BimboBob
Well-Known Member
Why? Just stop the clock when the ball goes out of play. They will still time waste no matter how long the game is.
This stinks of American influence.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
2 x 45 minute halves to be scrapped ??
- Thread starter oakiecokie
- Start date
Why? Just stop the clock when the ball goes out of play. They will still time waste no matter how long the game is.
This stinks of American influence.
Is this not what this proposal suggests?Why? Just stop the clock when the ball goes out of play. They will still time waste no matter how long the game is.
This stinks of American influence.
BimboBob
Well-Known Member
Is this not what this proposal suggests?
I have no idea. I didn't read it. Hold on...No.
They are saying 30 minute each half with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play.
I'm saying stick to 45 minutes AS IS THE GAME and stop the clock when the ball goes out. Simple to link the refs watch to the timing systems. They do it for games (and fine clubs for starting late)
But you've missed the point where it says the ball is in play 30 mins average anyway? Players wouldn't even be able to last the full 90 if it was actually 90 mins of the ball in play. It'd take almost 3 hours to complete a game.I have no idea. I didn't read it. Hold on...No.
They are saying 30 minute each half with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play.
I'm saying stick to 45 minutes AS IS THE GAME and stop the clock when the ball goes out. Simple to link the refs watch to the timing systems. They do it for games (and fine clubs for starting late)
BimboBob
Well-Known Member
But you've missed the point where it says the ball is in play 30 mins average anyway? Players wouldn't even be able to last the full 90 if it was actually 90 mins of the ball in play. It'd take almost 3 hours to complete a game.
Or just leave as is? I'm sick and tired of the law makers changing things for no fucking reason. Leave it as it is and go after the real cheats...by the sounds of it all of the Spanish league, diving and people who steal 20 yards on throw ins.
This actually stops a huge method of cheating (time wasting). It'd be impossible to waste time and players wouldn't be able to fake injuries to kill games off, why have you got a problem with that? I really can't understand.Or just leave as is? I'm sick and tired of the law makers changing things for no fucking reason. Leave it as it is and go after the real cheats...by the sounds of it all of the Spanish league, diving and people who steal 20 yards on throw ins.
BimboBob
Well-Known Member
This actually stops a huge method of cheating (time wasting). It'd be impossible to waste time and players wouldn't be able to fake injuries to kill games off, why have you got a problem with that? I really can't understand.
Because it fucks about with the game. 90 minutes. That will do. Players waste time, get the ref to sort that out. The divers? Sort them out with tv replays. Players killing the game off is professionalism. An art. Football doesn't have to be perfect. It just has to be. Why fuck about with it?
geoff clipp
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2010
- Messages
- 1,389
Why doesn't the fourth official just do his actual job and add the correct amount of time on? They don't need to change the rules, just apply the existing ones. You might get 15 mins added on in a couple of matches but teams would soon stop wasting time once they realised it was pointless.