The Wall

[charlie clown]

thought to meself on Saturday watching the Heinze incident in the Argies vs Mexcio that the use of a wall in free-kicks is a bit of a bad 'rule'. Mexico not only lost the chance of scoring because of the foul but any advantage they had in the situation is greatly reduced by the defeinding team's ability to put a wall in front of the free kick taker. I know potentially it works both ways in that it could come to a defending team's advantage if the ref makes a bad decision against the defending team but if the emphasis is on encouraging more goals then the balance shifts in the right direction becasue of that. Anyone else in on the campaign to ban the wall?

[Guest TanMan]

Hey Charlie, leave them kids alone

[Guest Si]

thought to meself on Saturday watching the Heinze incident in the Argies vs Mexcio that the use of a wall in free-kicks is a bit of a bad 'rule'. Mexico not only lost the chance of scoring because of the foul but any advantage they had in the situation is greatly reduced by the defeinding team's ability to put a wall in front of the free kick taker. I know potentially it works both ways in that it could come to a defending team's advantage if the ref makes a bad decision against the defending team but if the emphasis is on encouraging more goals then the balance shifts in the right direction becasue of that. Anyone else in on the campaign to ban the wall?

 

How would you enforce it?

 

As long as the players are the requisite 10 yards away from the ball when the kick is actually taken it would be hard to ban them from simply standing together in a line 10 yards away from the ball?

[jimmylibel]

There's a school of thought that a wall actually helps good free kick takers. It would be harder to beat a goalie with just an ordinary shot from distance as they would be differently position and the wall usually gives them a frame of reference when it comes to placing their freekicks.

[charlie clown]

How would you enforce it?

 

As long as the players are the requisite 10 yards away from the ball when the kick is actually taken it would be hard to ban them from simply standing together in a line 10 yards away from the ball?

 

 

the side taking the f-k could take the option of 'goal attempt' in which case no defenders to be positioned any where between ball and goal line unless they are specifically marking an attacking player. The attacking side wouldn't have to take the shot directly at goal but they can call that option in to play if they want to so that they can clear the defenders from in front of the ball. Make it more like a penalty, which in my opinion it should be under circumstances like the one the other night.

Edited June 26, 2006 by charlie clown

[Ostrich Man]

charlies gone mental.

[Ripley]

There's a school of thought that a wall actually helps good free kick takers. It would be harder to beat a goalie with just an ordinary shot from distance as they would be differently position and the wall usually gives them a frame of reference when it comes to placing their freekicks.

I am the head teacher in that school.

 

I'd like to have seen Beckham score from there with no wall yesterday.

[sutty]

I am the head teacher in that school.

 

I'd like to have seen Beckham score from there with no wall yesterday.

 

There'd be a new generation of free kick takers from the Jonny Method Ray Stewart school of thought.

[charlie clown]

I am the head teacher in that school.

 

I'd like to have seen Beckham score from there with no wall yesterday.

 

Ofsted are shutting you down.

[boohog]

Alternatively you could just put the wall on the goalline. That would be far more effective.

[charlie clown]

my rule rules that out.

[jimmylibel]

the side taking the f-k could take the option of 'goal attempt' in which case no defenders to be positioned any where between ball and goal line unless they are specifically marking an attacking player. The attacking side wouldn't have to take the shot directly at goal but they can call that option in to play if they want to so that they can clear the defenders from in front of the ball. Make it more like a penalty, which in my opinion it should be under circumstances like the one the other night.

 

How would you enforce the bit about 'having to have a shot on goal'? If your rule was enforced what's to stop a team saying they're taking a shot from 30-odd yards out, all the players are behind the ball and the free kick taker just passes the ball forward for someone like Cisse/ Henry to run on to, giving them a one on one with the keeper?

[charlie clown]

no, cause bear in mind that this can only be done from outside the box and all attacking players can be marked, the only stipulation is that there is no body in direct line between ball and goal line when the ball is kicked. It is easy enough to defend the 'through ball' situation. The defenders can stand two or three feet to the side of the goal and rush out to defend if they want to, they just can't stand on the goal line.

[sutty]

no, cause bear in mind that this can only be done from outside the box and all attacking players can be marked, the only stipulation is that there is no body in direct line between ball and goal line when the ball is kicked. It is easy enough to defend the 'through ball' situation. The defenders can stand two or three feet to the side of the goal and rush out to defend if they want to, they just can't stand on the goal line.

 

 

This sounds complex.

[Des]

This sounds complex.

 

Referees have enough trouble writing down the names of players that they've booked, what chance would they have of enforcing Charlie's Law?

[Ostrich Man]

Charlie's Flaw.

 

 

 

 

class signature des.

Edited June 26, 2006 by Ostrich Man

[jimmylibel]

no, cause bear in mind that this can only be done from outside the box and all attacking players can be marked, the only stipulation is that there is no body in direct line between ball and goal line when the ball is kicked. It is easy enough to defend the 'through ball' situation. The defenders can stand two or three feet to the side of the goal and rush out to defend if they want to, they just can't stand on the goal line.

 

Have far wide of the goal do they have to stand so? What's to stop them running in front of the ball as soon as it's struck?

[Nathan Explosion]

landmines.

[Ostrich Man]

landmines.

now this sounds interesting.... i may be persuaded on this one.....what else?

[JonShar]

Worst thread ever.

 

Fact.

[Nathan Explosion]

So basically it's a penalty from further out, and potentially different angles. Taking the angles into account, draw lines from the ball to the left and right posts - are the defending players allowed to stand on those theoretical lines, thus creating a tunnel-type shape, or do they have to get out of way totally?

[jimmylibel]

So basically it's a penalty from further out, and potentially different angles. Taking the angles into account, draw lines from the ball to the left and right posts - are the defending players allowed to stand on those theoretical lines, thus creating a tunnel-type shape, or do they have to get out of way totally?

 

Would these lines be in a cone shape from the ball or would they be parallel lines say ten yards either side of the ball?

 

Get rid of football walls, bring in football cones!

[Knox_Harrington]

Can you be offside?

[Ostrich Man]

instead of a wall all players have to get out of the way except one player whose has to run back and forth (like a space invader in the final stages of a level) 10 yrds away.

[Knox_Harrington]

instead of a wall all players have to get out of the way except one player whose has to run back and forth (like a space invader in the final stages of a level) 10 yrds away.

f***ing brilliant.