Opposition fans back from the game - 24/25 page 225 onwards

[Nameless]

A set timer that pauses as soon as the ball is out of play is fine by me. And I really don't see any problems with shots going in after the timer goes off. Sorry, too late. Might be some brief shenanigans early on, but people would get used to it quickly and it would be fair and transparent for everyone.

What would you cut the duration of the game down to ? 60 minutes ?
Snipping a few seconds here and there at every freekick seems a real waste of time, plus you need yet another official at every game to administer it, and yet another divergence between elite and lower level football

[YorkshireRoyal99]

A set timer that pauses as soon as the ball is out of play is fine by me. And I really don't see any problems with shots going in after the timer goes off. Sorry, too late. Might be some brief shenanigans early on, but people would get used to it quickly and it would be fair and transparent for everyone.

What would you cut the duration of the game down to ? 60 minutes ?
Snipping a few seconds here and there at every freekick seems a real waste of time, plus you need yet another official at every game to administer it, and yet another divergence between elite and lower level football

I think that's what previously been discussed before, a game would be 60 minutes with the timer stopped each time the ball isn't in play. When it comes to elite/lower level football, the referee would just have a stopwatch counting down from an hour and to be stopped each time there is a stoppage in play and just work from there. I actually think it would be quite interesting, I could imagine them changing it in the future to do that purely for the entertainment factor as that's where it seems to be moving to these days with differing styles of play, games on much more frequently than they were due to massive TV deals etc.

[paultheroyal]

How the game is timed now is perfectly fine. We don’t need anymore Americanisms!

What we will see is more time added, similar to World Cup and that’s fine by me.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

How the game is timed now is perfectly fine. We don’t need anymore Americanisms!

What we will see is more time added, similar to World Cup and that’s fine by me.

And I agree, I think it's fine as it is, it would just be interesting in a different mould. I can imagine it could happen in the future because I think a lot of football is moving more towards entertainment now, particularly amongst the elite.

[Nameless]

How the game is timed now is perfectly fine. We don’t need anymore Americanisms!

What we will see is more time added, similar to World Cup and that’s fine by me.

And I agree, I think it's fine as it is, it would just be interesting in a different mould. I can imagine it could happen in the future because I think a lot of football is moving more towards entertainment now, particularly amongst the elite.

Changing the way you measure time has no relevance to entertainment. Exciting football, close matches, honest players , high skill levels, goals etcetc give you that, not a guaranteed hour of watching Swansea bore us to 70% possession.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

How the game is timed now is perfectly fine. We don’t need anymore Americanisms!

What we will see is more time added, similar to World Cup and that’s fine by me.

And I agree, I think it's fine as it is, it would just be interesting in a different mould. I can imagine it could happen in the future because I think a lot of football is moving more towards entertainment now, particularly amongst the elite.

Changing the way you measure time has no relevance to entertainment. Exciting football, close matches, honest players , high skill levels, goals etcetc give you that, not a guaranteed hour of watching Swansea bore us to 70% possession.

As a spectator, if you're paying x price to watch a 90-minute game of football and the ball is only in play for 45, half of the price is going on wasted time which thus reduces the entertainment for fans to watch their teams, or so Pierluigi Collina thinks, as they want to make football more "spectacular" and reduce time-wasting. They just want shorter interruptions.

Although there is a notion that time-wasting is done to break up the game, which you would never stop no matter how you measure time, teams would still take x amount of time over throw ins, subs etc. It would just be interesting to see how long players would be on the field for if you were to introduce a 60-minute game stopping the clock at each stoppage.

[tmesis]

Sadly though that will never happen as it’s so much embedded in the game ethos that you can’t blow for time if a team is lining up shot/taking a free kick or corner etc.

so you are saying that if there was a visible countdown clock, and it got to zero when a team was attacking, it would be fine for a team to score a goal 10-15 seconds after the game has ended?

I'd say it's accepted purely because people don't know the time is up

Rugby does have the rule that the ball has to go out of play for the game to end, but that's a specific way for the game to end. It's not just ended at the referee's discretion.

[From Despair To Where?]

Didnt Clive Thomas disallow a goal for Brazil in the 1978 World Cup when he gave a corner then blew for full time as the ball was in flight but before the Brazilan headed it in? Looking at the video, he played all of 6 seconds of injury time I think its why refs tend to blow for time with the ball in neutral areas of the pitch.

Don't personally see any need to change anything other than be more strict about time wasting.

[Four Of Clubs]

Didnt Clive Thomas disallow a goal for Brazil in the 1978 World Cup when he gave a corner then blew for full time as the ball was in flight but before the Brazilan headed it in? Looking at the video, he played all of 6 seconds of injury time .
.

..... bit of a protracted take on it here but incident pretty well covered - no apols but it's lifted from the Grauniad
(.... did a bit of a double-take over the - Cliff Morgan, David Coleman and Clive Thomas out clubbing. )

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/apr/24/world-cup-stunning-moments-clive-thomas-denies-zico-and-brazil

Never one to shun controversy, Thomas - his 'highlights' are detailed at length in the article - (quite rightly) pointed out the Brazilians shouldn't have fannied about ( no pun etc ) for so long before taking said corner..... I like his view of the chap that did eventually pick up the honour of officiating the Final.......

[Nameless]

And I agree, I think it's fine as it is, it would just be interesting in a different mould. I can imagine it could happen in the future because I think a lot of football is moving more towards entertainment now, particularly amongst the elite.

Changing the way you measure time has no relevance to entertainment. Exciting football, close matches, honest players , high skill levels, goals etcetc give you that, not a guaranteed hour of watching Swansea bore us to 70% possession.

As a spectator, if you're paying x price to watch a 90-minute game of football and the ball is only in play for 45, half of the price is going on wasted time which thus reduces the entertainment for fans to watch their teams, or so Pierluigi Collina thinks, as they want to make football more "spectacular" and reduce time-wasting. They just want shorter interruptions.

Although there is a notion that time-wasting is done to break up the game, which you would never stop no matter how you measure time, teams would still take x amount of time over throw ins, subs etc. It would just be interesting to see how long players would be on the field for if you were to introduce a 60-minute game stopping the clock at each stoppage.

You pay to watch a game of football, you don’t pay extra if a cup game goes to extra time ! Does anyone go away moaning about ‘only’ getting 70 minutes of ‘actual’ play, and if you stopped the watch every time the ball went dead woukd ticket prices drop by 33% because you were now watching a 60 minute ‘playing time’ game ?

[SCIAG]

Set timer (60 minutes, stops whenever ball is out of play). Match ends when time has elapsed and either:

1) the ball leaves play for any reason other than the award of a penalty kick (out of bounds, free kick, burst ball, match abandoned due to safety concerns - match over)
or
2) the ball crosses the halfway line

Probably a terrible idea but seems to be pretty close to how they do things in rugby. I like the addition of the halfway line rule as it would add an extra dimension to the game.

[AthleticoSpizz]

Preposterous nonsense….just leave as is.

[Hound]

Any ideas what the Swansea fans felt about the game?

[Jagermesiter1871]

They loved it.

[Royal Rother]

This feels like discussions on here 20 years ago about goal line technology and then what became VAR.

So many people stuck in the past, unable to see what is obviously going to happen.

OF COURSE timekeeping is going to change in football, with time in play being paramount, eliminating time wasting and all this outdated 90 mins plus added time nonsense.

Like it or not it is just a matter of the finer points of how and when.

[Hound]

They loved it.

Glad to hear it

[Wycombe Royal]

Set timer (60 minutes, stops whenever ball is out of play). Match ends when time has elapsed and either:

1) the ball leaves play for any reason other than the award of a penalty kick (out of bounds, free kick, burst ball, match abandoned due to safety concerns - match over)
or
2) the ball crosses the halfway line

Probably a terrible idea but seems to be pretty close to how they do things in rugby. I like the addition of the halfway line rule as it would add an extra dimension to the game.

Isn't there already a trial for this somewhere? I think it was earlier this year, but have no idea how it went.

[Sutekh]

Preposterous nonsense….just leave as is.

Exactly. It’s not really broken is it? Trouble is that’s the sort of thing FIFA likes to fix….

[Nameless]

This feels like discussions on here 20 years ago about goal line technology and then what became VAR.

So many people stuck in the past, unable to see what is obviously going to happen.

OF COURSE timekeeping is going to change in football, with time in play being paramount, eliminating time wasting and all this outdated 90 mins plus added time nonsense.

Like it or not it is just a matter of the finer points of how and when.

Why is ‘time in play’ paramount ?
How woukd changing the way you keep time eliminate timewasting (it woukdn’t have an impact on Joe Lumley’s favourite tactic) ?
Playing to an exact countdown would simply change the way teams kill time. I have no interest in every game ending with a 2 minute huddle by the corner flag.
The ‘stop the clock’ thing is nothing to do with improving the game, it’s all about finding more room for ad breaks on TV. If you want to watch Shopping Channels with the odd bit of sport thrown in the Americans have that covered. Football was never a sport where decisions are better if made down to millimetres or milliseconds…..

[Snowflake Royal]

Preposterous nonsense….just leave as is.

Exactly. It’s not really broken is it? Trouble is that’s the sort of thing FIFA likes to fix….

I'd argue that given all the time wasting that goes on, often unpunished or unaddressed, it is broken.