Football Reforms

They all seem pretty good ideas to me. One way of combating time wasting is, with today's technology I am sure there is some way for the refs whistle to communicate with his watch. Ref blows for kick off - watch starts - ref blows for a throw in - watch stops - ref blows for the player to take throw in - watch starts again. Simple I would imagine. implement this with the stadium clock they have proposed and there you have it. Every stoppage is not added to play time. This could have course mean a quick 35 minute half or a full on one and a half hour plus half if there is a serious injury or handbags scenario.

Edit: I do like this one though. This would certainly make the last play exciting as it would make the attacking team keep ball in play trying to create a goal and the defending team put it out of play asap... :)

Half-time and full-time whistle: only blown when ball out of play – sometimes the referee blows the whistle for the end of the 1st or 2nd half just as a shot is going into the goal or a team has a promising attack/scoring opportunity. To remove this controversy and create more excitement, the Law could be changed so that the referee can only end the 1st or 2nd half when the ball is out of play. This could give an attacking team the incentive to keep the ball in play and try to create a goal-scoring opportunity and should save referees from the error/embarrassment of blowing for ‘time’ as a shot is going into the goal
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The Running Man said:
Terrible ideassoke terrible ideas .

The out of play stop the clock initiative will lead to synchronisation with adverts like american sports.

Fight it.
Click to expand...
Good the sooner we properly break football and the people fall out of love with it the better. Then the money will disappear and we can get back to the game.
 
The Running Man said:
You came into the football forum to say this?

Tottenham fan?
Click to expand...
No life long Southampton fan, I just feel the game is heading in totally the wrong direction and would love to see the TV money dry up and return the game to reality. I'd take a few years of broken football if it bankrupted the premier league!
 
Teams will just find other ways to time waste like running the ball into the corner or passing it around in defence. It won't stop time wasting and what of the matches where there is no time wasting? you're being deprived of entertainment. Will ticket prices be slashed by 33%?

I don't like the dead ball penalty idea either. I'd much rather see something like where only the penalty taker can hit the rebound, so it's 1v1 basically. Although tbh I don't see what's wrong with it now as long as the referee enforces player encroachment.

They seem to be just coming up with idaes for the sake of it whilst real problems go ignored.
 
I very much doubt you lose 30mins of play in games where teams aren't deliberately timewasting (feigning injuries and taking twice as long to take set pieces etc), besides the referee can add time on.
 
mmj_uk said:
I very much doubt you lose 30mins of play in games where teams aren't deliberately timewasting (feigning injuries and taking twice as long to take set pieces etc), besides the referee can add time on.
Click to expand...

Im sure that there's the coverage from the Italian football they flash up the stat of how long each team has been in possession during the game but it never adds up to the elapsed time. Due to the ball going out for a goal kick / throw in / time stopped for a free kick etc the players / ball boys take their time returning it whether its intentional or not which on average takes up 15 minutes per half. So its quite plausible to have a third of the game where literally nothing is happening.
 
I'd rather they played a full 90mins with the clock being stopped when it was out of play.

Not sure on the idea of ref being linked to stadium clock, time wasting teams will take advantage of that.

Penalty rotation is fine, can't see how it would make a difference though.

Rebound penalties should only involve the taker and keeper .
 
I really don't understand the opposition to changes one of the main problems with football is unwillingness to move with the times. In no way will shortening halves lead to adverts just look how rugby do it.

To those saying it will lead to less football a quick google brought up this so in fact we would see an increase in playing time with 30 min halves.
http://www.soccermetrics.net/team-performance/effective-time-in-football
 
Bickaxe said:
I'd rather they played a full 90mins with the clock being stopped when it was out of play.

Not sure on the idea of ref being linked to stadium clock, time wasting teams will take advantage of that.

Rebound penalties should only involve the taker and keeper .
Click to expand...


if the ref is stopping the clock how could they waste time?

make no difference if he is connected to a visible stadium clock.
 
If my team was barely holding on to a 1 goal lead and I could see that there were only a few mins left, I would waste time. Why risk giving the ball away?
If teams do not know how much time is left, then they would hopefully keep attempting to score rather than run down the clock.
 
mmj_uk said:
I very much doubt you lose 30mins of play in games where teams aren't deliberately timewasting (feigning injuries and taking twice as long to take set pieces etc), besides the referee can add time on.
Click to expand...

It's usually more than 30mins in competitive matches from what I've seen, and that's allowing for the fact that the ref adds time on. Even leaving 'standard' stoppages out of it, refs don't add on enough for subs, goals, injuries and time-wasting as it is. There's also a tendency to do some sort of arbitrary rounding to a whole minute; you'll see the board raised for 3mins and the ref blows on 48mins,

I reckon with 30min halves you'd want to allow 2hrs for a typical match to be played rather than 1h50 or whatever it is these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom