| Rule Change 08:56 - Sep 27 with 2141 views | hype313 |
After all the histrionics by Sheff W on Saturday why doesn't the FA start looking at doing what Rugby do with injuries, just stop the clock and call the final whistle on 90 minutes, that way if people want to waste time then it makes no odds and you then don't get this nonsense of how many minutes will be added on. |  |
| |  |
| Rule Change on 09:00 - Sep 27 with 1679 views | bluelagos |
If the ref adds on enough time, it makes no odds. I dont understand why he didnt just point to his watch and state clearrly the time was getting added on.
And the guy who moved himself onto the pitch to receive treatment, I'd have just booked him. Fit enough to move a couple of meters and then he became crock again fss. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:03 - Sep 27 with 1633 views | Wickets |
Not sure if that's the best way forward but agree that something needs to be done this "game management " has for me got out of hand . All teams are doing it to the detriment of football for me but i just dont know whats is the best way to handle this form of cheating ? |  | | |
| Rule Change on 09:05 - Sep 27 with 1608 views | Wickets |
| Rule Change on 09:00 - Sep 27 by bluelagos |
If the ref adds on enough time, it makes no odds. I dont understand why he didnt just point to his watch and state clearrly the time was getting added on.
And the guy who moved himself onto the pitch to receive treatment, I'd have just booked him. Fit enough to move a couple of meters and then he became crock again fss. |
Sorry but i think you are wrong as i do think it makes a difference even if the correct amount of time is added on which as we know rarely happens . | | | |
| Rule Change on 09:06 - Sep 27 with 1596 views | hype313 |
| Rule Change on 09:00 - Sep 27 by bluelagos |
If the ref adds on enough time, it makes no odds. I dont understand why he didnt just point to his watch and state clearrly the time was getting added on.
And the guy who moved himself onto the pitch to receive treatment, I'd have just booked him. Fit enough to move a couple of meters and then he became crock again fss. |
The problem is that ref's do add on time but no one knows how much and what it's for, I (a bit anorak) timed all the injuries and time wasted in the second half and it amounted to 7 minutes, that's where the disparagy comes in as only 4 were added. | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:08 - Sep 27 with 1578 views | UB9Blue |
Its the same with goal celebrations, are they supposed to allow 30 seconds to be added on although sometimes its clearly been longer? |  | | |
| Rule Change on 09:18 - Sep 27 with 1501 views | Guthrum |
| Rule Change on 09:03 - Sep 27 by Wickets |
Not sure if that's the best way forward but agree that something needs to be done this "game management " has for me got out of hand . All teams are doing it to the detriment of football for me but i just dont know whats is the best way to handle this form of cheating ? |
Refs should be stricter about time wasting during added-on time, i.e. after the board has gone up. Treat it very much as a minimum time and just keep adding more on if there is excesssive messing around.
That would be an incentive to keep things running smoothly if a team wants the game to finish with the minimum amount of further play. If they want to waste time, they'll have to do it properly, e.g. by taking the ball into a corner. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:22 - Sep 27 with 1460 views | MattinLondon |
Like a lot of other issues in football, the rules are already in place to
Solve this. They just need to be applied by the referee. [Post edited 27 Sep 2021 9:22]
|  | | |
| Rule Change on 09:23 - Sep 27 with 1447 views | hype313 |
| Rule Change on 09:18 - Sep 27 by Guthrum |
Refs should be stricter about time wasting during added-on time, i.e. after the board has gone up. Treat it very much as a minimum time and just keep adding more on if there is excesssive messing around.
That would be an incentive to keep things running smoothly if a team wants the game to finish with the minimum amount of further play. If they want to waste time, they'll have to do it properly, e.g. by taking the ball into a corner. |
But all that does is mask the issue somewhat, as it will constantly be subjected to interpretation.
I really fail to see what would be bad about just stopping the clock like Rugby and the a horn goes off at 90 minutes (80 in Rugby)
There would be no arguments all round that way, and it is fairer. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Rule Change on 09:25 - Sep 27 with 1422 views | jayessess |
If you stop the clock every time the ball is out of play football becomes a very different game. At the moment, the ball is out of bounds for 30-35 minutes in most matches. So, effectively if you stop the clock every time the ball is out, you're basically adding a whole extra time period to every game.
That said, I think refs are all over the place with what they add. I think if you checked back you'd find there was more time lost to proper stoppages (the things you do add time for) on Saturday than there was at Lincoln. Yet 4 minutes for the 2nd and 7 for the first. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:30 - Sep 27 with 1392 views | Wickets |
| Rule Change on 09:25 - Sep 27 by jayessess |
If you stop the clock every time the ball is out of play football becomes a very different game. At the moment, the ball is out of bounds for 30-35 minutes in most matches. So, effectively if you stop the clock every time the ball is out, you're basically adding a whole extra time period to every game.
That said, I think refs are all over the place with what they add. I think if you checked back you'd find there was more time lost to proper stoppages (the things you do add time for) on Saturday than there was at Lincoln. Yet 4 minutes for the 2nd and 7 for the first. |
Yes your right , i seem to remember the first time the World Cup was played in the USA they wanted to do this clock stopping but it was decided that it would extend matches much too long for it to be viable . | | | |
| Rule Change on 09:32 - Sep 27 with 1378 views | Garv |
There's probably a few things that could change. Another would be yellow carding a keeper who falls on the ball after collecting a cross/high ball late on, for absolutely no reason other than to waste time. Is it still the case the keeper is only allowed to hold the ball for six seconds? This is never enforced. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:32 - Sep 27 with 1371 views | Guthrum |
| Rule Change on 09:23 - Sep 27 by hype313 |
But all that does is mask the issue somewhat, as it will constantly be subjected to interpretation.
I really fail to see what would be bad about just stopping the clock like Rugby and the a horn goes off at 90 minutes (80 in Rugby)
There would be no arguments all round that way, and it is fairer. |
I agree. But, like VAR, that is a culture change which football would find hard to stomach.
A problem I have with the rugby method is it encourages longer breaks in play - everyone stops for a drink and the pitch is full of backroom staff who then have to be shooed off. | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:34 - Sep 27 with 1354 views | Garv |
| Rule Change on 09:23 - Sep 27 by hype313 |
But all that does is mask the issue somewhat, as it will constantly be subjected to interpretation.
I really fail to see what would be bad about just stopping the clock like Rugby and the a horn goes off at 90 minutes (80 in Rugby)
There would be no arguments all round that way, and it is fairer. |
Imagine football with no injury/stoppage time, though? | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:36 - Sep 27 with 1340 views | hype313 |
| Rule Change on 09:34 - Sep 27 by Garv |
Imagine football with no injury/stoppage time, though? |
Yeah, but it's a bit Sky for me, they love the hysteria behind it, and probably think it was brought in by them. | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:38 - Sep 27 with 1328 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
Keeping more precise time is only part of the issue. A lot of it is abut breaking up play and slowing the game down. Overall, the ball is in play for far less time than the 90 minutes. The biggest positive change to the rules on this front was the introduction of the rule preventing a goalkeeper from picking up a back pass.
It is always frustrating when your team is behind or level with a team we should beat and the opposition do this but the reverse to that is we are generally very poor at doing it ourselves. Norwood is probably about the only player who does it well.
If we could have play continue while a player receives treatment and they have to leave the field once recovered to be invited back on at the fourth official's satisfaction that they are properly kitted (aside from where a player has been booked for a challenge), it would help to some degree. Clearly, the referee would need to stop the game if the injury appeared serious.
How you prevent all the other things like taking a long time to take throw-ins, free kicks, etc, I am not sure. Booking players for clear examples is already in the referee's armoury but they have to be clear it is. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:41 - Sep 27 with 1305 views | Guthrum |
| Rule Change on 09:25 - Sep 27 by jayessess |
If you stop the clock every time the ball is out of play football becomes a very different game. At the moment, the ball is out of bounds for 30-35 minutes in most matches. So, effectively if you stop the clock every time the ball is out, you're basically adding a whole extra time period to every game.
That said, I think refs are all over the place with what they add. I think if you checked back you'd find there was more time lost to proper stoppages (the things you do add time for) on Saturday than there was at Lincoln. Yet 4 minutes for the 2nd and 7 for the first. |
Tho in rugby they don't stop the clock every time the ball goes out, only when the Ref orders it (chiefly when an injured player is in the way of the game, for disciplinary matters, or for a TV review of a decision). | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:42 - Sep 27 with 1298 views | SouperJim |
| Rule Change on 09:32 - Sep 27 by Garv |
There's probably a few things that could change. Another would be yellow carding a keeper who falls on the ball after collecting a cross/high ball late on, for absolutely no reason other than to waste time. Is it still the case the keeper is only allowed to hold the ball for six seconds? This is never enforced. |
Fairly sure the 6 seconds thing was dropped, now they can theoretically take as long as they like and it's just up to the ref to intervene if he feels time wasting is going on. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:44 - Sep 27 with 1281 views | bluelagos |
| Rule Change on 09:06 - Sep 27 by hype313 |
The problem is that ref's do add on time but no one knows how much and what it's for, I (a bit anorak) timed all the injuries and time wasted in the second half and it amounted to 7 minutes, that's where the disparagy comes in as only 4 were added. |
I timed a couple of stoppages at 2 mins each which when you add on the subs was defo more than the 4 mins - no argument.
So your argument is basically that refs are sh1t at time keeping so take it away from them. Fair argument, but for me am thinking there is more than enough outside interference already (Var / goal line tech) without more.
And the unknown (how much is left) is actually quite an enjoyable part of the game for me - albeit I absolutely think refs should be better than the guy on Saturday was.
Some people like order more than others I guess! | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:44 - Sep 27 with 1278 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Rule Change on 09:23 - Sep 27 by hype313 |
But all that does is mask the issue somewhat, as it will constantly be subjected to interpretation.
I really fail to see what would be bad about just stopping the clock like Rugby and the a horn goes off at 90 minutes (80 in Rugby)
There would be no arguments all round that way, and it is fairer. |
Doubt the ball is currently in play for30- 35 minutes each half. This excludes the time taken to restart games for goal kicks, throwing, corners, free kicks etc. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:44 - Sep 27 with 1277 views | jayessess |
| Rule Change on 09:38 - Sep 27 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Keeping more precise time is only part of the issue. A lot of it is abut breaking up play and slowing the game down. Overall, the ball is in play for far less time than the 90 minutes. The biggest positive change to the rules on this front was the introduction of the rule preventing a goalkeeper from picking up a back pass.
It is always frustrating when your team is behind or level with a team we should beat and the opposition do this but the reverse to that is we are generally very poor at doing it ourselves. Norwood is probably about the only player who does it well.
If we could have play continue while a player receives treatment and they have to leave the field once recovered to be invited back on at the fourth official's satisfaction that they are properly kitted (aside from where a player has been booked for a challenge), it would help to some degree. Clearly, the referee would need to stop the game if the injury appeared serious.
How you prevent all the other things like taking a long time to take throw-ins, free kicks, etc, I am not sure. Booking players for clear examples is already in the referee's armoury but they have to be clear it is. |
Personally, I think you'd up the consistency levels if you took it out of the referees' hands and gave it to the 4th official. I suspect a lot of the variance is just because the ref has a lot to do and think about.
The 4th official doing it might also facilitate a bit more transparency. Maybe you could have the current added time displayed on the scoreboard with the total going up in real time? [Post edited 27 Sep 2021 9:57]
| |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:45 - Sep 27 with 1275 views | Herbivore |
| Rule Change on 09:23 - Sep 27 by hype313 |
But all that does is mask the issue somewhat, as it will constantly be subjected to interpretation.
I really fail to see what would be bad about just stopping the clock like Rugby and the a horn goes off at 90 minutes (80 in Rugby)
There would be no arguments all round that way, and it is fairer. |
You'd need to have clear criteria for when it is stopped though. In rugby the ref calls time off and time on, the clock doesn't automatically stop whenever the ball goes out of play, and you couldn't have a situation like that in football or a 90 minute match would last over 2 hours.
So for things like goalies dithering over a goal kick the ref could call time off once they've taken more than, say, 8 seconds, but the goalie will then just take the kick as soon as he calls time off. You'll also then get sides pushing right to the limits of allowable time wasting. I'm not sure how workable it is. Rugby is different as there's very little in the way of deliberate time wasting when the ball isn't in play and usually the ref stops the clock because they need to intervene rather than because players are wasting time. |  |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:47 - Sep 27 with 1248 views | Guthrum |
| Rule Change on 09:34 - Sep 27 by Garv |
Imagine football with no injury/stoppage time, though? |
Altho in rugby, play continues after the 40/80-minute mark until the ball next goes dead. That can sometimes be several minutes, during which either team* can score and even change the result.
* If the ball is turned over without going dead. | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:51 - Sep 27 with 1223 views | jayessess |
| Rule Change on 09:45 - Sep 27 by Herbivore |
You'd need to have clear criteria for when it is stopped though. In rugby the ref calls time off and time on, the clock doesn't automatically stop whenever the ball goes out of play, and you couldn't have a situation like that in football or a 90 minute match would last over 2 hours.
So for things like goalies dithering over a goal kick the ref could call time off once they've taken more than, say, 8 seconds, but the goalie will then just take the kick as soon as he calls time off. You'll also then get sides pushing right to the limits of allowable time wasting. I'm not sure how workable it is. Rugby is different as there's very little in the way of deliberate time wasting when the ball isn't in play and usually the ref stops the clock because they need to intervene rather than because players are wasting time. |
Refs can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you add time for putting the ball back in play unless the time wasting is sufficient for disciplinary action (ie. enough to book them). | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:54 - Sep 27 with 1209 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Rule Change on 09:44 - Sep 27 by jayessess |
Personally, I think you'd up the consistency levels if you took it out of the referees' hands and gave it to the 4th official. I suspect a lot of the variance is just because the ref has a lot to do and think about.
The 4th official doing it might also facilitate a bit more transparency. Maybe you could have the current added time displayed on the scoreboard with the total going up in real time? [Post edited 27 Sep 2021 9:57]
|
Having time kept off-field happens in hockey. A loud siren signals the end of each period of the match.
Imagine a goal-bound shot just as the siren sounds and the referee having to determine whether the siren has gone before or after it goes in. Alternatively, you could still have the fourth official decide the suitable moment for the referee to blow up as soon as time is up or you could have the siren but play continues until there is a stoppage and the half/match ends at that point. Could make a final attack tasty. Of course a penalty award still means the penalty gets taken but a free kick/corner etc would not. | |
| |
| Rule Change on 09:56 - Sep 27 with 1188 views | SenatorBlue |
Why not move responsibility for time keeping out of the referees hands and onto a timekeeper. Same rules as now, but just like someone further up did, just track time lost for subs, injuries, and obvious delaying tactics at throw ins and goal kicks, and they put the board up with that time at the end. Leave the referee to just referee the game. By the look of Saturday, the refs got enough on his plate just being able to put one foot in front of the other. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
