Click 'Get Involved' to have your say
Reinventing football: Former Premier League referee Chris Foy takes your questions - here are some of his key points so far
Changes to VAR and offsides? 'Necessary proof may not be immediately available for time limits on VAR decisions' says Dale Johnson
Go back to the old handball laws? 'Some of the confusion has come from a big rewrite of the lawbook in 2019' | Chris Foy says handball 'is in a good place'
Stop the clock? 'The average ball-in-play time this season 55 minutes 05 seconds' | Chris Foy says it would 'add to the excitement'
Chris Foy is a retired former Premier League referee who officiated in England's top flight for 14 years between 2001-2015
Chris Foy's answers on... Tactical fouls | Corners | Refereeing standards | Dissent, sin-bins and simulation | Surrounding the referee
Image source, Getty ImagesEverton and England goalkeeper Jordan Pickford on a potential VAR challenge system: "With VAR involved, I'd do it like cricket. They've got two decisions and the captain has got to make sure they review at the right time, in so many seconds. I think that would keep the speed of the game up, and keep it flowing."
Image source, Getty ImagesWill VAR ever be accepted? Perhaps not in its current form, so how about adapting it to a challenge system?
You might not have heard of Fifa's Football Video Support (FVS), which is being trialled in several leagues including Liga F - the top flight of the women's game in Spain.
Under FVS, a coach is given two challenges per game. When they are activated, the on-field referee goes to the monitor to watch the incident back and make a decision. There isn't a VAR poring over the footage, just a replay operator to show the incident to the referee.
Sound good? It has its merits. The assumption is there will be better final outcomes, though trials have shown that's not always the case, and mistakes are still made by a referee at the screen.
VAR: Bring in a challenge system? Thumbs up for yes, down for no...
Click 'Get Involved' at the top of this page to have your say
Handball should be moving the arm in the direction of the ball. It's far too complicated and open to interpretation, but with VAR now, it's very easy to confirm if the arm moved that way.
Graeme
Handball is only when deliberate. Accidental handballs are part of the game.
Nick
Handball, bring back intent, just because the ball hits a hand doesn’t mean it is handball.
David
Click 'Get Involved' at the top of this page to have your say
Handball in the box from a cross/pass shouldn't be a penalty; it should be an indirect free kick. Penalty only for really obvious attempts at blocking a shot that had a good chance of going in like Suarez vs Ghana is a penalty, Rashford against PSG isn't.
Andrew
Hand to ball is a penalty, and ball to hand is not a penalty. That would stop players from aiming for hands in the penalty area.
Harry
Image source, Getty ImagesIf you asked a football fan to define handball a decade ago, you'd get a simple answer, like: "Ball to hand isn't a penalty."
Put that question to them today, and they probably wouldn't know where to start.
Some of the confusion has come from a big rewrite of the lawbook in 2019, when the considerations for handball went from just three lines to an entire page.
Referees were served with a whole menu of reasons to give handball.
The aim was to give a "clearer and more consistent definition and interpretation". What it brought was consistently more penalties, because there were many more reasons to give one.
The micro-definition of handball has left people guessing, so how about getting back to basics? Let the referee make handball decisions how they used to - on instinct.
Handball: Make it like used to be? Should we return to the simpler definition of handball and trust the referee's instinct? Thumbs up for yes, down for no...
Image source, Getty ImagesThink here about that relatively innocuous trip as an attacker is moving away from goal - or a handball decision when there's no immediate likelihood of a goal.
The result? A penalty - and a very high chance of a goal (historically, Opta says, 78%) when no such opportunity existed.
Is it fair, for example, that Brentford were given such a high chance of scoring when Liverpool defender Virgil van Dijk tapped the boot of Dango Ouattara right on the edge of the 18-yard area last month?
Is a shot from 12 yards with only the goalkeeper to beat a just punishment?
We already define an obvious goalscoring opportunity for a red card, so we'd only have to tweak this to any kind of scoring chance for a penalty.
If it's a foul with no clear attacking impact, why not a free-kick?
Could this incentivise defenders to bring opponents down in areas where a penalty would not be the result? Any deliberate or cynical act would still result in a spot-kick.
Penalties: Make the punishment fit the crime? Thumbs up for yes, down for no...
Image source, Getty ImagesClick 'Get Involved' at the top of this page to have your say
When infringements or injuries occur, stop the clock as they do in rugby. Then at the 90th minute, that is the end of the match. No more debates about why several minutes have been added to the half-time or full-time.
Anthony
Change the game to 60 minutes, but with a stop clock when the ball isn’t in play (like basketball). In most current games, there is less than 50 minutes of play. Would eliminate time wasting in an instant.
Gary
The clock stops every time ball goes out of play, and the referee blows his whistle to stop play.
Tony
Injury time. Follow rugby. Stop the clock for any injury, VAR, etc. If you are losing, you want more injury time; if you are winning, you want less. So just stop the clock, get rid of the unknown at the end of the game.
Alex
Image source, Getty ImagesThis idea has been kicking around for many years, with the intention that if the watch is stopped, teams can't waste time.
The plan could be for each half to last 30 minutes, with the clock halted when the ball isn't in play. That guarantees 60 minutes of effective playing time, and means much of the incentive to take vital seconds out of the match is removed.
Fans would actually gain rather than lose out, too, with the average ball-in-play time this season 55 minutes 05 seconds - 114 seconds down from last season.
It's not a magic bullet, because teams who are looking to see out a lead - or hold on to a draw - could still go slowly to break up the momentum of the opposition.
And if the clock is going to stop, how long will it take to play 60 minutes? There's no clear footprint for the match. The average 60-minute NFL game takes more than three hours to complete.
Stop the clock when the ball goes out? Thumbs up if you like the idea, thumbs down if you don't...
Click 'Get Involved' at the top of this page to have your say
Why do we need an offside law? It stops play too often and games become the referee show. If teams employ a 'goal hanger' then let the other team defend against it.
Nigel
I would remove offside completely. Hockey successfully removed offside many years ago and I think it would see more goals which is what fans want to see.
Charlie
Image source, Getty ImagesPremier League referee Anthony Taylor goes one step further.
He officiated a game where the offside rule was ditched altogether.
"One of the best tournaments I refereed in was a prison officer tournament and we had no offside... and we had so many goals it was unbelievable," he said.
"So maybe scrapping offside might be the answer."
Click 'Get Involved' at the top of this page to have your say
I would tweak the offside rule so a player cannot be offside if they are in an onside position when they receive the ball. The attacking team keep possession as they have not gained an advantage.
Will
I would change the offside rule, where there has to be "daylight" between the last defender and attacker, in order for a claim of offside to be legitimate.
Sal
Scrap the offside flag going up 20 minutes after someone is offside. Needlessly wasting time and play continuing could result in injuries. Just throw the flag up when they're off.
Matt
The offside rules are the biggest contention with VAR. The game is about scoring goals, and the offside rule stops many goals from being scored, especially when a player thinks they have scored to be overruled by someone sitting in a room miles away.
Maurice
Image source, Getty ImagesThe initial idea of offside surely wasn't that players should be penalised for having a toe in front of the 'offside line'? After all, before the advent of VAR you only had the judgement of the assistant.
We're told VAR tech is uber-reliable when judging offside decisions, but we're in the hands of AI and a VAR who has to manually confirm a frame that might not be the exact point the ball has been played anyway. And how confusing can those animations be?
So, how about ditching the microscopic tech, and just relying on a TV picture with no lines or funky graphics and an official's eye?
That's how it's done in Major League Soccer - largely because of problems with wildly differing stadium configurations.
The VAR looks at the images and decides if it's possible the assistant has got the decision wrong. If so, the referee is sent to the monitor to look. In other words, MLS judges offside at the clear and obvious threshold and not to millimetres.
VAR offsides: Lose the microscopic tech? Click thumbs up if you agree, thumbs down if you don't...
Image source, Getty ImagesImagine a world in which you could reinvent football.
What if you had the power to change any of the game's laws and potentially bring to an end countless hours of discussion about handball, offside, video assistant referees, or anything else you want to?
We've asked players, pundits and even referees what they'd like to see change in the beautiful game and over the next hour, we will be looking at some of the issues and potential solutions they came up with before we turn over the floor to you.
So stick with us, get your thinking caps on and - for a bit of fun - let's see how you would reinvent football...
Image source, Getty ImagesChris Foy was a match official for more than 20 years, working in the English Football League from 1995 and stepping up to referee his first Premier League match - Bolton Wanderers v Charlton Athletic - in December 2001.
He took charge of a number of key games in the domestic calendar, including the 2009 League Cup final, between Manchester United and Tottenham, and the 2010 FA Cup final, when Chelsea beat Portsmouth 1-0.
Foy also acted as an official in a host of international matches, and went on to work as a coach of senior referees for the Professional Game Match Officials Board after his retirement from Premier League duties in 2015.
More recently, the 62-year-old St Helens-born match official has campaigned to eradicate abusive or aggressive behaviour from players and spectators at junior and youth matches, playing a key role in Don't X The Line campaign.
Click 'Get Involved' at the top of this page to have your say
We would love for you to get in touch too and let us know how you would reinvent football if you had the power to...
He will be with us from 10:30 GMT to answer your questions and give his take on your proposals.
So, click on the 'Get Involved' tab at the top of this page to send in your questions and suggestions.
Image source, BBC SportWe’ve already asked our experts what football could look like if we ripped up the rulebook and started from scratch.
We will share their suggestions with you over the next hour or so and then it's your turn to send in your thoughts.
Former Premier League referee Chris Foy will also be joining us later today to give his verdict on your ideas and also answer some of your burning questions.
So whether you want to scrap offside, tweak VAR or introduce something completely new, this is your chance to weigh in on what needs to change in the game that we all love.
Good morning!
We’re doing something a little different on our live page today but we promise it's still going to be a lot of fun.
We have had plenty of debate on the video assistant referee (VAR) during the past couple of days - as it came under scrutiny in big clashes in both the Premier League and the Women's Super League.
But today, we are asking: If you could reinvent football, what would you change?
Stick with us as we explore bold ideas - old and new - from players, pundits, and referees - and then it’s over to you to join in!