I started a comment to reply to SteveA’s post on “A Response,” but I like Shourin’s idea of compiling something that we may want to send along to the “Powers That Be.”
I will take a slightly different approach to this: let’s talk about what changes are easy, not so easy and “no way.” For example, the easiest change to make is allowing dual or multiple referees. (My preference would be two on the field and one video official.) I say this is “easy” because the change is in the interest of a better, fairer game. Tough to argue with “better and fairer” natch?
Video replay is also an “easy” change to make for the same reason. I would propose that the video replay CANNOT make a call, but can be consulted on a difficult call if the referee on the field feels it is necessary. The consultation does not have to last very long.
In the “not so easy” category fall the substitution changes; time-outs and “sin bin.” Of these, IMAO, the penalty box concept has the most opportunity to change the game, though its impact would be enhanced with a freer flowing substitution scheme. I consider these strategic changes because it alters the way a coach will (or should) approach the game. Football is ripe for one of these, but maybe only one.
The “no way” category includes changes to the number of players, size of the goals; the ball or the offside rule. (I apologize to SteveA if I have put an ‘s’ at the end, I assure you that this was laziness, not ignorance, though I possess each in abundance.) My feeling is to ignore these for another day.
Rather then re-hash arguments, what would be everyone’s Top 3 changes? No order necessary.
Mine: multiple referees; a consultative video replay referee; and a penalty box. Thoughts.