McRamFan Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Multi ball last ten minutes if its looking like a draw... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolram Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 only rule is I dislike about football is injury time and ref's adding 4 minutes on and you end up playing an extra 6 minutes. I would much prefer it if the watch stopped when the ball went out of play like in Rugby/Hockey. Then the game ends when the ball goes into touch/goal after 90 minutes played. Then you get full/correct match time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 34 minutes ago, Mafiabob said: I'd argue the fact every team sport is highly emotional..... football ain't no different from Rugby, Basketball, Ice Hockey and baseball..... just to name a few well followed sports. Ice Hockey they are allowed to fight (plus they use technology for key decisions), Basketball is non-contact as is Baseball and Rugby is so much slower. You can't compare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 17 minutes ago, bristolram said: only rule is I dislike about football is injury time and ref's adding 4 minutes on and you end up playing an extra 6 minutes. I would much prefer it if the watch stopped when the ball went out of play like in Rugby/Hockey. Then the game ends when the ball goes into touch/goal after 90 minutes played. Then you get full/correct match time. Referees stop one of their watches and keep one continuous. I agree and you'll find most referees would quite happily also they'd prefer someone else to do the timekeeping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady1993 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 45 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: The problem with the first point is that football is a highly emotional game. It's your natural instinct, for instance, to go bezerk if you are desperate to score a goal and see the referee wave off a blatant penalty. Also, some challenges on your teammates will naturally force a reaction. I remember when I used to play,one game the referee was allowing such crude challenges to go and we were all frustrated by it. I was a left-back, and one of their forwards went in knee high on our centre-back and took him clean out. The referee just allowed it go, which prompted myself to launch into a mass tirade on him. Incidently I was dismissed... But it's an emotional game. Its hard to act in a normal manner and just walk away when you've just seen your friend receive a dangerous leg-breaking challenge. I know people want to use Rugby as the example, but Rugby is a completely different sport. Much slower, lot's of breaks between play. It's less desperate. Easier to keep emotions intact. I disagree that Rugby is any less emotional than football, I think the major reason why there is hardly any dissent in Rugby compared to football's two factors: The first one is cultural. In Rugby, it's drilled into you from a young age to respect the referee and that only the captain talks the referee. Combine this with young players don't see their 'heroes' do it on TV, and it isn't considered 'just part of the game' like it is in football. The second one is the referee in Rugby will either give a yellow card (and a sin bin) or at penalty situations can move the penalties further forward for dissent. This actively discourages players from talking back to the referee because it would cause a serious impact to their team if they do. Unlike in football where player only occasional gets a card for dissent, and the impact of that card is a lot less severe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mafiabob Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Just now, Bris Vegas said: Ice Hockey they are allowed to fight (plus they use technology for key decisions), Basketball is non-contact as is Baseball and Rugby is so much slower. You can't compare. You said football is a highly emotional game...... Tell me which of the other sports I mentioned are not highly emotional? You've just proved my point with the Ice Hockey comparison..... I'm hazarding a guess here but I do think theirs nothing in the rules where they are "allowed" to fight in ice hockey. All team sports are highly emotional..... I can compare to pretty much 99% of any sport which is team based...... Does it really matter if BasketBall is not a contact sport? No! I'm pretty sure I see celebrations and tears at end of play off games? If it ain't highly emotional.... then what is it?Scripted like Corrie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 28 minutes ago, Mafiabob said: You said football is a highly emotional game...... Tell me which of the other sports I mentioned are not highly emotional? You've just proved my point with the Ice Hockey comparison..... I'm hazarding a guess here but I do think theirs nothing in the rules where they are "allowed" to fight in ice hockey. All team sports are highly emotional..... I can compare to pretty much 99% of any sport which is team based...... Does it really matter if BasketBall is not a contact sport? No! I'm pretty sure I see celebrations and tears at end of play off games? If it ain't highly emotional.... then what is it?Scripted like Corrie? Perhaps I didn't explain myself very well. I know all sports are highly emotional. I'm struggling to explain myself on this one, but I just feel a major penalty shout or a dangerous tackle in the heat of the game in football isn't comparable in other sports. What could possibly cause such a moment, and on such frequent occasions, in Basketball, Baseball and Rugby? I could be totally wrong on this but I just don't see it in other sports. In Ice Hockey when emotions are high and an incident has happened, both sets of players turn on each other but are soon broken up with the aid of technology to help on decisions. There is actually no situation where there is a need to turn on the officials. It's the same for Baseball, and IMO Rugby too. I just can't picture a situation where rugby players are going to charge around the referee and call him all names under the sun. A bad tackle? This is a sport where you can stamp on your opponents and grapple them to the ground. Obviously if you break the rules, technology is there to ban players. What scenario could arise in rugby so that 6 or 7 players go and rush around the referee? Any major/controversial decision is settled by technology. Perhaps introducing that in football would prevent the need for referees on such decisions. But then again, surely that would be detrimental to the sport in terms of pace and emotion. Having to review every tackle, corner, throw-in decision via technology would kill the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 Also proposing splitting 90 mins into 4 quarters. Also suggesting players should wear big fluffy slippers instead if boots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 17 hours ago, bristolram said: only rule is I dislike about football is injury time and ref's adding 4 minutes on and you end up playing an extra 6 minutes. I would much prefer it if the watch stopped when the ball went out of play like in Rugby/Hockey. Then the game ends when the ball goes into touch/goal after 90 minutes played. Then you get full/correct match time. Trouble with this idea is that if you look at the stats for the length of time the ball is actually in play - it tends to be about 65 minutes - meaning a game would last nearer 2 hours if you stopped the clock for throw-ins, corners etc. Currently the ref only stops his watch for injuries, goal celebrations, lengthy stoppages and deliberate time-wasting. Actually a lot of this Van Basten stuff sounds like the NASL attempts to make "soccer" more popular in the USA during the 1970s They had a 35 yard line for offsides (rather than the half way line) A big clock that counted down to zero like most other US sports They had penalty shootouts for all games that ended in a draw and and one point also replaced penalties with the shoot-out formula. Player started from the 35 yard line 1:1 against the goalie Needless to say - none of these things caught on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted January 20, 2017 Share Posted January 20, 2017 13 minutes ago, StivePesley said: Trouble with this idea is that if you look at the stats for the length of time the ball is actually in play - it tends to be about 65 minutes - meaning a game would last nearer 2 hours if you stopped the clock for throw-ins, corners etc. Currently the ref only stops his watch for injuries, goal celebrations, lengthy stoppages and deliberate time-wasting. Also, what's to stop teams deliberately manipulating the ball time in play and therefore the length of the match - on occasions when knowing the outcome of other matches could be important, such as the final game of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted January 21, 2017 Author Share Posted January 21, 2017 On 18.1.2017 at 23:09, richinspain said: That sounds good. Don't know what I'd do with the the 3 seconds I'd have left over mind. Suppose I could take up smoking It used to be done in five! These penalties are likely to be introduced in 2026 World Cup along with effective game-time in the last 10 minutes. Latter would make time wasting useless as clock would be stopped if ball is not in play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.