|
|
Post by hinckpotter on Sept 18, 2021 23:23:07 GMT
What is the point of having a rule if it is never enforced. May aswell scap it all together if only to stop me screaming.
I wont bore you all but over 20 seconds on numerous occasions today.
When was the last time an indirect freekick for breaking the rule?
I'm not saying it changed the result in any way but why do refs ignore a rule of the game?
|
|
|
|
Post by bucknall67 on Sept 19, 2021 0:19:57 GMT
If you explained what you are on about then you might get more replies??
|
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Sept 19, 2021 0:55:32 GMT
If you explained what you are on about then you might get more replies?? i think this is in reference to the time the goal keeper has after he picks up the ball before he has to get rid of it. I believe it's 8 seconds, but who's counting. |
|
|
|
Post by bucknall67 on Sept 19, 2021 1:35:52 GMT
If you explained what you are on about then you might get more replies?? i think this is in reference to the time the goal keeper has after he picks up the ball before he has to get rid of it. I believe it's 8 seconds, but who's counting. I did know what he was on about-but how many times have you seen it enforced?? |
|
|
|
Post by dirtclod on Sept 19, 2021 2:13:37 GMT
Whew! What a relief...
Saw the thread title and thought my wife had been on here complaining...
|
|
|
|
Post by madnellie on Sept 19, 2021 4:24:44 GMT
For what it's worth I've only ever seen it enforced once and I watch a fair amount of footie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Sept 19, 2021 7:21:33 GMT
If you explained what you are on about then you might get more replies?? i think this is in reference to the time the goal keeper has after he picks up the ball before he has to get rid of it. I believe it's 8 seconds, but who's counting. Certainly not the refs |
|
|
|
Post by sportsman on Sept 19, 2021 7:23:06 GMT
Don't think it's been enforced since the first season it was brought in years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brist_AL on Sept 19, 2021 7:38:37 GMT
I am an advocate of stopping the clock when the ball goes out of play and I would also stop the clock when the goalie is holding the ball. This would stop all the time wasting. When has a player gone done with cramp in the last 5 minutes if his team is losing?
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvechurch Assassin on Sept 19, 2021 7:52:54 GMT
Potentially not enough time for bacteria to form, so eat it quickly.
|
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Sept 19, 2021 9:18:27 GMT
The rule is 6 seconds but the keeper can "bounce the ball to reset the time". This means it's always going to be down to the ref to decide if the keeper is wasting time (wtf!?) Typical half arsed rule  |
|
|
|
Post by brumstokie on Sept 19, 2021 9:23:48 GMT
I am an advocate of stopping the clock when the ball goes out of play and I would also stop the clock when the goalie is holding the ball. This would stop all the time wasting. When has a player gone done with cramp in the last 5 minutes if his team is losing? If that applied I wouldn’t get home from a night match until 1 in the morning 😁 |
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Sept 19, 2021 9:53:08 GMT
I am an advocate of stopping the clock when the ball goes out of play and I would also stop the clock when the goalie is holding the ball. This would stop all the time wasting. When has a player gone done with cramp in the last 5 minutes if his team is losing? Just try working out how long matches would be then. We've played matches recently when the ball has been in play for less than 45 minutes so if you add on injury time and assume that every minute would actually take two minutes we're talking about matches being about three hours long if not longer. I'm not sure I want that any more than watching time wasting and we'd probably have both. It's got to be down to the referees and enforcing the rules rather than implying that they are adding on the time wasted which they never do. Time wasting breaks up momentum of teams as well and as Huddersfield managed to do, breaks up the opposition's rhythm. I'm not saying Stoke aren't guilty of it. My solution would be to give 10 seconds after a referee's signal, then the free kick/throw in is turned over to the opposition. |
|
|
|
Post by middleoftheboothen on Sept 19, 2021 9:55:12 GMT
Whew! What a relief... Saw the thread title and thought my wife had been on here complaining... That long? You're doing something right. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 11:29:36 GMT
I also hate the lack of clarity around obstruction. There’s a number of these time wasting rules that I feel should be gone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 14:18:36 GMT
Same with the steps rule before. How many keepers also carry the ball out of the area when kicking out of their hands?
Also kids are way too fat these days and Wagon Wheels used to be far bigger and jammier.
|
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Sept 19, 2021 14:33:43 GMT
There was talk last season about stopping the clock when the ball went out of play and reducing the game time to 60 mins, which is the time the ball is actually in play.. That made perfect sense to me because it would cut out time wasting altogether and the requirement that the added time is at the refs discretion. The present system is archaic and it’s time we did away with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonnybravo on Sept 19, 2021 14:41:21 GMT
Whew! What a relief... Saw the thread title and thought my wife had been on here complaining... Not just me with 3 bangs then ya out then |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Sept 19, 2021 14:51:18 GMT
There was talk last season about stopping the clock when the ball went out of play and reducing the game time to 60 mins, which is the time the ball is actually in play.. That made perfect sense to me because it would cut out time wasting altogether and the requirement that the added time is at the refs discretion. The present system is archaic and it’s time we did away with it. My thoughts entirely. I would not have the 60 minutes set in stone I would start with that figure or possibly 70 minutes and use the first season of such a rule to get an idea of what the amount of playing time should be set at to ensure that games are neither too long nor too short. I'm sure the use of a visible clock which is stopped under certain circumstances when the ball is not in play would eradicate much of the time wasting we see in the game at present. I'd even be open to the option they have in rugby of attending to injured players on the pitch whilst the game continued - unless the medics or the ref felt the game needed to be stopped for safety reasons. That would make players think twice about feigning injury. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2021 14:58:40 GMT
If you explained what you are on about then you might get more replies?? i think this is in reference to the time the goal keeper has after he picks up the ball before he has to get rid of it. I believe it's 8 seconds, but who's counting. Certainly not the fourth official |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 19, 2021 16:04:15 GMT
There was talk last season about stopping the clock when the ball went out of play and reducing the game time to 60 mins, which is the time the ball is actually in play.. That made perfect sense to me because it would cut out time wasting altogether and the requirement that the added time is at the refs discretion. The present system is archaic and it’s time we did away with it. My thoughts entirely. I would not have the 60 minutes set in stone I would start with that figure or possibly 70 minutes and use the first season of such a rule to get an idea of what the amount of playing time should be set at to ensure that games are neither too long nor too short. I'm sure the use of a visible clock which is stopped under certain circumstances when the ball is not in play would eradicate much of the time wasting we see in the game at present. I'd even be open to the option they have in rugby of attending to injured players on the pitch whilst the game continued - unless the medics or the ref felt the game needed to be stopped for safety reasons. That would make players think twice about feigning injury. It might eradicate "time-wasting" in that the players couldn't employ tactics to literally use up seconds of game time, but I think the ends of matches would be deathly in other ways. With a visible countdown looming over the pitch, you don't think teams would become experts in devising negative, anti-football "plays" which would eat up 20 seconds at a time before another leisurely break and reset for the next game-strangling strategy, with no real pressure to keep things flowing? Every spectator watching the real time tick agonisingly towards pub closing or train departure.... I bang on about this but a stopping clock would be absolute torture in football imo |
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Sept 19, 2021 17:39:44 GMT
What is the point of having a rule if it is never enforced. May aswell scap it all together if only to stop me screaming. I wont bore you all but over 20 seconds on numerous occasions today. When was the last time an indirect freekick for breaking the rule? I'm not saying it changed the result in any way but why do refs ignore a rule of the game? It doesn’t really exist as a hard and fast rule. For years now the directive to referees, at least in England, has been not to stick to a strict six seconds but punish keepers for time wasting if the situation calls for it rather than if they’ve held the ball for a certain amount of time. They’re also asked to consider whether any opposing players are applying pressure to the keeper as holding onto the ball with a striker three feet away is quite different to holding onto it completely unopposed. I’m not at all convinced that time wasting is effectively managed but I don’t much like the idea of a strict six second rule. It feels arbitrary and like the sort of rule you’d get in an American sport. |
|
|
|
Post by simple on Sept 19, 2021 18:06:27 GMT
The six second rule was supposed to of been the amount of time the keeper could keep hold of the ball,if they drop it and dribble the ball out the time does not start again until they pick it up.
We are all been short changed but we have also been Quilty of this in the past and will be in the future.Most of this is usually in the last 10min,so maybe the clock stops until the ball is in play like they do in American football .
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtclod on Sept 19, 2021 18:13:05 GMT
Parallel: Similar to the possession clocks they have in Basketball. Implemented to eliminate "stalling" in that sport too. For years, teams in the lead would simply play keep-a-way for minutes on end and not even try to score. Crowds were rebelling. The clocks were brought in because teams spent an entire 2nd half of a game stalling to protect a 10-point lead. So another case of - people bitched and something irritating was introduced to eliminate something else that was irritating. Humans... Edit: Oh...so my recommendation would be clock-stopping when a ball goes out of bounds, during injuries etc. Only because after a while, it's almost "invisible" as you get used to it. And you don't get "ripped off" of actual playing time, questionable referee decisions on how MUCH extra time is needed at the end etc. That is...if something truly needs done about it. Could always send Rory over to sort things out.   |
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Sept 19, 2021 19:53:38 GMT
The problem with clock stopping is that it wouldn't stop teams from time wasting for tactical reasons when the opposition have them under the cosh. The thing I hate is when Stoke are building up a head of steam and have the opposition all over the place and one of their players goes down with an injury or they take ages making a substitution or the gk can't decide where to take the kick from or they deliberately try to take a throw in from the wrong place and then take ages finding a player to throw to. These are done not to waste time per se but to slow down the impetus and pressure they are under.
|
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Sept 20, 2021 0:58:45 GMT
The rule is 6 seconds but the keeper can "bounce the ball to reset the time". This means it's always going to be down to the ref to decide if the keeper is wasting time (wtf!?) Typical half arsed rule There's a simple fix to this. Once the goalie has control of the ball and then lets it go it's an indirect free kick if he picks it up again. Same as a back pass.. |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 20, 2021 3:09:41 GMT
The rule is 6 seconds but the keeper can "bounce the ball to reset the time". This means it's always going to be down to the ref to decide if the keeper is wasting time (wtf!?) Typical half arsed rule There's a simple fix to this. Once the goalie has control of the ball and then lets it go it's an indirect free kick if he picks it up again. Same as a back pass.. This is already the rule. |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 20, 2021 3:10:23 GMT
What is the point of having a rule if it is never enforced. May aswell scap it all together if only to stop me screaming. I wont bore you all but over 20 seconds on numerous occasions today. When was the last time an indirect freekick for breaking the rule? I'm not saying it changed the result in any way but why do refs ignore a rule of the game? It doesn’t really exist as a hard and fast rule. For years now the directive to referees, at least in England, has been not to stick to a strict six seconds but punish keepers for time wasting if the situation calls for it rather than if they’ve held the ball for a certain amount of time. They’re also asked to consider whether any opposing players are applying pressure to the keeper as holding onto the ball with a striker three feet away is quite different to holding onto it completely unopposed. I’m not at all convinced that time wasting is effectively managed but I don’t much like the idea of a strict six second rule. It feels arbitrary and like the sort of rule you’d get in an American sport. It is a hard and fast rule. |
|
|
|
Post by redandwhitetundra on Sept 20, 2021 4:47:43 GMT
As has already been said, it's a rule that is rarely implemented... The goalkeeper has six seconds to distribute the football, once in standing and ready to distribute. In some cases, this does NOT include moving around the box... so if it took a goalkeeper five seconds to collect the ball and run past a number of players to get to the edge of the box, 0 of these seconds would count towards the six. The referee is also advised to factor in opposing players lingering around the goalkeeper - which could result in the "delaying the restart" law being implemented...
Instead of an "in-play" clock, why not implement a 5-minute "out of play" clock for each team.
Each team starts with a 5-minute clock. Once the ball goes out for a throw-in or a free-kick is awarded, their clock starts counting down. Once it reaches 0, a player is removed and 30-seconds added...
The real issue is that any such rule needs to be implemented across the game as a whole, and not only for the "elite" levels - this is the issue with goal line tech and VAR right now IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by walrus on Sept 20, 2021 7:48:06 GMT
Instead of an "in-play" clock, why not implement a 5-minute "out of play" clock for each team.
Each team starts with a 5-minute clock. Once the ball goes out for a throw-in or a free-kick is awarded, their clock starts counting down. Once it reaches 0, a player is removed and 30-seconds added...
Because it’s not bloody netball! |
|
