|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 30, 2023 10:35:57 GMT
Why not? If we needed one goal for promotion in the last game of the season and we should get 6-7 minutes added on because the other team “managed the game” like West Brom at home last season. Then my god we would riot if the board went up with 3 minutes. Because it’s terrible and not actually what a game should be like? 10 minutes of added time was given yesterday presumably because of this daft rule. It was ott. Managing the game is an art. We can’t whine that teams do it well and we don’t. As PL says, the game was never designed to have the ball in play for 90 minutes. It was fine as it was. I don't think it is fine, this is because teams have worked out a way to get around the rules in a way that cant be regulated in play. An example is when a team is winning a game and wanting to make a substitute The player, knowing they are going to be substituted is clearly instructed to go down feigning injury, the game is stopped, the physio comes on gets loads of fake treatment on the pitch and then the player fakes a hobble as they slowly go off the pitch, this can take 3 minutes of time off the game and often does. The ref can't do anything because the player could be injured and the player is lying on the floor and play cant commence. It happens every game when a team take the lead in the 2nd half. If a team knows this time is going to be added on it is a clear deterrent to not do this, as it ceases to be a way of gaining advantage. I'm fed up of seeing teams going ahead in something like the 60th minute and only 10-15 minutes of game time played from that point onward.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 10:43:19 GMT
Because it’s terrible and not actually what a game should be like? 10 minutes of added time was given yesterday presumably because of this daft rule. It was ott. Managing the game is an art. We can’t whine that teams do it well and we don’t. As PL says, the game was never designed to have the ball in play for 90 minutes. It was fine as it was. I don't think it is fine, this is because teams have worked out a way to get around the rules in a way that cant be regulated in play. An example is when a team is winning a game and wanting to make a substitute The player, knowing they are going to be substituted is clearly instructed to go down feigning injury, the game is stopped, the physio comes on gets loads of fake treatment on the pitch and then the player fakes a hobble as they slowly go off the pitch, this can take 3 minutes of time off the game and often does. The ref can't do anything because the player could be injured and the player is lying on the floor and play cant commence. It happens every game when a team take the lead in the 2nd half. If a team knows this time is going to be added on it is a clear deterrent to not do this, as it ceases to be a way of gaining advantage. I'm fed up of seeing teams going ahead in something like the 60th minute and only 10-15 minutes of game time played from that point onward. It already is added on? 🤷♂️🤣
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 30, 2023 10:48:38 GMT
I don't think it is fine, this is because teams have worked out a way to get around the rules in a way that cant be regulated in play. An example is when a team is winning a game and wanting to make a substitute The player, knowing they are going to be substituted is clearly instructed to go down feigning injury, the game is stopped, the physio comes on gets loads of fake treatment on the pitch and then the player fakes a hobble as they slowly go off the pitch, this can take 3 minutes of time off the game and often does. The ref can't do anything because the player could be injured and the player is lying on the floor and play cant commence. It happens every game when a team take the lead in the 2nd half. If a team knows this time is going to be added on it is a clear deterrent to not do this, as it ceases to be a way of gaining advantage. I'm fed up of seeing teams going ahead in something like the 60th minute and only 10-15 minutes of game time played from that point onward. It already is added on? 🤷♂️🤣 It's never added on and thats why teams do it because they know it's not. We must be watching different games.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 10:49:20 GMT
It already is added on? 🤷♂️🤣 It's never added on and thats why teams do it because they know it's not. We must be watching different games. It is though.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Jul 30, 2023 10:50:04 GMT
The World Cup was a good example. It started with lots of injury time, over ten minutes in some cases and then there was a noticeable difference in frequency of time wasting so the injury time became less and less. It worked I thought. It was especially fun when the offending team conceded in the 100th minute!
|
|
|
Post by a on Jul 30, 2023 10:52:03 GMT
I don't think it is fine, this is because teams have worked out a way to get around the rules in a way that cant be regulated in play. An example is when a team is winning a game and wanting to make a substitute The player, knowing they are going to be substituted is clearly instructed to go down feigning injury, the game is stopped, the physio comes on gets loads of fake treatment on the pitch and then the player fakes a hobble as they slowly go off the pitch, this can take 3 minutes of time off the game and often does. The ref can't do anything because the player could be injured and the player is lying on the floor and play cant commence. It happens every game when a team take the lead in the 2nd half. If a team knows this time is going to be added on it is a clear deterrent to not do this, as it ceases to be a way of gaining advantage. I'm fed up of seeing teams going ahead in something like the 60th minute and only 10-15 minutes of game time played from that point onward. It already is added on? 🤷♂️🤣 Oh yea. What are the FA doing it for then? Ffs 😆
|
|
|
Post by Block 26 on Jul 30, 2023 10:52:21 GMT
Personally I’m a big supporter of this. The amount of games last season alone in which the away team came down here, went 1-0 up then time wasted was ridiculous. We all go to see a game of football right? Not a bunch of pansies rolling around the floor or fixing their socks for a minute before taking a throw in. Can’t see it happening this season though tbh.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 30, 2023 10:55:44 GMT
It's never added on and thats why teams do it because they know it's not. We must be watching different games. It is though. Nope. Totally disagree. Or must only in the games you watch obviously. I agree that there should be better 'in game' management, but there is clearly not enough deterrent for teams to engage in time wasting and some of it is difficult to regulate in game time and has made alot of games unwatchable after a team take the lead. I would personally rather watch 10 minutes of added on time where the ball is on the pitch than have to endure 10 minutes in game time where players are lying on the floor feigning injuries. But the point is it will work as a deterrent as was proved in the World Cup.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 10:56:13 GMT
It already is added on? 🤷♂️🤣 Oh yea. What are the FA doing it for then? Ffs 😆 Because it got a bit of media attention? It’s like handball. It didn’t need changing and now they’ve really fucked the rule up.
|
|
|
Post by a on Jul 30, 2023 10:57:11 GMT
Oh yea. What are the FA doing it for then? Ffs 😆 Because it got a bit of media attention? It’s like handball. It didn’t need changing and now they’ve really fucked the rule up. So the FA want media attention? That’s a new one 😂
|
|
|
Post by mattador78 on Jul 30, 2023 10:59:00 GMT
It's never added on and thats why teams do it because they know it's not. We must be watching different games. It is though. Read the efl statement nominal amounts of time were added now the actual amount will be. So if it was 30 seconds added for a substitution which took over 60 because of 10 handshakes a limp a jog and the physio having to come back on as an eyelash had fell off it will now be the actual time spent so no benefit of pissing around to get off the pitch
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 11:00:00 GMT
Because it got a bit of media attention? It’s like handball. It didn’t need changing and now they’ve really fucked the rule up. So the FA want media attention? That’s a new one 😂 No. You asked why. Time wasting etc has had media attention so they need to be seen to look to do something about it. Like handball. Lineker was the first I can remember saying that a penalty should be given for any handball in the penalty area and that’s where it’s going. It’s ridiculous. And now he has the balls to criticise the new handball rules.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 11:01:06 GMT
Read the efl statement nominal amounts of time were added now the actual amount will be. So if it was 30 seconds added for a substitution which took over 60 because of 10 handshakes a limp a jog and the physio having to come back on as an eyelash had fell off it will now be the actual time spent so no benefit of pissing around to get off the pitch Subs don’t last much longer than 30 seconds though. The added time generally always felt about right.
|
|
|
Post by a on Jul 30, 2023 11:02:25 GMT
So the FA want media attention? That’s a new one 😂 No. You asked why. Time wasting etc has had media attention so they need to be seen to look to do something about it. Like handball. Lineker was the first I can remember saying that a penalty should be given for any handball in the penalty area and that’s where it’s going. It’s ridiculous. And now he has the balls to criticise the new handball rules. Two totally different things that you’re failing at shoehorning in to the debate, but nice try.
|
|
|
Post by mattador78 on Jul 30, 2023 11:02:51 GMT
Read the efl statement nominal amounts of time were added now the actual amount will be. So if it was 30 seconds added for a substitution which took over 60 because of 10 handshakes a limp a jog and the physio having to come back on as an eyelash had fell off it will now be the actual time spent so no benefit of pissing around to get off the pitch Subs don’t last much longer than 30 seconds though. The added time generally always felt about right. Some do read the statement it should stop faking injuries as well www.efl.com/news/2023/july/match-officials-adopt-new-approach-for-202324-season/
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 11:03:19 GMT
No. You asked why. Time wasting etc has had media attention so they need to be seen to look to do something about it. Like handball. Lineker was the first I can remember saying that a penalty should be given for any handball in the penalty area and that’s where it’s going. It’s ridiculous. And now he has the balls to criticise the new handball rules. Two totally different things that you’re failing at shoehorning in to the debate, but nice try. No they’re not. They’re both rule changes that have come about because of media crying. And they’re both totally unnecessary rule changes.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 11:03:58 GMT
Some shouldn’t mean a rule change. It’s a farce.
|
|
|
Post by a on Jul 30, 2023 11:08:15 GMT
Two totally different things that you’re failing at shoehorning in to the debate, but nice try. No they’re not. They’re both rule changes that have come about because of media crying. And they’re both totally unnecessary rule changes. So by your twisted logic, because the FA implemented a rule you don’t agree with, this new one is also pointless? Do you even read what you write?! 😂 it no wonder you get called out so often, making these laughable comments
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 11:34:39 GMT
No they’re not. They’re both rule changes that have come about because of media crying. And they’re both totally unnecessary rule changes. So by your twisted logic, because the FA implemented a rule you don’t agree with, this new one is also pointless? Do you even read what you write?! 😂 it no wonder you get called out so often, making these laughable comments No. I think they’re both pointless. You asked me a question and I gave you what I think the reason for this change is for. Both are totally unnecessary rule changes.
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Jul 30, 2023 13:12:27 GMT
It would just be so much easier if the ref blew for an indirect free kick in the box every time a goalkeeper held onto the ball for more than six seconds. That’s such a big time waster.
They could easily add the same rule at throw-ins. When is a foul throw ever called anymore?
There are so many ways that the game could be sped up.
The problem is that the refs themselves are too scared to carry out rules already in place (e.g the 6 second rule).
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 13:26:00 GMT
It would just be so much easier if the ref blew for an indirect free kick in the box every time a goalkeeper held onto the ball for more than six seconds. That’s such a big time waster. They could easily add the same rule at throw-ins. When is a foul throw ever called anymore? There are so many ways that the game could be sped up. The problem is that the refs themselves are too scared to carry out rules already in place (e.g the 6 second rule). Disagree. That slows the game even more. Refs should book a keeper for time wasting before the 89th minute. They’d soon hurry up then.
|
|
|
Post by a on Jul 30, 2023 13:29:23 GMT
So by your twisted logic, because the FA implemented a rule you don’t agree with, this new one is also pointless? Do you even read what you write?! 😂 it no wonder you get called out so often, making these laughable comments No. I think they’re both pointless. You asked me a question and I gave you what I think the reason for this change is for. Both are totally unnecessary rule changes. Time wasting detracts from the game, any attempt to prevent it isn’t pointless.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jul 30, 2023 13:32:14 GMT
No. I think they’re both pointless. You asked me a question and I gave you what I think the reason for this change is for. Both are totally unnecessary rule changes. Time wasting detracts from the game, any attempt to prevent it isn’t pointless. And I think it’s pretty rare that it happens to that level.
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Jul 30, 2023 13:37:02 GMT
It would just be so much easier if the ref blew for an indirect free kick in the box every time a goalkeeper held onto the ball for more than six seconds. That’s such a big time waster. They could easily add the same rule at throw-ins. When is a foul throw ever called anymore? There are so many ways that the game could be sped up. The problem is that the refs themselves are too scared to carry out rules already in place (e.g the 6 second rule). Disagree. That slows the game even more. Refs should book a keeper for time wasting before the 89th minute. They’d soon hurry up then. Which part would slow the game? If we had indirect free kicks in the area at each goal-kick where time wasting was occurring, goalkeepers would soon speed up. There’d be no need to time waste when you need to go back to the other end and score after just conceding.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Jul 30, 2023 13:47:58 GMT
Read the efl statement nominal amounts of time were added now the actual amount will be. So if it was 30 seconds added for a substitution which took over 60 because of 10 handshakes a limp a jog and the physio having to come back on as an eyelash had fell off it will now be the actual time spent so no benefit of pissing around to get off the pitch The example given was when someone goes down feigning injury and a physio has to come on “for three minutes”. That time is currently already added on and is not part of any “nominal” figure. The reason injury times drastically came down in the World Cup wasn’t because anything “worked”, it was because the authorities quickly realised it was ridiculous, told refs to stop being so officious with it and allowed things to revert to the mean. The same will happen here.
|
|
|
Post by a on Jul 30, 2023 14:29:42 GMT
Time wasting detracts from the game, any attempt to prevent it isn’t pointless. And I think it’s pretty rare that it happens to that level. It does though, the stats are out there for all to see
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 30, 2023 15:25:01 GMT
Read the efl statement nominal amounts of time were added now the actual amount will be. So if it was 30 seconds added for a substitution which took over 60 because of 10 handshakes a limp a jog and the physio having to come back on as an eyelash had fell off it will now be the actual time spent so no benefit of pissing around to get off the pitch The example given was when someone goes down feigning injury and a physio has to come on “for three minutes”. That time is currently already added on and is not part of any “nominal” figure. The reason injury times drastically came down in the World Cup wasn’t because anything “worked”, it was because the authorities quickly realised it was ridiculous, told refs to stop being so officious with it and allowed things to revert to the mean. The same will happen here. But we see time and time again that this time is not added on. Most commonly we get 3 mins added on in our games. Its exceptional if it's more than this. This is with 3 and often more subs, goals (which take 2 mins usually), injury stoppages which are numerous when a team is winning. It's clearly an incentive for players to cheat, and they can get away with it, thats the only reason they are doing it. The refs can't drag the players off the pitch and the coaches know this, so they have found a loophole. The only way to address is to add on the time, and that's what this change is going to enforce. I cant see how anyone in their right minds would have a problem with this. It's enforcing something that surely everyone would agree with. If people are going to be critical, they should be critical of the players and coaches who intentionally take the time out of the game. It even happens in non-League games when teams are winning these days, especially goalkeepers when they catch a ball, wanting the physio on when they are winning and have caught a ball and go down as if they have been shot, its tiresome.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Jul 30, 2023 15:49:24 GMT
The example given was when someone goes down feigning injury and a physio has to come on “for three minutes”. That time is currently already added on and is not part of any “nominal” figure. The reason injury times drastically came down in the World Cup wasn’t because anything “worked”, it was because the authorities quickly realised it was ridiculous, told refs to stop being so officious with it and allowed things to revert to the mean. The same will happen here. But we see time and time again that this time is not added on. Most commonly we get 3 mins added on in our games. Its exceptional if it's more than this. This is with 3 and often more subs, goals (which take 2 mins usually), injury stoppages which are numerous when a team is winning. It's clearly an incentive for players to cheat, and they can get away with it, thats the only reason they are doing it. The refs can't drag the players off the pitch and the coaches know this, so they have found a loophole. The only way to address is to add on the time, and that's what this change is going to enforce. I cant see how anyone in their right minds would have a problem with this. It's enforcing something that surely everyone would agree with. If people are going to be critical, they should be critical of the players and coaches who intentionally take the time out of the game. It even happens in non-League games when teams are winning these days, especially goalkeepers when they catch a ball, wanting the physio on when they are winning and have caught a ball and go down as if they have been shot, its tiresome. What games have you been watching the last few years?? Three minutes was about par 20 years ago but it’s almost never as few as that nowadays, they routinely add 5 or 6. I’m also not convinced the little tactics used to disrupt the game can be solved as simply as adding time at the end. There are other incentives for a winning team to slow things down and take the momentum out of the game which won’t go away simply by adding a few more seconds at the end. It just means we'll get 56 minutes of it instead of 49 and people won’t get off the ground until half ten… I’m not against tightening up on blatant time-wasting, I just think it’s not as major a problem as is made out, refs already add loads more time on and this tinkering won’t have much of an impact other than to drag things out eternally.
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Jul 30, 2023 16:10:58 GMT
But we see time and time again that this time is not added on. Most commonly we get 3 mins added on in our games. Its exceptional if it's more than this. This is with 3 and often more subs, goals (which take 2 mins usually), injury stoppages which are numerous when a team is winning. It's clearly an incentive for players to cheat, and they can get away with it, thats the only reason they are doing it. The refs can't drag the players off the pitch and the coaches know this, so they have found a loophole. The only way to address is to add on the time, and that's what this change is going to enforce. I cant see how anyone in their right minds would have a problem with this. It's enforcing something that surely everyone would agree with. If people are going to be critical, they should be critical of the players and coaches who intentionally take the time out of the game. It even happens in non-League games when teams are winning these days, especially goalkeepers when they catch a ball, wanting the physio on when they are winning and have caught a ball and go down as if they have been shot, its tiresome. What games have you been watching the last few years?? Three minutes was about par 20 years ago but it’s almost never as few as that nowadays, they routinely add 5 or 6. I’m also not convinced the little tactics used to disrupt the game can be solved as simply as adding time at the end. There are other incentives for a winning team to slow things down and take the momentum out of the game which won’t go away simply by adding seconds at the end. It just means we'll get 56 minutes of it instead of 49 and people won’t get off the ground until half ten… I’m not against tightening up on blatant time-wasting, I just think it’s not as major a problem as is made out, refs already add loads more time on and this tinkering won’t have much of an impact other than to drag things out eternally. Ive already said that a big part of the problem can be addressed by better refereeing and proper enforcement of existing rules, but this move is to address specific time-wasting that has crept into the game and is difficult to enforce. The idea being that games will not last any longer, because players and coaches wont be able to get away with it and will be deterred from such timewasting because they wont gain the advantage they are currently getting. The whole idea behind this is to get games played properly for 90 minutes. The quality of football has deteriorated badly because of timewasting imho We saw 3 or 4 games at Stoke where there was hardly any football played after the opposing team went ahead last season and thats been a feature of several games Ive seen recently.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Jul 30, 2023 16:26:35 GMT
What games have you been watching the last few years?? Three minutes was about par 20 years ago but it’s almost never as few as that nowadays, they routinely add 5 or 6. I’m also not convinced the little tactics used to disrupt the game can be solved as simply as adding time at the end. There are other incentives for a winning team to slow things down and take the momentum out of the game which won’t go away simply by adding seconds at the end. It just means we'll get 56 minutes of it instead of 49 and people won’t get off the ground until half ten… I’m not against tightening up on blatant time-wasting, I just think it’s not as major a problem as is made out, refs already add loads more time on and this tinkering won’t have much of an impact other than to drag things out eternally. Ive already said that a big part of the problem can be addressed by better refereeing and proper enforcement of existing rules, but this move is to address specific time-wasting that has crept into the game and is difficult to enforce. The idea being that games will not last any longer, because players and coaches wont be able to get away with it and will be deterred from such timewasting because they wont gain the advantage they are currently getting. The whole idea behind this is to get games played properly for 90 minutes. The quality of football has deteriorated badly because of timewasting imho We saw 3 or 4 games at Stoke where there was hardly any football played after the opposing team went ahead last season and thats been a feature of several games Ive seen recently. I just think that’s always been part of the game, good teams take control and minimise the opportunities to do it. I can’t say I’ve noticed any recent worsening of it particularly. Anyway we’ll have to see how it pans out this season.. pound to a penny you’ll get zealous refs gleefully whacking on 12 minutes at first (as people groan and anxiously check their watches) The change that has had by far the biggest impact on this element of the game in my lifetime was the backpass rule.. now there was a truly radical and transformative change - much resisted at the time of course.
|
|