears to be too small. its too easy to fall back and defend all space while still having the threat of a counter attack. If you only have 10 players, either you can't send anyone forward or you give away more space when defending - attacking might become more succesful. The game would be more fun if there were more chances and goals anyways. Nowadays there's often few actual chances in a game.
In theory you could make the pitch larger - something that would be nice too. However, then you would have to rebuild every stadion in the world which seems to be impossible in practise.

thats just out of imignation changes

as are most suggestions. But for all its worth, #1 and #2 are actively being considered atm

fouls are part of game .. still people un professional enough with yellow cards ..I dnt see this change.. there hardly any delay on football beside fouls..

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/ ... llow-cards
https://www.dutchreferee.com/improving-laws-game/
https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... 60-minutes
It's not just 'imagination', even officials are actively thinking about at least two of my proposals.

momuuu wrote:

almalek wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the rules need a revamp actually. Teams and players are too professional and have found many 'bug abuses' that are really OP. Suggestions to change it:

1) True playing time. Delaying is way too effective, even extra time fails to account for it. Play 30 minutes twice, with the clock only running when the ball is rolling. Continuous fouls are too effective at bringing the game to a standstill and that's extremely unfun/frustrating (and the only boring part of the final)
2) Yellow card means you get a ~10 minute penalty. It's too easy to just ruin a promising attack by making a foul. There's 4-5 defenders and 3 midfielders that can just make a foul on purpose to prevent an attack. A yellow card matters some but people have become professional enough to just get one yellow card. With substitutes you can prevent more than 10 attacks by just tanking a yellow card. In practise, it has few consequences. It just makes it too hard to actually set up an attack. You see this way too often, promising attack and then it's just destroyed by a lame foul.
3) Maybe it'd be better to play 10 vs 10. Players are so fit and good that the pitch appears to be too small. its too easy to fall back and defend all space while still having the threat of a counter attack. If you only have 10 players, either you can't send anyone forward or you give away more space when defending - attacking might become more succesful. The game would be more fun if there were more chances and goals anyways. Nowadays there's often few actual chances in a game.
In theory you could make the pitch larger - something that would be nice too. However, then you would have to rebuild every stadion in the world which seems to be impossible in practise.

thats just out of imignation changes

as are most suggestions. But for all its worth, #1 and #2 are actively being considered atm

umeu wrote:

momuuu wrote:

Show hidden quotes

almalek wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the rules need a revamp actually. Teams and players are too professional and have found many 'bug abuses' that are really OP. Suggestions to change it:

1) True playing time. Delaying is way too effective, even extra time fails to account for it. Play 30 minutes twice, with the clock only running when the ball is rolling. Continuous fouls are too effective at bringing the game to a standstill and that's extremely unfun/frustrating (and the only boring part of the final)
2) Yellow card means you get a ~10 minute penalty. It's too easy to just ruin a promising attack by making a foul. There's 4-5 defenders and 3 midfielders that can just make a foul on purpose to prevent an attack. A yellow card matters some but people have become professional enough to just get one yellow card. With substitutes you can prevent more than 10 attacks by just tanking a yellow card. In practise, it has few consequences. It just makes it too hard to actually set up an attack. You see this way too often, promising attack and then it's just destroyed by a lame foul.
3) Maybe it'd be better to play 10 vs 10. Players are so fit and good that the pitch appears to be too small. its too easy to fall back and defend all space while still having the threat of a counter attack. If you only have 10 players, either you can't send anyone forward or you give away more space when defending - attacking might become more succesful. The game would be more fun if there were more chances and goals anyways. Nowadays there's often few actual chances in a game.
In theory you could make the pitch larger - something that would be nice too. However, then you would have to rebuild every stadion in the world which seems to be impossible in practise.

thats just out of imignation changes

as are most suggestions. But for all its worth, #1 and #2 are actively being considered atm

They would be decent changes, especially #2, but it could turn into basketball, where a 90m match takes 3 hours.

#2 is good but it will require refs to really step up their game and no longer give those silly yellow cards they sometimes give. Also the 2 yellow = red needs to be reworked then as well.

Making it 10 players would change the game too much imo. But could maybe be trialed seperately, like 7vs 7 rugby

Lukas_L99 wrote:I haven’t seen a single yellow card for diving the entire cup even though there were so many divers...
Harder punishment for that would be the change I’d like to see.

momuuu wrote:

umeu wrote:

Show hidden quotes

momuuu wrote:

almalek wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the rules need a revamp actually. Teams and players are too professional and have found many 'bug abuses' that are really OP. Suggestions to change it:

1) True playing time. Delaying is way too effective, even extra time fails to account for it. Play 30 minutes twice, with the clock only running when the ball is rolling. Continuous fouls are too effective at bringing the game to a standstill and that's extremely unfun/frustrating (and the only boring part of the final)
2) Yellow card means you get a ~10 minute penalty. It's too easy to just ruin a promising attack by making a foul. There's 4-5 defenders and 3 midfielders that can just make a foul on purpose to prevent an attack. A yellow card matters some but people have become professional enough to just get one yellow card. With substitutes you can prevent more than 10 attacks by just tanking a yellow card. In practise, it has few consequences. It just makes it too hard to actually set up an attack. You see this way too often, promising attack and then it's just destroyed by a lame foul.
3) Maybe it'd be better to play 10 vs 10. Players are so fit and good that the pitch appears to be too small. its too easy to fall back and defend all space while still having the threat of a counter attack. If you only have 10 players, either you can't send anyone forward or you give away more space when defending - attacking might become more succesful. The game would be more fun if there were more chances and goals anyways. Nowadays there's often few actual chances in a game.
In theory you could make the pitch larger - something that would be nice too. However, then you would have to rebuild every stadion in the world which seems to be impossible in practise.

thats just out of imignation changes

as are most suggestions. But for all its worth, #1 and #2 are actively being considered atm

They would be decent changes, especially #2, but it could turn into basketball, where a 90m match takes 3 hours.

#2 is good but it will require refs to really step up their game and no longer give those silly yellow cards they sometimes give. Also the 2 yellow = red needs to be reworked then as well.

Making it 10 players would change the game too much imo. But could maybe be trialed seperately, like 7vs 7 rugby

10 vs 10 is very radical indeed. But I can't stop thinking about how much more fun the game would be if there's more space on the pitch.

Anyways, the criticism of the first suggestion is very fair. It has been tested in some youth tournament in the Netherlands, and from what I read about it people were mostly positive. Supposedly the ~30 minutes per half in practise equal the 45 minutes per half with the current rules. But that's something you would need to test and measure indeed. And the 10 minute bench time for a yellow card indeed probably means the system has to change slightly. But I think I'd like it's effect overall. Of course it all needs to be tested. I hope FIFA and UEFA will be open minded about these things.

umeu wrote:

momuuu wrote:

Show hidden quotes

umeu wrote:

momuuu wrote:

almalek wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the rules need a revamp actually. Teams and players are too professional and have found many 'bug abuses' that are really OP. Suggestions to change it:

1) True playing time. Delaying is way too effective, even extra time fails to account for it. Play 30 minutes twice, with the clock only running when the ball is rolling. Continuous fouls are too effective at bringing the game to a standstill and that's extremely unfun/frustrating (and the only boring part of the final)
2) Yellow card means you get a ~10 minute penalty. It's too easy to just ruin a promising attack by making a foul. There's 4-5 defenders and 3 midfielders that can just make a foul on purpose to prevent an attack. A yellow card matters some but people have become professional enough to just get one yellow card. With substitutes you can prevent more than 10 attacks by just tanking a yellow card. In practise, it has few consequences. It just makes it too hard to actually set up an attack. You see this way too often, promising attack and then it's just destroyed by a lame foul.
3) Maybe it'd be better to play 10 vs 10. Players are so fit and good that the pitch appears to be too small. its too easy to fall back and defend all space while still having the threat of a counter attack. If you only have 10 players, either you can't send anyone forward or you give away more space when defending - attacking might become more succesful. The game would be more fun if there were more chances and goals anyways. Nowadays there's often few actual chances in a game.
In theory you could make the pitch larger - something that would be nice too. However, then you would have to rebuild every stadion in the world which seems to be impossible in practise.

thats just out of imignation changes

as are most suggestions. But for all its worth, #1 and #2 are actively being considered atm

They would be decent changes, especially #2, but it could turn into basketball, where a 90m match takes 3 hours.

#2 is good but it will require refs to really step up their game and no longer give those silly yellow cards they sometimes give. Also the 2 yellow = red needs to be reworked then as well.

Making it 10 players would change the game too much imo. But could maybe be trialed seperately, like 7vs 7 rugby

10 vs 10 is very radical indeed. But I can't stop thinking about how much more fun the game would be if there's more space on the pitch.

Anyways, the criticism of the first suggestion is very fair. It has been tested in some youth tournament in the Netherlands, and from what I read about it people were mostly positive. Supposedly the ~30 minutes per half in practise equal the 45 minutes per half with the current rules. But that's something you would need to test and measure indeed. And the 10 minute bench time for a yellow card indeed probably means the system has to change slightly. But I think I'd like it's effect overall. Of course it all needs to be tested. I hope FIFA and UEFA will be open minded about these things.

yea i think it would be better too, although the time maybe needs to be tweaked a little. but then I don't think the 2nd yellow should be red immediately. Rather 2nd yellow = longer ban and 3rd yellow is red. or no longer x yellow = red but just reserve red cards for direct violations that require a red card.

momuuu wrote:

umeu wrote:

Show hidden quotes

momuuu wrote:

umeu wrote:

momuuu wrote:

almalek wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the rules need a revamp actually. Teams and players are too professional and have found many 'bug abuses' that are really OP. Suggestions to change it:

1) True playing time. Delaying is way too effective, even extra time fails to account for it. Play 30 minutes twice, with the clock only running when the ball is rolling. Continuous fouls are too effective at bringing the game to a standstill and that's extremely unfun/frustrating (and the only boring part of the final)
2) Yellow card means you get a ~10 minute penalty. It's too easy to just ruin a promising attack by making a foul. There's 4-5 defenders and 3 midfielders that can just make a foul on purpose to prevent an attack. A yellow card matters some but people have become professional enough to just get one yellow card. With substitutes you can prevent more than 10 attacks by just tanking a yellow card. In practise, it has few consequences. It just makes it too hard to actually set up an attack. You see this way too often, promising attack and then it's just destroyed by a lame foul.
3) Maybe it'd be better to play 10 vs 10. Players are so fit and good that the pitch appears to be too small. its too easy to fall back and defend all space while still having the threat of a counter attack. If you only have 10 players, either you can't send anyone forward or you give away more space when defending - attacking might become more succesful. The game would be more fun if there were more chances and goals anyways. Nowadays there's often few actual chances in a game.
In theory you could make the pitch larger - something that would be nice too. However, then you would have to rebuild every stadion in the world which seems to be impossible in practise.

thats just out of imignation changes

as are most suggestions. But for all its worth, #1 and #2 are actively being considered atm

They would be decent changes, especially #2, but it could turn into basketball, where a 90m match takes 3 hours.

#2 is good but it will require refs to really step up their game and no longer give those silly yellow cards they sometimes give. Also the 2 yellow = red needs to be reworked then as well.

Making it 10 players would change the game too much imo. But could maybe be trialed seperately, like 7vs 7 rugby

10 vs 10 is very radical indeed. But I can't stop thinking about how much more fun the game would be if there's more space on the pitch.

Anyways, the criticism of the first suggestion is very fair. It has been tested in some youth tournament in the Netherlands, and from what I read about it people were mostly positive. Supposedly the ~30 minutes per half in practise equal the 45 minutes per half with the current rules. But that's something you would need to test and measure indeed. And the 10 minute bench time for a yellow card indeed probably means the system has to change slightly. But I think I'd like it's effect overall. Of course it all needs to be tested. I hope FIFA and UEFA will be open minded about these things.

yea i think it would be better too, although the time maybe needs to be tweaked a little. but then I don't think the 2nd yellow should be red immediately. Rather 2nd yellow = longer ban and 3rd yellow is red. or no longer x yellow = red but just reserve red cards for direct violations that require a red card.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Although if you get two yellow cards you'll still miss 20-25 minutes of game time.

umeu wrote:

momuuu wrote:

Show hidden quotes

umeu wrote:

momuuu wrote:

umeu wrote:

momuuu wrote:

almalek wrote:

momuuu wrote:I think the rules need a revamp actually. Teams and players are too professional and have found many 'bug abuses' that are really OP. Suggestions to change it:

1) True playing time. Delaying is way too effective, even extra time fails to account for it. Play 30 minutes twice, with the clock only running when the ball is rolling. Continuous fouls are too effective at bringing the game to a standstill and that's extremely unfun/frustrating (and the only boring part of the final)
2) Yellow card means you get a ~10 minute penalty. It's too easy to just ruin a promising attack by making a foul. There's 4-5 defenders and 3 midfielders that can just make a foul on purpose to prevent an attack. A yellow card matters some but people have become professional enough to just get one yellow card. With substitutes you can prevent more than 10 attacks by just tanking a yellow card. In practise, it has few consequences. It just makes it too hard to actually set up an attack. You see this way too often, promising attack and then it's just destroyed by a lame foul.
3) Maybe it'd be better to play 10 vs 10. Players are so fit and good that the pitch appears to be too small. its too easy to fall back and defend all space while still having the threat of a counter attack. If you only have 10 players, either you can't send anyone forward or you give away more space when defending - attacking might become more succesful. The game would be more fun if there were more chances and goals anyways. Nowadays there's often few actual chances in a game.
In theory you could make the pitch larger - something that would be nice too. However, then you would have to rebuild every stadion in the world which seems to be impossible in practise.

thats just out of imignation changes

as are most suggestions. But for all its worth, #1 and #2 are actively being considered atm

They would be decent changes, especially #2, but it could turn into basketball, where a 90m match takes 3 hours.

#2 is good but it will require refs to really step up their game and no longer give those silly yellow cards they sometimes give. Also the 2 yellow = red needs to be reworked then as well.

Making it 10 players would change the game too much imo. But could maybe be trialed seperately, like 7vs 7 rugby

10 vs 10 is very radical indeed. But I can't stop thinking about how much more fun the game would be if there's more space on the pitch.

Anyways, the criticism of the first suggestion is very fair. It has been tested in some youth tournament in the Netherlands, and from what I read about it people were mostly positive. Supposedly the ~30 minutes per half in practise equal the 45 minutes per half with the current rules. But that's something you would need to test and measure indeed. And the 10 minute bench time for a yellow card indeed probably means the system has to change slightly. But I think I'd like it's effect overall. Of course it all needs to be tested. I hope FIFA and UEFA will be open minded about these things.

yea i think it would be better too, although the time maybe needs to be tweaked a little. but then I don't think the 2nd yellow should be red immediately. Rather 2nd yellow = longer ban and 3rd yellow is red. or no longer x yellow = red but just reserve red cards for direct violations that require a red card.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Although if you get two yellow cards you'll still miss 20-25 minutes of game time.

yah that's still pretty big. I dunno. on the one hand, ur right about these tackles that break down promising attacks, where the defender just cuts down the player knowingly accepting the yellow card. For that I think a 10m ban or something is totally right. Perhaps for diving it would be a good remedy too, as people would probably dive less if it's properly enforced. But sometimes there are other yellow cards, for which I feel like a 10m ban might be too much, and if that player is banned, you can't substitute, like you could now.

deleted_user wrote:Get your own thread! I want to talk about FIFA World Cup 2018.

Sargsyan wrote:

Lukas_L99 wrote:I haven’t seen a single yellow card for diving the entire cup even though there were so many divers...
Harder punishment for that would be the change I’d like to see.

Id love to see these payday loans and var for divers

P i k i l i c wrote:The question now is: who can stop England Brasil_OPPPPP? What is the weakness of Brazil? Their team is so complete. I feel they will slowly but surely make their way to the cup like a quiet strength.

almalek wrote:

almalek wrote:

Show hidden quotes

P i k i l i c wrote:

almalek wrote:

P i k i l i c wrote:The question now is: who can stop England Brasil_OPPPPP? What is the weakness of Brazil? Their team is so complete. I feel they will slowly but surely make their way to the cup like a quiet strength.

france or uruguay could.. what makes them too op?

well of course nothing is 100% sure in football, but your answer is in my comment: the team has top players at every position, what is their weakness according to you?

My predictions:
Uruguay 1-0 France (I expect something sad so I can't be disappointed)
Brazil 2-1 Belgium
Sweden 1-0 England
Russia 1-3 Croatia

I predict 3-2 belguim
I think it'll be close game..

they lack a leader like cristiano ronaldo thats is it .. nothing new
strats wise spain vs brasil would hav been made good game