My mind can’t figure out how anyone could conclude this has been brought in to use against us.The problem is that Arsenal scored during the long injury time and thus 70% of this forum believes it’s there to screw us.
There are plenty of agendas against City and plenty of things that we should be annoyed about, these changes aren’t them.
Read the “changes to rules for 2023/24 season” thread and virtually everyone is in favour of the extended time to stop time wasting affecting results. 24 hours later and everyone loses their mind. It’s odd.
Only this ^^^The biggest problem with this is that in the majority of games it will favor the time wasters, shithousers, and bus parkers. These inferior squads employ these tactics to offer the superior side less time to play and thus theoretically score. However, as proven by the records of teams like ours it normally fails as City overcome these tactics and find themselves ahead a large part of the time after 90 minutes. Now additional time will be returned to the shithousers giving them a greater chance to pull something out of their asses. The amount of times it will benefit us vs. our opponents will be minimal. For example City trailed at 90 minutes 4 times in league games last season as opposed to being level in 6 and ahead in the other 28 games. In other words we don't normally need extra time, our opponents who are actually time wasting do. And now they'll get it. So in essence, waste time, shorten the game, and if that doesn't pan out, no worries we'll get the time back at the end if needed...
We Already know it's bent. From top to bottom. Not just time added on. We commit a 50/50 foul and our player is carded immediately. Whereas the opposing team commit foul after foul after foul until the card is brandished.Well that is bent then it shouldn't matter if a team are winning 6-0 or 1-0 the time added should be the same
The biggest problem with this is that in the majority of games it will favor the time wasters, shithousers, and bus parkers. These inferior squads employ these tactics to offer the superior side less time to play and thus theoretically score. However, as proven by the records of teams like ours it normally fails as City overcome these tactics and find themselves ahead a large part of the time after 90 minutes. Now additional time will be returned to the shithousers giving them a greater chance to pull something out of their asses. The amount of times it will benefit us vs. our opponents will be minimal. For example City trailed at 90 minutes 4 times in league games last season as opposed to being level in 6 and ahead in the other 28 games. In other words we don't normally need extra time, our opponents who are actually time wasting do. And now they'll get it. So in essence, waste time, shorten the game, and if that doesn't pan out, no worries we'll get the time back at the end if needed...
Majority of team we face are bus parkers , so how does that benefit us? During the holiday season when games come thick and fast , which team will suffer the most for playing 100+ minutes in space of two days ?My mind can’t figure out how anyone could conclude this has been brought in to use against us.
We will probably benefit more than not. It’s a perfect opportunity to get our GD as high as possible, by scoring when teams are dead on their feet against us.
Don’t disagree, but if the ball has to be in play for 90 minutes, games will take 2 hours plus.While I have sympathy for the idea of working out time wasted by each team, I don’t like it because I think it’s got several really severe problems.
For me the ideal scenario is a stop clock. Stop it when the ball is dead. Game lasts 90 minutes. Simple. That’s transparent.
The problems with calculating time wasting by each team are:
1. Who decides what is time wasting and what is a genuine stoppage (for an injury say)? The referee or time keeper? I’d rather not give them that power.
2. What about neutral stoppages? Both teams make a sub. Pitch invader etc.
3. What if a team wastes time all game and the opposition scores to make it 1-0, in the 90th minute. They void the time wasted by the other team so there is now only 1 minute added on. The other team makes it 1-1 in the 91st minute. Now the team subjected to the time wasting has been screwed over and only has <30 seconds to get a winner. This might seem unlikely but it only needs to happen once in a big game for it to be seen as a massive injustice.
For me, the biggest issue is that this two timekeepers tracking time wasted is gamefying time wasting in a way that some teams might see as “worth the gamble”. I don’t want time wasting to be an aspect of the game at all, I want it to be stamped out.
So just have a flat stop clock that ends at 90 minutes. That is the most equitable way.
And yet we scored 94 goals.Majority of team we face are bus parkers , so how does that benefit us? During the holiday season when games come thick and fast , which team will suffer the most for playing 100+ minutes in space of two days ?
How often do we see City going full tilt till the 98th minute when we are 4 nil up at half time.My mind can’t figure out how anyone could conclude this has been brought in to use against us.
We will probably benefit more than not. It’s a perfect opportunity to get our GD as high as possible, by scoring when teams are dead on their feet against us.
That’s not the point , infact we’ve scored 100 goals .And yet we scored 94 goals.