General officiating/rules

[AndyM3000]

4 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

does anyone actually want a 60 minute match? I dont 

Yeh, it's more football. The current set up is outdated and leads to loads of inconsistencies.

There was a game we played last season where we tried to wind down the clock, something like 5 mins added on but the ref played all the way to 98 mins. Yet, let's look at when Man City won the title against us, you can go and rewatch it, 5 mins added on and Ederson was down on the floor injured for almost 2 mins of stoppage time, did they play to 97/98 mins? Of course they didn't. 5 mins 19 seconds was the total amount played, I decided to have a look myself, the ball was out of play for 3 mins 10 seconds of that.

You can't get better refs, nobody wants to be one. Even if you did, you cant remove the bias from them but this method does. They have enough to focus on, take the time aspect out of their hands completely.

Anything that becomes a matter of fact and removes the decision from a ref I am all for. I'm annoyed we aren't using the automated offside like they do in the Champions League, I can accept a mistake if its a programming/technical error because it can be fixed and improved but instead we are going to continue with these lot drawing lines at random and making mistakes like not realising who the last man even is.

I'd even go as far as to change the yellow card rule, if you make 4 fouls no matter how small it's an automatic yellow card for consistent fouling, why is this left for the refs to make up on the spot? I've seen games where Cash has been booked for after 2 nothing fouls and I think Fabinho last away game of the season for us made 6 fouls before he was booked. 

 

[TomC]

I could see doing a partial stop-clock system...

Stop the clock only for goals, substitutions, injuries, and maybe penalties. The clock keeps running for free kicks and the ball going out of play, unless the referee thinks that someone is deliberately wasting time, in which case he can stop it.

Goals, substitutions, injuries, and penalties are rare enough that it wouldn't give advertisers an excuse to run ads every few minutes.

Injuries are the worst time wasters of all when players fake agony.

 

[Stevo985]

7 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

does anyone actually want a 60 minute match? I dont 

If they do it properly then yes. But I'm sure they'll find a way to completely **** it up

[Stevo985]

52 minutes ago, TomC said:

I could see doing a partial stop-clock system...

Stop the clock only for goals, substitutions, injuries, and maybe penalties. The clock keeps running for free kicks and the ball going out of play, unless the referee thinks that someone is deliberately wasting time, in which case he can stop it.

Goals, substitutions, injuries, and penalties are rare enough that it wouldn't give advertisers an excuse to run ads every few minutes.

Injuries are the worst time wasters of all when players fake agony.

 

I've given my solutions many times for the subs and injuries time wasting and I'm still convinced they'd work.

 

Subs: Just do them. While the game goes on. Why does the game have to stop and we all watch a player walk off? Just make your sub, new player can't come on until the player coming off leaves the pitch. **** get on with it

Injuries: Let the physios on while the game carries on. The ref has the option of stopping it if it's serious like they do with head injuries. Just play round the player. See how many players fake injuries when the game carries on. Yeah it might lead to the odd occasion where you're at a disadvantage because you have a player injured. But the pros outweigh the cons. Other sports do this

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

I've given my solutions many times for the subs and injuries time wasting and I'm still convinced they'd work.

 

Subs: Just do them. While the game goes on. Why does the game have to stop and we all watch a player walk off? Just make your sub, new player can't come on until the player coming off leaves the pitch. **** get on with it

Injuries: Let the physios on while the game carries on. The ref has the option of stopping it if it's serious like they do with head injuries. Just play round the player. See how many players fake injuries when the game carries on. Yeah it might lead to the odd occasion where you're at a disadvantage because you have a player injured. But the pros outweigh the cons. Other sports do this

Don’t like either of these - purely because they disadvantage the team making the sub or suffering an injury. You’re playing with 10 men for a short period of time through absolutely no fault of your own.

Want to take off the player on the far side of the pitch? Go for it, but the opposition can attack down there freely as the sub has to run across. 

[bobzy]

4 hours ago, TomC said:

American experience. Everyone over here knows what a "TV timeout is."

The broadcasters basically tell the leagues, we want to run commercials x times per half/quarter/period, and the leagues say, "yes sir, thank you for paying us millions." I can't remember which sport it is (ice hockey? basketball?) where it's every 4 minutes of clock time. Clock runs down from 20 minutes...the first stoppage after the 16 minute mark, play isn't restarted for a minute and they run commercials. First stoppage after the 12 minute mark, 8 minute mark, 4 minute mark, same thing.

Granted, in football, IFAB controls the laws and is a bit more insulated from TV broadcaster pressure because they don't get the millions from the TV contracts. That doesn't mean they won't feel the pressure. Grant an opening and the pressure will come.

 

Yeah, I’m very much against advertising in that regard - but that isn’t the game. They can still do that in stoppages now if they really wanted to.

I think people have a misconception that a stopped clock means the game has fully stopped. It doesn’t.

[Genie]

10 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

I've given my solutions many times for the subs and injuries time wasting and I'm still convinced they'd work.

 

Subs: Just do them. While the game goes on. Why does the game have to stop and we all watch a player walk off? Just make your sub, new player can't come on until the player coming off leaves the pitch. **** get on with it

Injuries: Let the physios on while the game carries on. The ref has the option of stopping it if it's serious like they do with head injuries. Just play round the player. See how many players fake injuries when the game carries on. Yeah it might lead to the odd occasion where you're at a disadvantage because you have a player injured. But the pros outweigh the cons. Other sports do this

I like the sub idea.

Not really a fan of the injury one though, very quickly people will fall over the injured player and physio. Or someone will boot the ball at them. What if another player then gets injured? Clubs will need 2, 3 doctors per game.

I absolutely hate time wasting, even when Villa players do it. Drives me mad and is such a false economy. 

[sne]

13 hours ago, TomC said:

American experience. Everyone over here knows what a "TV timeout is."

The broadcasters basically tell the leagues, we want to run commercials x times per half/quarter/period, and the leagues say, "yes sir, thank you for paying us millions." I can't remember which sport it is (ice hockey? basketball?) where it's every 4 minutes of clock time. Clock runs down from 20 minutes...the first stoppage after the 16 minute mark, play isn't restarted for a minute and they run commercials. First stoppage after the 12 minute mark, 8 minute mark, 4 minute mark, same thing.

Granted, in football, IFAB controls the laws and is a bit more insulated from TV broadcaster pressure because they don't get the millions from the TV contracts. That doesn't mean they won't feel the pressure. Grant an opening and the pressure will come.

 

I would be pretty surprised if FIFA doesn't try to implement something like this at the 2026 WC or at the 2030 Saudi WC at the latest. You know, to "test it out". And once it's there it will not change.

Americanize the game and make it more appealing to the kids who have an attention span of 30 sec.

[Stevo985]

9 hours ago, bobzy said:

Don’t like either of these - purely because they disadvantage the team making the sub or suffering an injury. You’re playing with 10 men for a short period of time through absolutely no fault of your own.

Tough. It happens all the time anyway, player goes off for treatment and the other team plays on with 10. It happens. Teams cope then. Other sports cope. It's not perfect but like I said the positives outweigh the negatives. Players wouldn't be rolling around feigning injury if the game just carried on.

9 hours ago, bobzy said:

Want to take off the player on the far side of the pitch? Go for it, but the opposition can attack down there freely as the sub has to run across. 

Then wait until the ball goes out and do it quickly. Player can leave the pitch on the far side and the new player run on. How long does it take for a footballer to run across the pitch? 10 seconds at most?

Or make it so that subs can run round and enter play from the other side of the pitch. The point is why do we all have to wait around while subs are made and running down the clock? It's absurd.

[Stevo985]

22 minutes ago, Genie said:

Not really a fan of the injury one though, very quickly people will fall over the injured player and physio. Or someone will boot the ball at them.

Play round them. You really think players will just blindly run into injured players and physios? Or kick the ball at them? I doubt it.

23 minutes ago, Genie said:

What if another player then gets injured? Clubs will need 2, 3 doctors per game.

Clubs already have this. And the ref can still stop the game if it's serious or a situation like this crops up. But again I imagine it would be rare. How often do real injuries where the player actually needs to stay down for treatment happen? 90% of the time a player stays down injured it's bullshit, it's just gamesmanship

[villa4europe]

21 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Play round them. You really think players will just blindly run into injured players and physios? Or kick the ball at them? I doubt it.

Clubs already have this. And the ref can still stop the game if it's serious or a situation like this crops up. But again I imagine it would be rare. How often do real injuries where the player actually needs to stay down for treatment happen? 90% of the time a player stays down injured it's bullshit, it's just gamesmanship

they can afford more physios, it will reduce the number of "injuries" in general anyway, teams will also change the way they set their subs up because god forbid we'd have to return to the days where subs had their kit on underneath their training jacket rather than the special edition chinese new year away training top

that's one of my issues in general with this and VAR, the idea that one man as a ref cant be responsible for managing all of this, simple answer - get more men...if you need a time keeper then get a time keeper, the worry for me sne would be that like VAR FIFA trial it a world cup, do it properly with large well trained groups of international refs, its get approved and put in the hands of PGMOL and then suddenly as if by magic it doesn't work anymore and its a shit idea but it couldn't possibly be how PGMOL operate it because apparently its impossible to train better refs

[bobzy]

34 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Tough. It happens all the time anyway, player goes off for treatment and the other team plays on with 10. It happens. Teams cope then. Other sports cope. It's not perfect but like I said the positives outweigh the negatives. Players wouldn't be rolling around feigning injury if the game just carried on.

Then wait until the ball goes out and do it quickly. Player can leave the pitch on the far side and the new player run on. How long does it take for a footballer to run across the pitch? 10 seconds at most?

Or make it so that subs can run round and enter play from the other side of the pitch. The point is why do we all have to wait around while subs are made and running down the clock? It's absurd.

Bit in bold, just have a stop clock like pretty much every other sport.  Substitution being made, game stops, clock stops.  Players can still be booked for leaving the pitch too slowly but there's no impact on game time.  The thing with the "it doesn't take long" is absolutely fine, but it takes equally as little time for a team to attack.  It's just too big a possible concession (in my eyes) versus some petty time wasting which has zero impact other than frustration.

Top bit; I sort of agree with trying to nullify the amount of feigning injury but equally don't think a team should be incentivised to deliberately "leave one on them" because it gains a fairly decent advantage.  Do other sports actually continue generally, by the way?  I know rugby does but just not aware of any other sports where an "injury" happens and the play just carries on.

[Genie]

44 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Play round them. You really think players will just blindly run into injured players and physios? Or kick the ball at them? I doubt it

Not intentionally (although some word removed might do it).

[Genie]

24 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

teams will also change the way they set their subs up because god forbid we'd have to return to the days where subs had their kit on underneath their training jacket

Oh man, this should do in the piss you off thread. 

Why do subs often act with complete surprise that they need to go onto the pitch? 
What, me? Shit, I need to put my boots, socks, shirt, shin pads on then.

FA or PL need to make it mandatory that the subs are kitted and ready to play beneath a jacket. 

[Stevo985]

12 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Bit in bold, just have a stop clock like pretty much every other sport.  Substitution being made, game stops, clock stops.  Players can still be booked for leaving the pitch too slowly but there's no impact on game time.  The thing with the "it doesn't take long" is absolutely fine, but it takes equally as little time for a team to attack.  It's just too big a possible concession (in my eyes) versus some petty time wasting which has zero impact other than frustration.

Yeah that works too. And if a stopped clock is what happens then that will give us the same solution. I guess it just annoys me that everyone stops and watches the charade of a guy pretending to run off the pitch when he's actually moving very slowly for no reason

[villa4europe]

8 minutes ago, Genie said:

Oh man, this should do in the piss you off thread. 

Why do subs often act with complete surprise that they need to go onto the pitch? 
What, me? Shit, I need to put my boots, socks, shirt, shin pads on then.

FA or PL need to make it mandatory that the subs are kitted and ready to play beneath a jacket. 

yep, thats why even genuine injuries are taking so long and you see this nonsense where an injured player comes back on only to sit down again, its because the sub isn't ready

stopping play is not only about trying to waste time and get to 90 minutes playing less football and thats partly my issue with this clock suggestion, you wont fix the problems with it, the gamesmanship will still exist

[villa4europe]

1 hour ago, bobzy said:

Bit in bold, just have a stop clock like pretty much every other sport.  Substitution being made, game stops, clock stops.  Players can still be booked for leaving the pitch too slowly but there's no impact on game time.  The thing with the "it doesn't take long" is absolutely fine, but it takes equally as little time for a team to attack.  It's just too big a possible concession (in my eyes) versus some petty time wasting which has zero impact other than frustration.

but again it misses the point as to why some managers make some subs when they do

you're getting battered, in the last 5 mins the opposition has 80% possession and 5 shots on goal, manager makes a sub, sub takes 1-2 minutes to make, defending team isnt doing it in order to reach the 90 minutes, they're doing it to slow the momentum down, to take a breather and regain their shape, same with feigning injuries, they're not doing it to stop the clock they're doing it to slow the game down, they will take the piss in order to adversely affect the attacking team, its gamesmanship

stopping the clock does not stop that gamesmanship, all stopping the clock does is prevent an inept ref adding 30 seconds on rather than the full 2 minutes on....if you had a better ref not only would they capture that 2 minutes they would where possible stop the defending team from taking the piss in the first place

thats why i say its VAR mkII, nothing will actually get better, it wont fix footballs problems

[bobzy]

10 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

but again it misses the point as to why some managers make some subs when they do

you're getting battered, in the last 5 mins the opposition has 80% possession and 5 shots on goal, manager makes a sub, sub takes 1-2 minutes to make, defending team isnt doing it in order to reach the 90 minutes, they're doing it to slow the momentum down, to take a breather and regain their shape, same with feigning injuries, they're not doing it to stop the clock they're doing it to slow the game down, they will take the piss in order to adversely affect the attacking team, its gamesmanship

stopping the clock does not stop that gamesmanship, all stopping the clock does is prevent an inept ref adding 30 seconds on rather than the full 2 minutes on....if you had a better ref not only would they capture that 2 minutes they would where possible stop the defending team from taking the piss in the first place

thats why i say its VAR mkII, nothing will actually get better, it wont fix footballs problems

Flip it the other way round, though.  Aston Villa are away at Man City, 85 minutes on the clock leading 2-1 and under immense pressure.  Emery decides to slow the game down by making 3 substitutions, they all take a while to get on the pitch as we're desperate to kill the momentum.  Instead of stopping the clock but allowing momentum to be slowed, you'd rather have rolling subs?

Time wasting and killing the game is an important tactical part of football in my eyes.  I don't want to see that scrapped because sometimes we don't like it.

 

 

Edit:  I guess maybe you see gamesmanship as the sport being broken and I don't.  I don't mind Martinez taking an age over a goal kick or taunting penalty takers.  I don't mind players diving to attempt to win free kicks/penalties.  I think the only thing I dislike is feigning injuries because it takes away from what could be a real serious injury and it puts doubt in the mind.  It's sort of... abusive, in a way.  The rest though?  Part of the game, for me.

Edited August 3, 2023 by bobzy

[villa4europe]

I see refs as breaking football

I see clock stopping as another way of "helping" them rather than tackling the problem head on and admitting PGMOL aren't fit for purpose

[Tegis]

2 hours ago, Genie said:

Not intentionally (although some word removed might do it).

The biggest factor is that in reality, players are very rarely injured for real. So the amount of time we have physios on the field will be miniscule. Todays magic spraycans and water bottles are just for show and timewasting