| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? 06:34 - Sep 14 with 960 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
The levels of sh1thousery seem to be reaching unprecedented levels. The Derby match 2 weeks ago was probably the worst, most unenjoyable match I've been to. If football is going this way, tens of thousands maybe more will just get fed up and stop going. A 5-6 hour round trip and all the sacrifices you make to support your team, to have a horrible experience of no entertainment, just cheating and play acting, it just doesn't add up. (yes I know we did a bit of it last year with Chappers sitting down at various intervals).
McK has said on a few occasions about ball in play time, i.e. matches requiring e.g. 60 mins of ball in play. Other alternatives that like rugby, the trainer can come on the pitch to attend to a player whilst the match continues. Or retrospective match analysis and sanctions against players deemed to have been feigning injury. Any other ideas? |  |
| |  |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 06:48 - Sep 14 with 894 views | NthQldITFC |
The radical one, which would take a lot of persuasion for some to even consider, would be to move to a Rugby League style timekeeper (not sure if they do it in Union too?) and have an official who stops the clock for throw ins, corners, goal kicks, injuries, bookings, talkings-to etc., and play out two thirty? minute halves on this strict timekeeping system.
I don't think any other system works - trainers on the pitch certainly wouldn't in football and retrospective analysis would be too subjective and open to fkn legal challenges.
However, I'd licence Norwich to do it if they can keep stealing points off our promotion rivals this season. |  |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:08 - Sep 14 with 659 views | SheffordBlue |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 06:48 - Sep 14 by NthQldITFC |
The radical one, which would take a lot of persuasion for some to even consider, would be to move to a Rugby League style timekeeper (not sure if they do it in Union too?) and have an official who stops the clock for throw ins, corners, goal kicks, injuries, bookings, talkings-to etc., and play out two thirty? minute halves on this strict timekeeping system.
I don't think any other system works - trainers on the pitch certainly wouldn't in football and retrospective analysis would be too subjective and open to fkn legal challenges.
However, I'd licence Norwich to do it if they can keep stealing points off our promotion rivals this season. |
I don't see why physios on the pitch wouldn't work in football. It works well in rugby which is much faster moving game than it used to be. 4th official to control their entry to the playing field. |  |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:11 - Sep 14 with 646 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:08 - Sep 14 by SheffordBlue |
I don't see why physios on the pitch wouldn't work in football. It works well in rugby which is much faster moving game than it used to be. 4th official to control their entry to the playing field. |
And perhaps the main thing about allowing physios on during play is the deterrent effect. A player sitting on the ground whilst play continues is only going to happen when it's genuine. | |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:21 - Sep 14 with 613 views | Pinewoodblue |
The only thing that needs to be done is score first forcing your opponent to play. |  |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:24 - Sep 14 with 603 views | NthQldITFC |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:08 - Sep 14 by SheffordBlue |
I don't see why physios on the pitch wouldn't work in football. It works well in rugby which is much faster moving game than it used to be. 4th official to control their entry to the playing field. |
Mainly because rugby is a much more linear game where players and ball are generally moving in one direction together. There would be a lot of collisions with trainers and downed players when, for examples, you're a centre back backtracking under a header, or the ball's getting across the pitch or back and across. | |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:45 - Sep 14 with 538 views | USA |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:21 - Sep 14 by Pinewoodblue |
The only thing that needs to be done is score first forcing your opponent to play. |
Didn’t see the Derby game then? | |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 09:06 - Sep 14 with 457 views | bsw72 |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 08:24 - Sep 14 by NthQldITFC |
Mainly because rugby is a much more linear game where players and ball are generally moving in one direction together. There would be a lot of collisions with trainers and downed players when, for examples, you're a centre back backtracking under a header, or the ball's getting across the pitch or back and across. |
You would very rarely see physios on the pitch as players would not go down so easily, especially defenders in their own half who effectively would play the opposition onside. You only see it in rugby at most once or twice a game if that. Risk of physios causing interruptions to play is minimal as a result.
There’s about 7500 square metres on a football pitch on average, and an injured player / physio would take up less than 0.5% of that.
Based on recent games I have watched, physio attention is not required for 95% of players they have been coming on to attend for as within moments of getting “treatment” the player is up and moving again with no ill effects. |  | | |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 11:19 - Sep 14 with 123 views | franz_tyson |
One thing that p1sses me off is that the rule of stopping play is because it was seen as a attempt to provide medical attention to players with genuine injuries. A good rule with honourable intentions. That has been taken way, way out of context to the point where now its bei g used for open cheating. I have sympathy for the refs. If refs see so much obvious cheating ( players going down and then miraculously on their feet again) so many time, but then decide to ignore a genuine injury just once they'd be vilified by the clubs, media, authorities. Theyd be thrown under the bus..... yet cheating every game goes pretty much unpunished.
Its ruining the game. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 11:42 - Sep 14 with 78 views | ITFC_Forever |
Budgies were at it yesterday at Cov.
Even the majority of their fans said it was too much. |  |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 11:50 - Sep 14 with 53 views | ArnieM |
All " head injuries" the player should be asked to leave the field of play for 10 mins, just like they do in rugby. That would stop the tap on the ankle tackles morphing into " head injuries" to waste time.
Its coached cheating, pure and simple, and its killing the game as a spectator sport. |  |
| |
| Sh1thousery and anti-football - surely something needs to be done? on 12:01 - Sep 14 with 19 views | Bramidan |
If a player goes down he should be taken off the field of play and made to stay off for a minimum of 10 mins. Adequate time to be assessed and treated.
If it is that bad, no problem as he has been taken off, strapped up or whatever.
A miraculous recovery then he has 10 minutes rest whilst his team plays with 10 men.
A player knows if it is serious, they are professional athletes who know their own bodies. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
