O/T:- Added on time

[Elite_Pie]

The trouble is telling whether a player is genuinely injured.

That's the big problem. If a player rolls around in apparent agony, it must be hard for a ref to ignore it. But there are clues - if it's fake it's usually late on in the game where the offending team are ahead or desperate to hold on to a point. It's here that refs have to earn their wage. If it's off the ball, they should play on because if they do play on in 99% of cases the player gets up, limps for a couple of steps, then makes a miraculous recovery if they have a pass to chase. I'm sure time wasting has it's own special slot for some clubs in training now, because a lot of teams are really good at it, maybe including us. A few classics are:

The keeper decides he needs a drink when the ball goes out of play for a goal kick.
The keeper pretends he wants to play the goal kick short when he's played it long all game, and then spends a few seconds looking around before ushering his team up the pitch playing it long.
A free kick is deliberately taken from the wrong place with the taker knowing he will be sent back to take it in the correct place. Job done, he's wasted several seconds which the ref won't add on.
A throw in is deliberately taken from the wrong place with the taker knowing he will be sent back to take it in the correct place. Job done, he's wasted several seconds which the ref won't add on.

And don't get me started on Tozer's towels. The ball goes out of play, he strolls up the pitch to take it, waits for the ball boy to bring him a towel, carefully dries the ball and 40 seconds after it went out of play he throws it back in. This would normally take 10 seconds. If this happens just 10 times in a game it means 5 minutes of the game have been lost. But refs and the rules allow it to happen.

[uysapie]

That's the big problem. If a player rolls around in apparent agony, it must be hard for a ref to ignore it. But there are clues - if it's fake it's usually late on in the game where the offending team are ahead or desperate to hold on to a point. It's here that refs have to earn their wage. If it's off the ball, they should play on because if they do play on in 99% of cases the player gets up, limps for a couple of steps, then makes a miraculous recovery if they have a pass to chase. I'm sure time wasting has it's own special slot for some clubs in training now, because a lot of teams are really good at it, maybe including us. A few classics are:

The keeper decides he needs a drink when the ball goes out of play for a goal kick.
The keeper pretends he wants to play the goal kick short when he's played it long all game, and then spends a few seconds looking around before ushering his team up the pitch playing it long.
A free kick is deliberately taken from the wrong place with the taker knowing he will be sent back to take it in the correct place. Job done, he's wasted several seconds which the ref won't add on.
A throw in is deliberately taken from the wrong place with the taker knowing he will be sent back to take it in the correct place. Job done, he's wasted several seconds which the ref won't add on.

And don't get me started on Tozer's towels. The ball goes out of play, he strolls up the pitch to take it, waits for the ball boy to bring him a towel, carefully dries the ball and 40 seconds after it went out of play he throws it back in. This would normally take 10 seconds. If this happens just 10 times in a game it means 5 minutes of the game have been lost. But refs and the rules allow it to happen.

On throw ins, players never seem to be sent back to where the ball actually went out of play. Seems like gaining 5 yds is the norm

[Wedgie_pie]

[QUOTE=Elite_Pie;40209386]
[I]The keeper decides he needs a drink when the ball goes out of play for a goal kick.
The keeper pretends he wants to play the goal kick short when he's played it long all game, and then spends a few seconds looking around before ushering his team up the pitch playing it long.















Our own Roy Carroll was master at wasting time used to infuriate me...

[magpie_mania]

[QUOTE=Wedgie_pie;40209656][QUOTE=Elite_Pie;40209386]
[I]The keeper decides he needs a drink when the ball goes out of play for a goal kick.
The keeper pretends he wants to play the goal kick short when he's played it long all game, and then spends a few seconds looking around before ushering his team up the pitch playing it long.

Don't forget that he needs to adjust his socks and kick the post a few times to clean his boots first.

[nw6pie]

Just to play devil's advocate, do we really need games going on for 110 minutes? (Most of my years watching Notts have been spent imploring the ref to blow for full-time!) Yes, teams time waste, but every single club does it when it suits them - it's just part of the game. And given the athleticism in the modern game, aren't we just going to tire players out quicker and risk more injuries by making them play, say, 20 minutes more per game?

If we were to make fundamental changes to the game, I'd prefer something that encourages teams to score more goals - like with the points system in rugby union where you're awarded more points for the more points you score in a game. That said, I'm fine with the game as it is - especially as we don't need to worry about VAR at our level.

[upthemaggies]

Just to play devil's advocate, do we really need games going on for 110 minutes?.

If young people have shorter attention spans these days and the average age of spectators is increasing, then probably not.

Unless the ref has blown for a foul or to stop play over a clash of heads/a nasty accident, it's very rare that a player is going to be injured badly enough to not be able to get himself off the pitch to get treatment, so I think there needs to be an incentive for players to do just that and a more meaningful forfeit for those that go down pretending or exaggerating.

If a player goes down or stays down of his own accord then he should be immediately stretchered off, receive treatment off the pitch and then not be allowed back on for 5 minutes. If he's genuinely injured then he can be subbed straight away.
With that rule, there would be some injustices, but overall you'd wipe out a lot of the timewasting for the good of the game.

[magpie_mania]

Based on this article the ball is actually in play for 55 minutes in a 90 minute game. Therefore what should be trialed first and foremost is 30 minute halves. The clock is then stopped each time the ball is out of play. The reality is that the half will end up finishing around the 45 min mark from the time of kick off based on the data.

It's the same as now but different psychologically. The key thing is there would be no benefit in wasting time because the 30 minutes in game play is guaranteed for each halve. No more no less.

The in play game time data is clearly there so it could form the basis of any future trials.

No point in that really though is there? Play 30 minute halfs which will take 45 minutes - may as well carry on as we are.

I would much rather they look at things like dives, trying to get players red-carded etc. Whatever was done with time it wouldn't really change the amount of time the ball is in play if halves were shorter.

Every team manages the game when they are winning close to the end - leave it as it is.

[GEZMAN]

Maybe there's a couple of things football could learn from rugby. Injured players are tended to, but the game goes on around them. Funny in a game where physical contact is part of the game, you don't see a lot of injuries. Also if you have a free kick awarded against you, & you don't retire 10m immediately, the free kick is moved forward 10m. Could be interesting approaching the penalty area!

[Observerpie]

Maybe there's a couple of things football could learn from rugby. Injured players are tended to, but the game goes on around them. Funny in a game where physical contact is part of the game, you don't see a lot of injuries. Also if you have a free kick awarded against you, & you don't retire 10m immediately, the free kick is moved forward 10m. Could be interesting approaching the penalty area!

The free kick thing was tried and then shelved as was awarding the throw in to the opposition if you took it from the wrong place.

[upthemaggies]

Maybe there's a couple of things football could learn from rugby. Injured players are tended to, but the game goes on around them.!

Nice idea, but how would it work in football? What happens if the physio blocks a goal bound shot or impedes the opposition keeper?
If you left it to the refs discretion whether or not to stop the game depending on where the player has gone down - ie carry on if the injured player isn't in or near either box - you can bet players would make their way into the nearest penalty area before collapsing.

Fans have always screamed "GET HIM OFF THE PITCH!" and I think that is what needs to happen straight away. No club physio allowed on, just medical staff to get them straight onto a stretcher and off with no fuss and then they're not allowed back on for 5 minutes "to give them enough time recover for their own safety", that would soon put a stop to play acting.