[fishini]

Why not play the game for as long as it takes to have the ball in play for 90 minutes?

[Mr Mercury]

[quote name='fishini' timestamp='1497723463' post='1309826']
Why not play the game for as long as it takes to have the ball in play for 90 minutes?
[/quocan you imagine that last season, God no..

[60s 70s Spireite]

fishini, on 17 June 2017 - 06:17 PM, said:

Why not play the game for as long as it takes to have the ball in play for 90 minutes?

Don't you like your home?

[whittman]

Spire-Heights, on 17 June 2017 - 03:39 PM, said:

I'm sure this would work out roughly about the same. I'd anticipate on average the ball is in play around 60mins in football games, therefore, I'd keep it the same and not change - worked ok for the last 150 years or so...

At least with the way it is, you know exactly the minutes remaining. If they changed, would the clock also stop and start on the big screen along with the refs watch. Could the refs watch be linked to the big screens...

I for one hope this change doesn't come in... however, up for changing my mind if others views posted have good reasons for think it would be better than what we do currently. Cannot see it tho, this season s a bit g tradition that needs to remain. In my opinion of course.

The clock on our big screen can hardly cope with 2 45 minute periods as it is lol

[Between The Sticks]

It is in the referees hands to ensure there is no time wasting. If they did their job correctly we wouldn't even be debating this possible change. The biggest problem we have in modern football is referees not enforcing the rules, i.e. keepers having just 6 seconds with the ball in their hands. 90 minutes has been the duration of a match for 150 years why change it.

[60s 70s Spireite]

Between The Sticks, on 17 June 2017 - 07:10 PM, said:

It is in the referees hands to ensure there is no time wasting. If they did their job correctly we wouldn't even be debating this possible change. The biggest problem we have in modern football is referees not enforcing the rules, i.e. keepers having just 6 seconds with the ball in their hands. 90 minutes has been the duration of a match for 150 years why change it.

We had two points for a win for 100 years but it was changed for the better.

[Spire-Heights]

60s 70s Spireite, on 17 June 2017 - 07:22 PM, said:

We had two points for a win for 100 years but it was changed for the better.

How long was it 2 points for a win for? 100 years? When did it come in and When did it get changed? I wonder where we would have finished in the league last season if it had stayed the same with 2 points for a win, would we had stayed up? Also, would we have not won the league when we did both times a few years ago?

This post has been edited by Spire-Heights: 17 June 2017 - 07:27 PM

[60s 70s Spireite]

Spire-Heights, on 17 June 2017 - 07:23 PM, said:

How long was it 2 points for a win for? 100 years? When did it come in and When did it get changed?

1981 in England Then other countries slowly until 1994 when It was adopted at the World Cup and UEFA introduced it for the CL in 1995.

[Benno Spire]

Spire_78, on 17 June 2017 - 06:13 PM, said:

"Former English referee David Elleray is Ifab's technical director and has overseen the document."

The man should have been drowned at birth

If Elleray is in charge nothing will be allowed to get over the line as he will see something different

[Lincs Spireite]

Well I for one think something should be done about time wasting.

Whether that is refs toughening up which would be variable, or the rule book changed. It would benefit both home and away fans.

It rattles my chains when I witness obvious time wasting and goes as usual unpunished.

[Mr Mercury]

Bowzer spirey, on 17 June 2017 - 07:53 PM, said:

Well I for one think something should be done about time wasting.

Whether that is refs toughening up which would be variable, or the rule book changed. It would benefit both home and away fans.

It rattles my chains when I witness obvious time wasting and goes as usual unpunished.

It winds me up no end, it's WEAK referees. The rules are there and punishments are as well.
Quite simply after the first episode of time wasting call the guilty teams captain to you for a chat, tell him that is a warning for the whole team, anybody deemed to be timewasting from then on will be booked, and if that is a second bookingin the game then a red. It's so simple.
It's exactly the same with abuse of refs..after the first offence, tell the guilty teams captain that "that's enough" then issue a yellow card, or even red if the abuse is excessive for every further example!

[Happ Hazzard]

Might as well have cheerleaders, half-time "shows", time-outs, popcorn, hot-dogs and added time multi-ball. FIFA need to keep their noses out of football. They are nothing but a malign influence on the game.

[dtp]

60s 70s Spireite, on 17 June 2017 - 05:28 PM, said:

The fourth official would act as time keeper and stop the clock until the ball was in play. His match clock could be linked to the stadium clock so we all see how much time is left.

That's the fourth official who is currently responsible for holding up the customary "4 minutes" added-on board now to exclamations of "where did he get that from" or "it should be much more than that" depending on which bench you are sitting on. Fills me with confidence that does!!!!!!!!

[60s 70s Spireite]

dtp, on 17 June 2017 - 09:03 PM, said:

That's the fourth official who is currently responsible for holding up the customary "4 minutes" added-on board now to exclamations of "where did he get that from" or "it should be much more than that" depending on which bench you are sitting on. Fills me with confidence that does!!!!!!!!

That's the whole point. It's wholly subjective currently. Under this idea, the ball is either in play or it's not. Can't be that difficult to determine.

[Siberian Spireite]

60s 70s Spireite, on 17 June 2017 - 09:13 PM, said:

That's the whole point. It's wholly subjective currently. Under this idea, the ball is either in play or it's not. Can't be that difficult to determine.

Well said.

[sign of the chimes]

Bowzer spirey, on 17 June 2017 - 07:53 PM, said:

Well I for one think something should be done about time wasting.

Whether that is refs toughening up which would be variable, or the rule book changed. It would benefit both home and away fans.

It rattles my chains when I witness obvious time wasting and goes as usual unpunished.

Enjoy Wycombe next season, they've turned it in to an art form. To be fair it's actually quite impressive how well drilled they are but incredibly frustrating when you're on the other end of it as we were last season.

I suspect the 60 minutes 'active' thing will be dead in the water as the majority of the more fundamental changes are when these things get discussed but it would be great if they acted as a catalyst to sort out some of the gamesmanship problems more generally. The proposal to ensure subs leave the field of play to the nearest touchline would be a welcome start.

[monte]

The cynic in me would suggest this is a move to become more "advertising friendly" like American football where they can put more adverts into a game.

[JonB]

monte, on 19 June 2017 - 08:02 AM, said:

The cynic in me would suggest this is a move to become more "advertising friendly" like American football where they can put more adverts into a game.

Not sure how they can because in theory they are still having 2 halves just shorter but with the same amount of playing time if they are stopping the clock when the ball goes out. There is nowhere to shove the extra adverts etc as there is no addition break. That would have been the case had they gone for 3 periods of 30 mins as was suggested once.

[monte]

JonB, on 19 June 2017 - 08:22 AM, said:

Not sure how they can because in theory they are still having 2 halves just shorter but with the same amount of playing time if they are stopping the clock when the ball goes out. There is nowhere to shove the extra adverts etc as there is no addition break. That would have been the case had they gone for 3 periods of 30 mins as was suggested once.

Think of it like in the cricket when they play a quick 10 second ad between overs on sky. They currently do it in Brasil, when it goes out for a throw you have a 5 second advert.

[clarevoyant.]

monte, on 19 June 2017 - 08:39 AM, said:

Think of it like in the cricket when they play a quick 10 second ad between overs on sky. They currently do it in Brasil, when it goes out for a throw you have a 5 second advert.

Please stop. I can hear Barry Frys brain cells churning whilst he conciders getting sponsorship for his ballboys