A proposal to scrap 45-minute halves is to be looked at by football's lawmakers to deter time-wasting. Instead, there could be two periods of 30 minutes with the clock stopped whenever the ball goes out of play. Lawmaking body the International Football Association Board (Ifab) says matches only see about 60 minutes of "effective playing time" out of 90. The idea is one of several put forward in a new strategy document designed to address football's "negativities".
Brilliant... reduce time-wasting by giving them less time to waste... that'll learn 'em... hey-ho, why not just have a penalty shoot-out and forget all of that other silly nonsense that goes on during a game of football.. or paper, scissors, stone, the away team can phone in their selection...?
Or maybe just keep the matches at 90 minutes and stop the clock when the ball goes out of play and and actually enforce the current laws and book more players for blatant time wasting.
Or maybe just keep the matches at 90 minutes and stop the clock when the ball goes out of play and and actually enforce the current laws and book more players for blatant time wasting.
Because then each match would last about 2 hours. I would imagine this is the thinking behind reducing to 60 minutes and stopping the watch every time the ball goes out of play.
Post by townmeadleftover on Jun 19, 2017 19:31:12 GMT
Not really a surprise, they've screwed cricket into a game for accountants and they're also looking to mess about big time with tennis, add that to all the other sports they've made more 'spectator friendly' and it would be the shock of the century if football wasn't on the tinkering list as well. There was actually a discussion during the tennis coverage today about reducing both the length, 6 to 4, and number, 5 to 3, of sets, the 'experts' openly stating that it had to come because younger people nowadays don't have the attention span required to watch the old fashioned stuff that us old gits put up with, talk about insulting your support base, or is it an insult? are the future supporters that bad that sports will all be butchered to keep the punters rolling up and spending their cash?
Post by Red, Red & Red on Jun 19, 2017 20:38:31 GMT
Idea proposed is completely looney and can.never happen our beautiful game will be destroyed. 60 minutes is simply not enough and absolutely barking mad idea
Or maybe just keep the matches at 90 minutes and stop the clock when the ball goes out of play and and actually enforce the current laws and book more players for blatant time wasting.
Because then each match would last about 2 hours. I would imagine this is the thinking behind reducing to 60 minutes and stopping the watch every time the ball goes out of play.
Would that be a bad thing? (I'm serious in case you're wondering)
Because then each match would last about 2 hours. I would imagine this is the thinking behind reducing to 60 minutes and stopping the watch every time the ball goes out of play.
Would that be a bad thing? (I'm serious in case you're wondering)
I'm with you on this one... robustly enforce the actual laws that currently exist and you will address the matter at source.. the real issue is that we have come to accept certain unsavoury aspects as a normal everyday part of the game.. if you want to stop time-wasting then stop rewarding those who indulge in time-wasting... it's not rocket science.
And as an aside... taking the ball to the corner flag NEVER works... just play your normal game, who knows you might even end up scoring a goal...!
Referees seem unwilling to enforce existing laws, why would shuffling things around make any difference?
For example, I note the suggestion to only allow the captain to talk to the referee to prevent him being crowded or intimidated. Currently the referee can book players for 'unsporting behaviour' of which attempted intimidation of the referee would count, so the referee could warn the book anyone acting in this manner.
Secondly, if the captain is injured and receiving treatment how can he speak to the referee? Who would in that instance?
The answer to the current issues is not to confuse matters but to enforce the existing laws!
I recall listening to a pundit a few years ago (sorry, can't remember which one) who was bemoaning the fact that a referee had stopped the game and booked a player for shirt pulling in the penalty area, with comments along the line of "you can't book a player for that as everyone does it".
Errr, I would........... it would soon stop the cheating action if everyone shirt pulling was booked.
Of course the easy way to kill this one off is by using the one and only thing that really matters in the current football universe... suggest to club representatives at the meeting, that it is only fair & reasonable that their TV revenue and admission prices plus staff wages, should all consequently be reduced by a third to reflect the change..!
Once they have recovered from the shock, they will be moving onto the next agenda item pretty damn pronto.