Time wasting, spoiling, moving the ball etc.

phil thefluter24 · Dec 12, 2018

Well said "voice of reason" also agree with Balham have heard Hoddle say many times "he won the foul"it makes me cringe every time i hear it.
Also referees in Rugby are far more respected in Rugby than football

GreenThing · Dec 12, 2018

phil-thefluter24":3gr7w7zu said:
Well said "voice of reason" also agree with Balham have heard Hoddle say many times "he won the foul"it makes me cringe every time i hear it.
Also referees in Rugby are far more respected in Rugby than football

The problem with ‘winning the foul’ is that if you’re fouled but stay on your feet, the ref is less likely to give it.

jespafc · Dec 12, 2018

Shankster":3hlntqw4 said:
Rugby, from a participant perspective, is far better for kids than football, the social side is better too.

Rugby simply does not put up with the garbage that football does at that level

Absolutely.

It saddens me to say it but there are certain parts of football now which are rotten to the core.

r4h4al · Dec 12, 2018

Agree. It's ungentlemanly but if other teams come here and do it it's only fair that we do it as well.

Excellent post by Mark :thumbup: :thumbup:
I've often wondered how much actual time we lose to the ball being out of play. It's ridiculous that all this time only 25 minutes get played, and it would be even less than that with teams like Wycombe I suspect. Some sort of clock system has to come into the game. Then all this nonsense would stop anyway.

rongreenblood":1ezor1eb said:
Also,when we hear pundits on MOTD saying things like " There's contact,so he's entitled to go down"clearly to "win"a penalty,which i think is cheating anyway it saddens me.

Completely depends if the contact was a foul or not.

The problem with ‘winning the foul’ is that if you’re fouled but stay on your feet, the ref is less likely to give it.

I would the think the opposite. If you stay on your feet he'll give it whereas if you "dive" there's half a chance he'll think it's a simulation. I seem to be in the minority though in that thinking. :thumbdown:

r4h4al · Dec 12, 2018

rongreenblood":3p7aqrl6 said:
Also,when we hear pundits on MOTD saying things like " There's contact,so he's entitled to go down"clearly to "win"a penalty,which i think is cheating anyway it saddens me.

Mike E · Dec 13, 2018

At professional level, where the public are paying to watch the sport, they are being cheated out of their money by deliberate time wasting, especially as most of the excitement in a nail biting close game is in the last five minutes or so.

One tactic that should be looked into is substituting players in injury time to run down the clock and take the sting out of the opposition. How often do you see a player knowing he is about to be substituted move to the far side of the field to then 'run slowly' back across towards the bench, while applauding the fans. The player should be made to leave the field by the nearest touchline.

Also any substitution made in injury time should incur more than the current 30 seconds added on, and play should never be stopped because a player has cramp, if so they should leave the field of play like any other injury.

Balham Green · Dec 13, 2018

One obvious rule change would be no substitute in injury time. No need for it. I would also stop the carrying the ball in to the corner at the end. That is not entertainment.

GreenThing · Dec 13, 2018

Balham_Green":34rscpfm said:
I would also stop the carrying the ball in to the corner at the end. That is not entertainment.

Unfortunately, I don’t think there’s anything that can be done to stop this as the ball is still in play. Maybe the ref could give a free kick for obstruction when the player is shielding the ball while making no attempt to play it, but that would be the most a ref could give.

IJN · Dec 13, 2018

How about giving a 30 second countdown after a goal? So, it would mean that the scoring team would have to be back in position or the scored against team would have free reign to score a breakaway. Would be a great spectacle.

Biggs · Dec 13, 2018

IJN":1yyjc042 said:
How about giving a 30 second countdown after a goal? So, it would mean that the scoring team would have to be back in position or the scored against team would have free reign to score a breakaway. Would be a great spectacle.

That's not bad, and the same for subs maybe. You can't bring on the new man if you can't get the old one off within 30 seconds?

These things just need rule tweaks like the above, or more enforcement from the refs, rather than wholescale remodelling of the game as we know it.

People seem shocked that the ball is only in play for 25 mins or so, but it's always been the case that it's a relatively low amount of time. And the game and tactics are still continuing while the ball is technically out of play, with marking, set piece routines, jostling for positioning etc etc.

jespafc · Dec 13, 2018

IJN":vjp037k1 said:
How about giving a 30 second countdown after a goal? So, it would mean that the scoring team would have to be back in position or the scored against team would have free reign to score a breakaway. Would be a great spectacle.

Simple, clear, logical.....the FA would never go for it.

The other day I caught the very end of Lille vs. Reims on BT Sport. It was 1-2 to Reims, but Lille had a 93rd min penalty. Now, everyone was ready for the penalty apart from the Reims GK who was stood just by his post off the pitch adjusting his boots apparently, but in reality it was clear he was just delaying the penalty for mind games. The ref finally booked him, but he petulantly walked into the back of his goal and took a drink of water.

I find it baffling that in this situation the ref can't just say, you've had plenty of time, we're all ready and blow his whistle giving the penalty taker an empty net to fire into. Why do we have to put up with these ridiculous incidents which could be so easily eradicated.

In rugby for example England played New Zealand very recently. England scored a try in roughly the 76th minute which would have potentially been the match winning points. It was eventually ruled out after video consultation and the try was not awarded meaning England lost by a single point. My point here is that the England players barely murmured at the decision. They took it and carried on....no finger pointing, no blatant shouting at the ref, they got on with it in a dignified manner.

Lundan Cabbie · Dec 13, 2018

Balham_Green":3bmf3ffh said:
One obvious rule change would be no substitute in injury time. No need for it. I would also stop the carrying the ball in to the corner at the end. That is not entertainment.

What if there has been a protracted treatment of a player, the board goes up with say 15 minutes still to play and then a player is genuinely injured? I know it doesn’t happen too often but it would be harsh then to say he can’t be substituted.

Referees need to be more aware of time running down substitutions and instead of using the 30 second rule per substitution that now seems to be the norm, they should add a minute if a player takes a minute to leave the field. I myself in the past have said to a player “I’m going to add on double the time you take to go off.” Suddenly, he was jogging to the line.

The one I would love to see a referee have courage to do is where the player going off is already on a yellow and is obviously being deliberately slow, then issue the second yellow for unsporting behaviour so he has to go off without the sub coming on and of course would then be facing a suspension for the next game.

Voice of Reason · Dec 13, 2018

My personal gripe is the one when a slightly injured player knows he is about to be subbed and just sits on the floor. We then wait for the medical team to come on, only for him to rise to his feet and walk off!
Looking at world football as a whole our referees to at least on occasion's use common sense and go over the added time allowed if they feel something has been taken longer than it should. I watched a Spanish game 6-8 weeks ago (i'm sure Celta Vigo were one of the teams) when 3 minutes time was to be added. Celta then scored (to make it 2-1 or 3-2 to them) when the clock was 90.25 and the game didn't restart until 92.30 and guess when the referee blew - yep exactly 93.00 dead. In theory the other team should have had a minimum of 2 minutes to get an equaliser but were given just 30 seconds.
A few tweaks here and there and it would make for a better and more exciting sport, surely thats what everyone wants?

r4h4al · Dec 13, 2018

IJN":1uvrmom3 said:
How about giving a 30 second countdown after a goal? So, it would mean that the scoring team would have to be back in position or the scored against team would have free reign to score a breakaway. Would be a great spectacle.

And Yellow card the players who aren't in position by 30 seconds.

Cobi Budge · Dec 13, 2018

Taking the ball into the corner is a tactical measure to kill time whilst keeping the ball in play, I don't think there's anything dirty about it and it's certainly not cheating, in fact I think it shows good discipline when many more naive players would try to cut in and get a shot away. I was pleased when a while ago Jephcott came on for his debut, he could have tried to take on the full back but instead held the ball in the corner, showed a sensible head. Everyone would be moaning if we didn't do it and instead gifted an opportunity for our opponents to attack.

Time wasting, spoiling, moving the ball etc.

phil thefluter24

GreenThing

Administrator

jespafc

r4h4al

r4h4al

Mike E

Balham Green

GreenThing

Administrator

IJN

Site Owner

Biggs

Administrator

jespafc

Lundan Cabbie

Voice of Reason

r4h4al

Cobi Budge