Incessant VAR delays, more and more time-wasting, set-piece goals at an all-time high… these are just some of the things blighting football. Here Telegraph Sport’s writers offer their solutions – and you can join the debate at the bottom.
No hands
There is one very simple change to the laws of football that would make a world of difference: banning players from putting their hands on each other. They can no longer grab, hold or place their arm across an opponent. Inadvertent contact, when going for the ball, such as challenging for a header when needing to use an arm for leverage, would be allowed as long as it is brief and only lasts while the ball is there. Certainly not before. They would not be allowed to hold. Any prolonged contact would be an offence. Simple as that.
Advertisement
Sin-bin for simulation
An eight-minute sin-bin for simulation. If there is a second offence by a team in the same game then the opponents are awarded a penalty and five instances by the same side over a season would result in a one-point deduction.
Only one player from each team in addition to the defending goalkeeper to be permitted in the six-yard box in a effort to end these ludicrous corner scrums.
Grappling at corners has become unbearable for spectators and viewers – Alex Pantling/Getty Images
A common-sense 10-second rule to get the ball back into play from goal-kicks, throw-ins and corners to cut out the most blatant acts of time-wasting or the opponents are awarded possession 25 yards from goal in one of two marked areas on the pitch.
Advertisement
Players would also have the ability to pass to themselves at throw-ins, free-kicks and corners in an effort to produce more creative set-piece routines and limit the aerial bombardment.
A 90-second VAR limit – if it is not “clear and obvious” in that time then it is not clear and obvious.
Reclaim football from the nerds
VAR, PSR, and SCR – get rid of them all. Full abolition. The game has been stolen by data and finance boffins, and none of it is fun. Fans cannot celebrate goals for fear of a guy in a truck deciding a striker’s toenail was offside. And those who support a club outside the big six cannot dream about playing Barcelona or Real Madrid without some finance expert telling them their club will be screwed if they finish sixth instead of fifth. Football has become a game of fear rather than one that encourages ambition and hope.
Advertisement
Scale back VAR
I do not want VAR scrapped, but I want it scaled back to its original purpose: to ensure clear and obvious mistakes are not made. Things that are clear and obvious do not take several minutes of studying replays, from a variety of different angles, to determine. Whether it is a foul, a handball or anything VAR currently investigates.
I would argue that includes offside decisions that are judged on the millimetres of someone’s toe or forehead. Or if someone is standing in the goalkeeper’s line of vision I do not care if we are using a semi-automated system.
The law needs to be changed for this to happen and Arsène Wenger’s clear daylight idea is the best I have heard.
Zian Flemming’s goal, from Jaidon Anthony’s cross, to put Burnley 4-3 up against Brentford would have stood under Arsene Wenger’s clear-daylight proposal
If we can see a gap between the last defender and the attacker, we all know it’s offside. There would be no need for lines. Fans inside the stadium would be able to tell far better with their naked eye, as would the referee’s assistants with the flag to raise. Goal celebrations could return to something like their former glory.
Advertisement
Referees will always make mistakes; the biggest problem we have is that the VAR is making them almost as often as the officials on the pitch and that is largely down to the fact they are over-analysing incidents.
So many calls are subjective, so just use VAR to get rid of the clangers. That was all we ever wanted it for in the first place.
Just sack VAR off completely
When I was a lad, many moons ago, the ultimate adrenalin rush of supporting your team was the mad celebrations when you witnessed a goal. If you were fortunate enough to see your team score a winner in added time, all the better. Limbs and all that. So to remove the thrill and excitement from our national sport is not only scandalous but it feeds into the theory that people who do not know the game have taken over.
Advertisement
It is now so laughable that the officials cannot hide behind the old “it’s not the people, it’s the technology” excuse. I would recommend removing the whole process. Semi-automated offsides, at a push, can stay, but VAR needs to go or we risk losing generations of fans from the game we supposedly love.
VAR should have a 90-second time limit to prevent delays that are ruining the match-going experience for fans – Richard Sellers/PA
Time limits on corners
There is nothing more infuriating about the modern game than the amount of time it takes for corners to be taken. Especially when the delay is because of the referee. Officials frequently prevent corners from being delivered so they can have a stern word with the players in the penalty area about holding. What is the point of this? The players are obviously going to hold each other anyway. It is the referee’s job to punish fouls at corners, not to waste time trying to convince the players not to commit them. Just get on with the game.
Advertisement
Cut down substitutions
Little in modern football is ever downsized but I would advocate for a return to a maximum of three substitutions per team. The final quarter of Premier League matches is often pockmarked now by multiple stoppages to bring players on and matches lose momentum and impetus as a result.
The seemingly endless stream of substitutions is killing the flow of the game, as well as favouring the bigger clubs with deeper squads – Shaun Botterill/Getty Images
More subs clearly benefits better-funded teams with deeper squads in a competition already stacked generously in their favour. And it is a hassle to keep track of five changes per team when reporting on matches. Will somebody please think of the journalists?