Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2017 17:26:56 GMT
BBC reporting that the lawmakers, in their infinite wisdom, are considering whether to scrap 45 minute halves and replacing with 2x30 minutes with clock being stopped whenever the ball is not in play - the argument being that generally there's no more than 60 minutes of actual football in a regular game
Personally, I feel they should leave well alone but interested in what others think
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 17, 2017 17:40:09 GMT
That's an idea geared around advertising surely?
Apart from a football match, there's no other occasion where a TV programme goes 45 minutes without an ad break
|
|
|
|
Post by Hannibal on Jun 17, 2017 18:40:50 GMT
BBC reporting that the lawmakers, in their infinite wisdom, are considering whether to scrap 45 minute halves and replacing with 2x30 minutes with clock being stopped whenever the ball is not in play - the argument being that generally there's no more than 60 minutes of actual football in a regular game Personally, I feel they should leave well alone but interested in what others think Just read at on BBC website. Are they mad. I don't want football to become a laughing stock, which is what this proposal is. |
|
|
|
Post by marner93 on Jun 17, 2017 18:58:02 GMT
Yes obvious it is about advertising, and to appeal to the US audience, who can't go 5 minutes without being told to buy something. However the clock stopping when play is dead I do like, stops time wasting then, because you can't.
|
|
|
|
Post by henry on Jun 17, 2017 19:08:02 GMT
It seems to work well in rugby.The alternative is for referees to be much more strict with time wasting at throw ins, free kicks, goal kicks and players rolling around injured.The referee should stop their watch, the instant the game is stopped for an injury or the goalkeeper takes more than the allowed 6 seconds to release the ball and add the FULL amount of time on. The article says that only 60 minutes is normal playing time
OK if 30 minutes is lost - add it on, 15 minutes first half, 15 minutes at the end, perhaps this would encourage players to get on with the game
|
|
|
|
Post by marner93 on Jun 17, 2017 19:23:26 GMT
Eventually there will be one European league no promotion, no relegation, with say the top 30 sides.
Other teams will become reserve sides, we already have the U23's league, where the players can mature, before either making the first team, or going to another team like ourselves. Will we ever see a draft in football I'm not to sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Da Part on Jun 17, 2017 19:55:17 GMT
Nah, leave it as it is! There's too much advertisement in football these days (sadly, that's the way the game has gone and its essential now) but to adjust times of halves to suit those promoting their products? No thanks! Plus, what benefit would it be to clubs in the Non-League game anyway.
As the above poster says, there will be an elite group of clubs who will breakaway to form their own league, they can do as they please with that, but leave the core 90 minutes of our game well alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by rcb on Jun 17, 2017 21:10:39 GMT
Any such proposal would be further decisive to the common good of the game. Any sports game the world over should be defined by one common set of playing rules which can be played from grass roots through to the top elite. We already have football breaking this mold with the introduction of technology at the top, coupled with five or more officials. In my lifetime I've seen a great game disintegrate into farce with the level of cheating that goes on. I'm sure Tom Daley does less diving in training than premier league footballers. So called experts now call cheating " professional fouls" or the "take a yellow card for the team" nonsense..
We used to "pay our subs each week", wearing a team strip devoid of any writing on it. Nowadays, junior teams can't play without the need for a major sponsor. More and more the game is being taken away from the grass roots and controlled by those outside the game. Money to agents floods out of the game and doesn't filter down. Referees bend the rules on a regular basis, almost close to cheating themselves. A second yellow varies dependent on whether you already have a first yellow for example.
It's only a matter of time before the game splits into the elite format as opposed to the original game. I'm sticking with the real game at Chester's level and below. Sky has already been cancelled. Bring on pre-season!!
|
|
|
|
Post by rcb on Jun 17, 2017 21:12:31 GMT
"Divisive" it should read
|
|
|
|
Post by Al on Jun 17, 2017 22:04:10 GMT
If that goes ahead the game is well and truly dead.
Just leave it alone FFS.
45min halves are it. from Top flight to Sunday league and below. LEAVE THE GAME ALONE!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rio Doherty on Jun 17, 2017 22:07:00 GMT
What a daft idea. Keep it like it is, 45 each way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Al on Jun 17, 2017 22:07:16 GMT
Just reading some of the above comments. If they change the game times it will also affect grass roots football. with, Sunday league, Saturday league as well.
Just leave it alone for gods sake man. The top flight and FA pandering to increased advertising revenue will destroy the game. Keep 45min halves for crying out loud!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2017 22:28:02 GMT
Never going to happen, everyone calm down.
|
|
|
|
Post by hackett on Jun 18, 2017 1:22:44 GMT
100% a wind up.
Don't get me wrong, it might be a genuine proposal but it wouldn't happen in a million years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frank Owen’s Paintbrush on Jun 18, 2017 4:58:19 GMT
Referees already have a tough job as it is without having to remember rules such as the following proposals in the unlikely event they are introduced.
Further proposals:
Players will be able to play free kicks or corners to themselves. Essentially, this means that they're just dribbling.
Goal kicks will no longer have to leave the penalty area.
Free kicks will be allowed to stand if the ball is moving.
A penalty will be awarded if a 'keeper handles a back-pass.
A penalty goal could be awarded for deliberate handballs that occur on the goal-line.
Referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play, just like rugby.
Disallowing players to follow up and score from a saved penalty. Basically, this means that if their spot-kick doesn't hit the back of the net, play would stop immediately and a goal-kick would be awarded.
|
|
|
|
Post by rcb on Jun 18, 2017 13:41:45 GMT
Referees make things tough on themselves frequently. We have a set of Laws that are not always applied, so why change them so that even more are ignored. Let's start by seeing what happens when existing laws are applied. All players should be in their own half at kick off - ignored. At a corner the ball must be placed IN the quadrant - ignored. ( read the definition of the word IN if you disagree). 6 seconds for the goalkeeper to hold the ball - ignored.
And why are players allowed to lean back at 45 degrees into opponents to supposedly shield the ball?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2017 14:23:05 GMT
Referees make things tough on themselves frequently. We have a set of Laws that are not always applied, so why change them so that even more are ignored. Let's start by seeing what happens when existing laws are applied. All players should be in their own half at kick off - ignored. At a corner the ball must be placed IN the quadrant - ignored. ( read the definition of the word IN if you disagree). 6 seconds for the goalkeeper to hold the ball - ignored. And why are players allowed to lean back at 45 degrees into opponents to supposedly shield the ball? Bet you're loads of fun to sit with at a match |
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 18, 2017 14:42:22 GMT
Referees already have a tough job as it is without having to remember rules such as the following proposals in the unlikely event they are introduced. Further proposals: Players will be able to play free kicks or corners to themselves. Essentially, this means that they're just dribbling. Goal kicks will no longer have to leave the penalty area. Free kicks will be allowed to stand if the ball is moving. A penalty will be awarded if a 'keeper handles a back-pass. A penalty goal could be awarded for deliberate handballs that occur on the goal-line. Referees can only blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play, just like rugby. Disallowing players to follow up and score from a saved penalty. Basically, this means that if their spot-kick doesn't hit the back of the net, play would stop immediately and a goal-kick would be awarded. That last one, what if the keeper gets a hand to a penalty but it goes in. Would it be classed as a save? Football is a simple, fast-paced game that works best if stoppages and interference from the officials are kept to a minimum. Once the ball has been kicked from the penalty spot, it's in open play. Everyone understands that and there's absolutely no need to make special rule changes just for penalty kicks. I'd say the 'penalty goal' idea for handballs on the line is not a bad idea. It would have to be for absolute certainties though, like Suarez's handball against Ghana. Maybe giving a penalty for a keeper picking up a backpass makes sense too - really it should be treated the same as a handball from an outfield player, except it's down to the ref to decide whether the backpass was intentional. Definitely don't like the idea of players taking free kicks and corners to themselves. You'd get stupid situations where players start dribbling it about as if they're getting ready to take the kick, but then suddenly have a shot and claim they've already taken the kick. Cocky players would start taking advantage, stealing yards and then 'changing their minds' about whether the kick had actually been taken if they make a mess of it. |
|
|
|
Post by hawardenblue on Jun 18, 2017 20:45:02 GMT
As a referee my self, these new 'proposals' are awful. The halves are fine as they are, they don't need changing. If the IFAB want to pick on time keeping, they should introduce a law on additional time as there is actually no clarification. If the clock is stopped every time the ball went out of play, it can get very very very frustrating and especially when the restarts are being took quickly - what happens if the referee forgets to start his watch?
The only proposal I slightly agree with is the penalty goal for a handball DOGSO on the line - the team have essentially missed out on what would be a clear goal because of an incompetent player - and now they have to score a penalty to get it back? For some teams - denying a goal by handball could be better as the opposition might not be good at penalties as theres a chance of missing. E.G Play off final, Chester V Tranmere. It's 1-1 120th minute, hannah has a shot, straight past the keeper, going in and McNulty decides to block on the line with his hands. What has he got to lose? He is not going to miss the rest of the game, as it's already over and I highly doubt he would be selected to take a penalty. He's putting Chester at a disadvantage as we have to score that penalty to seal it. If we score, well we were going to score anyway, if we were to miss, he has an advantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Angry Agenda on Jun 18, 2017 21:52:17 GMT
That's an idea geared around advertising surely? Apart from a football match, there's no other occasion where a TV programme goes 45 minutes without an ad break Why would it be geared around advertising ? If a half Last's 30 mins, but the clock stops everytime the ball Isn't in play, you're still gonna see probably 40 mins Before the end of the half, and an advert break. |
|
|
|
Post by The Angry Agenda on Jun 18, 2017 22:35:56 GMT
Out of curiosity with regards how long it would take to play 30 mins, under the new rules, just watched 5 mins of the New York v Philadelphia MLS game. Of that 5 mins, the ball was in actual play for 3 mins 17 seconds, and there were no bookings or injuries, eating up time. Corners and goal kicks take 20 seconds and upwards to take - now where's me anorak.
|
|
|
|
Post by Frank Owen’s Paintbrush on Jun 18, 2017 22:52:48 GMT
The only proposal I slightly agree with is the penalty goal for a handball DOGSO on the line - the team have essentially missed out on what would be a clear goal because of an incompetent player - and now they have to score a penalty to get it back? For some teams - denying a goal by handball could be better as the opposition might not be good at penalties as theres a chance of missing. E.G Play off final, Chester V Tranmere. It's 1-1 120th minute, hannah has a shot, straight past the keeper, going in and McNulty decides to block on the line with his hands. What has he got to lose? He is not going to miss the rest of the game, as it's already over and I highly doubt he would be selected to take a penalty. He's putting Chester at a disadvantage as we have to score that penalty to seal it. If we score, well we were going to score anyway, if we were to miss, he has an advantage. Sorry you've wasted your time typing that paragraph but a "penalty goal" is basically an awarded goal. What you're describing is just a penalty. |
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 19, 2017 4:42:46 GMT
The only proposal I slightly agree with is the penalty goal for a handball DOGSO on the line - the team have essentially missed out on what would be a clear goal because of an incompetent player - and now they have to score a penalty to get it back? For some teams - denying a goal by handball could be better as the opposition might not be good at penalties as theres a chance of missing. E.G Play off final, Chester V Tranmere. It's 1-1 120th minute, hannah has a shot, straight past the keeper, going in and McNulty decides to block on the line with his hands. What has he got to lose? He is not going to miss the rest of the game, as it's already over and I highly doubt he would be selected to take a penalty. He's putting Chester at a disadvantage as we have to score that penalty to seal it. If we score, well we were going to score anyway, if we were to miss, he has an advantage. Sorry you've wasted your time typing that paragraph but a "penalty goal" is basically an awarded goal. What you're describing is just a penalty. I think he understands that. He was describing what the problem is with the current rules. |
|
|
|
Post by oldboneze on Jun 19, 2017 6:44:08 GMT
Definitely don't like the idea of players taking free kicks and corners to themselves. You'd get stupid situations where players start dribbling it about as if they're getting ready to take the kick, but then suddenly have a shot and claim they've already taken the kick. Cocky players would start taking advantage, stealing yards and then 'changing their minds' about whether the kick had actually been taken if they make a mess of it. That's why the law was amended in the first place.
Sam Chedgzoy, born 27 January 1889 in Ellesmere Port, began his professional career with Everton F.C. in 1910.
In 1926, he forced a change in the laws of the game when he almost scored by dribbling the ball in from a corner kick. Prior to 1924 a goal could only be scored from a corner kick if another player made contact with the ball. In that year, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) changed the laws of football so that a goal could be scored directly from a corner kick (without another player touching the ball). However, the wording of the new law was vague. During a game against Woolwich Arsenal, Everton gained a corner kick that Chedgzoy took. Instead of crossing the ball in, he dribbled the ball into the penalty area and nearly scored while the other players and referee looked on in shock – and then he successfully persuaded the referee that the rules permitted this way of scoring a goal. After deliberation by the Football Association, the law was amended making it clear that the player taking the corner could only strike the ball once before another player must make contact. This ensures that corner kicks cannot become corner dribbles, but also permits a goal to be scored direct from a corner.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 19, 2017 7:00:33 GMT
Yes, I thought I'd heard of an incident of it happening from years ago, thanks for finding it!
There's a degree of innovation about that example, but modern players are sneaky. You see those corners sometimes where players pretend they're just kicking it to a team mate so he can take the corner, but it turns out they've already taken it and the receiving player puts a cross into the box unchallenged. Refs normally disallow it as it's deceptive.
This would take it to another level - players would start doing keep ups and things, pretending they were just getting ready to take a kick. If a defender challenged them, they would claim they hadn't taken the kick yet and demand the defender gets booked for kicking the ball away. It wouldn't work and there's nothing wrong with the way we've been taking free kicks and corners for the last century.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Jun 19, 2017 7:01:38 GMT
That's an idea geared around advertising surely? Apart from a football match, there's no other occasion where a TV programme goes 45 minutes without an ad break Why would it be geared around advertising ? If a half Last's 30 mins, but the clock stops everytime the ball Isn't in play, you're still gonna see probably 40 mins Before the end of the half, and an advert break. Fair point, I misunderstood the proposal. |
|
|
|
Post by RonD on Jun 20, 2017 15:29:16 GMT
Utterly stupid proposal. Please leave well alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by RonD on Jun 20, 2017 15:29:33 GMT
Utterly stupid proposal. Please leave well alone.
Posted twice . . . how the hell do you delete one, lol?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rio Doherty on Jun 20, 2017 15:39:04 GMT
Utterly stupid proposal. Please leave well alone. Posted twice . . . how the hell do you delete one, lol? Click the settings icon on the right of your post, scroll down until it says 'delete'. Once you click on 'delete' type in 'delete' then your post will be deleted. 👍 |
|
|
|
Post by sqzl on Jun 20, 2017 15:43:46 GMT
Why would it be geared around advertising ? If a half Last's 30 mins, but the clock stops everytime the ball Isn't in play, you're still gonna see probably 40 mins Before the end of the half, and an advert break. Fair point, I misunderstood the proposal. NFL has quick adverts for single shows/companies whenever there is a slightly longer stoppage in play, could well see that with this proposal so i wouldn't say Lobster's suggestion is too outrageous and could happen. |
|
