Interesting letter from SoCal League, re referee issues

[Carlsbad7]

As with corners it just resulted in shoving near the goal which is interesting for a corner but not if it’s going on all game (you’ve also just added a second ref necessary to police it). Iirc isn’t that also the origin of the line of scrimmage in football?

Maybe but this would be where refs call fouls (just like in basketball).

Once a foul is called the play is dead and the other team gets to start working the ball up the field.

Keep in mind that both teams can park a forward if there was no offsides. But if you do this you're playing man down until the ball is in the other teams side. At the highest levels could you allow this? I dont know.

 

[Grace T.]

Maybe but this would be where refs call fouls (just like in basketball).

Once a foul is called the play is dead and the other team gets to start working the ball up the field.

Keep in mind that both teams can park a forward if there was no offsides. But if you do this you're playing man down until the ball is in the other teams side. At the highest levels could you allow this? I dont know.

Yes but now you are back to needing a ref crew (at least 2) which is where this started plus you are now rewriting the foul laws (because otherwise the ball goes to the gk at the 6). Also the gk rules probably need to be rewritten because every time they’ll punt it into the box (which right now is limited by the offside rule).

 

[Carlsbad7]

Yes but now you are back to needing a ref crew (at least 2) which is where this started plus you are now rewriting the foul laws (because otherwise the ball goes to the gk at the 6). Also the gk rules probably need to be rewritten because every time they’ll punt it into the box (which right now is limited by the offside rule).

2 refs is one less than 3

I have to admit I've never really thought about getting rid of offsides from a keepers perspective. There might be some additional rule changes needed to accommodate.

But overall the concept of getting rid of offsides has its merits. More action, higher scores, less refs, less rules that make refs the bad guy.

 

[Grace T.]

2 refs is one less than 3

I have to admit I've never really thought about getting rid of offsides from a keepers perspective. There might be some additional rule changes needed to accommodate.

But overall the concept of getting rid of offsides has its merits. More action, higher scores, less refs, less rules that make refs the bad guy.

We'll have to rethink the DFKs too because otherwise they'll also just park someone to take out the GK...OK, I've got it!.... hear me out

What if we create a line (can be used for kick offs too) level with the ball where the other team has to line up before a DFK....we can call it a line of kickoff or something. In order to encourage the GK to not hang out at the net all game, we'll remove the PK area and allow them to use their hands anywhere on the field...BUT they can't punt the ball...only throw it!...but since this is a powerful move we'll encourage the other teams to foul the GK...that will be called I dunno something like maybe a "sack"....of course the GK will need some big powerful guys to block for him...and we'll need to require the GK to move the ball up a minimum of 10 yards up the line to keep the game moving or that's a foul!!!...and since two whistles are confusing maybe we move the flags from off the field onto the field??? Might work!

Life Cereal on Mad Men: The Cure for the Common Breakfast

A national site covering food and dining culture, with 23 city sites tracking local dining scenes across hundreds of maps.

www.eater.com

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

OK, so where should we add the shuttlecock, horseshoes, and pickleball equipment?

 

[Carlsbad7]

This is the problem with soccer.

For most of the issues people like to complain about there are solutions. Unfortunately when a solution is provided theres always a vocal group that fears change.

It's like the recent BY to SY change. Why is it happening? To make it so players in the same grade can play on the same team. So SY means "School Year" right? No, it means "Seasonal Year". But I thought the change was being implemented to align with players grade in school. Why wouldn't you call it School Year? Oh, because different schools start at different dates so we dont want groupings to be done by grade. But I thought thats why things were changing from BY? Yes, it's one of the reasons. Another big reason is so theres no more trapped players. OK, so under Seasonal Year there wont be trapped players. No there will still be trapped players but instead of being trapped on an older team they'll be trapped on a younger team.

Reguarding offsides a more middle of the road way to change the rule is to only allow offsides in the box or do like hockey does and have a blue line. This way center field wouldn't have offsides. Which would result in more goals but wouldn't be so crazy for the goalies. The downside to this approach is you still need 3 refs per game.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Or how about this one.

Leagues like SOCAL say that refs need to be paid in cash. We all know that they're doing this because illegal immigrants will work the job because they dont have other options. But, wink wink SOCAL doesn't officially know this and just happens to have rule requiring refs be paid in cash.

How about instead of exploiting people offer more money for games? And maybe if you changed the rules so refs weren't always the bad guys getting yelled at more people would want to be a ref.

 

[RandomSoccerFan]

Status quo <> good
Change <> bad

But change for change's sake <> necessarily good either.

There are many foreseen and probably a few unforeseen consequences to just about any rule change we can dream up to improve the game. Collectively, it's how the rules continue to morph towards some level of agreement that the governing bodies believe is "good for the sport". There's never going to be full agreement, or even necessarily consensus, about sporting changes. Those who are pushing for their particular agenda - even with the best of intentions - are always going to be disappointed about how slow change that they're looking for tends to happen. In most things it's almost always slow and incremental.

By no means is the offside rule in soccer today perfect in meeting all of its objectives, and I agree with you, there are probably a number of different things that can be considered to adjust it for either higher goal scoring, perceived fairness, perhaps less referees, etc.

 

[Grace T.]

This is the problem with soccer.

For most of the issues people like to complain about there are solutions. Unfortunately when a solution is provided theres always a vocal group that fears change.

It's like the recent BY to SY change. Why is it happening? To make it so players in the same grade can play on the same team. So SY means "School Year" right? No, it means "Seasonal Year". But I thought the change was being implemented to align with players grade in school. Why wouldn't you call it School Year? Oh, because different schools start at different dates so we dont want groupings to be done by grade. But I thought thats why things were changing from BY? Yes, it's one of the reasons. Another big reason is so theres no more trapped players. OK, so under Seasonal Year there wont be trapped players. No there will still be trapped players but instead of being trapped on an older team they'll be trapped on a younger team.

Reguarding offsides a more middle of the road way to change the rule is to only allow offsides in the box or do like hockey does and have a blue line. This way center field wouldn't have offsides. Which would result in more goals but wouldn't be so crazy for the goalies. The downside to this approach is you still need 3 refs per game.

That’s almost like the u10 build out line.

Or how about this one.

Leagues like SOCAL say that refs need to be paid in cash. We all know that they're doing this because illegal immigrants will work the job because they dont have other options. But, wink wink SOCAL doesn't officially know this and just happens to have rule requiring refs be paid in cash.

How about instead of exploiting people offer more money for games? And maybe if you changed the rules so refs weren't always the bad guys getting yelled at more people would want to be a ref.

IF (a big if….SoCal is supposed to be generating 1099s over the threshold but again I don’t know if they are or aren’t) SoCal is doing this, it would also be away around the $20 minimum wage. Refs generally aren’t subject to the minimum wage as ics but if you can’t get the air conditioned McDonald’s job, and if you aren’t paying taxes on your cash, can see why the economic incentives for them to do it. Though IF it’s happening, it does further point to a growing divide between top letter leagues and everyone else.