3 things you would change

[paultheroyal]

Any handball in six yard box by defender is a penalty.

Proper controlled timekeeping. From my refereeing days I can assure you that this is the biggest con.

Ten yard dissent rule, yep I would like that in.

[papereyes]

Not according to Keith Hackett:

Premiership referees' chief Keith Hackett has expressed his regret at Fifa scrapping the '10-yard' rule.

The rule, which moves play 10-yards towards the offending team's goal if players show dissent, has been used in English football for four seasons.

"It is a disappointing decision because while the law was not used a lot, it did have an impact on the behaviour of players," said Hackett.

"The referees over here found it acted as a deterrent."

He added: "The problem, as I understand it, is the countries who do not have any familiarity with the concept couldn't get their heads around the process."

That's how I've heard it. The only place I've ever heard different is, perhaps unsurprisingly, on here.

I think also the rule should be that the wall is moved back first, then ball can then follow. Slight change but easily implemented.

[Dirk Gently]

I'd suggest that even those in the game have heard different stories, because it was David Ellery who told me.

the only propel who really know are the 8 IFAB reps.

[TBM]

2, Give a free kick when a defender who is making no attempt to play the ball, blocks an opponent from reaching the ball as it rolls out for a goalkick/throw in etc.
^^^ My biggest budbear in football. Blatant, blatant fouling that is somehow acceptible

Dont agree. Its no different to the ball being played into a strikers feet and he's shielding the ball from the defender until his team mates join him and he lays it off to them. I think as long as the ball is within touching distance of the player shielding then there is no offence.

[Wax Jacket]

I half agree TBM but isn't it essentially covered in the obstruction rule?

[TBM]

If a player covers up the ball without touching it in an endeavor not to have it played by an opponent, he obstructs but does not infringe Law 12 para. 3 because he is already in possession of the ball and covers it for tactical reasons whilst the ball remains within playing distance. In fact, he is actually playing the ball and does not commit an infringement; in this case, the player may be charged because he is in fact playing the ball.

Whatever that means

[Wax Jacket]

right so it is actually covered and is seen as OK. I think it's fair enough - the pitch is so big and if the opposition can't do enough to keep the ball on the pitch you may as well try and lever the advantage of a goal kick, corner, throw-in etc