• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.
  • Our prediction league is now available for the 25/26 season. Click here to join.

Penalising teams for just hoofing the ball out of play

Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally I'm always fuming when I need an extra goal in a game (betting) and one side just decides to kill the game with 10 minutes to go. It's no exaggeration to say often up to those 5 of those minutes the ball isn't in play.

So yeah, from a selfish point of view penalise these teams with a penalty against them. From a rationale perspective, nah keep it as it is.
 

If the clock stopped as soon as the ball was out of play for & even as the ref blows for a free kick etc then it wouldn't make a difference.

Wonder how much time over the course of the season is lost when the ball isn't actually in play ?

We're paying for 90 actual minutes of play but I bet over a year of a season ticket we're being done out of a fair bit of play, 1 of the only things I think we should adopt from other sports is to actually play the full amount of time with official timekeepers on the clock signalling the end of the match.


TV would obviously invest in the clock to the most decimal places on earth and have a whole team of folk coming up with the fact that they still played 0.00000000000000000000000000000000008 seconds short & the fact that the ball was being held in the least goal scoring position in the history of the game and that it has done Liverpool out of winning the league as there was still enough time left for a penalty to be given.

Whilst I don't like the idea of penalizing a team for hoofing it out of play, I do think they need to seriously figure out the added time. Why not just stop the damn clock whenever the ball isn't in motion? The idea that there are '3 minutes of extra time' (and the whistle is blown at 3 minutes regardless of stoppage IN extra time) is a ridiculous concept. Like said it's probbaly closer to 60 minutes of ACTUAL football in any given match.

The difference with football compared to other time-limited sports is that it is generally a longer period allowed, eg NBA/NFL, which are only 48/60 minute 'games', but take hours due to stoppages (and timeouts). The closest comparisons I guess would be rugby and hockey. I don't really know hockey very well, but I certainly would say Rugby lends itself to keeping the ball in play more than football just due to the nature of the game.
 
The difference with football compared to other time-limited sports is that it is generally a longer period allowed, eg NBA/NFL, which are only 48/60 minute 'games', but take hours due to stoppages (and timeouts). The closest comparisons I guess would be rugby and hockey. I don't really know hockey very well, but I certainly would say Rugby lends itself to keeping the ball in play more than football just due to the nature of the game.

I reckon if it was brought in then over a couple of seasons the various types of time wasting would quickly stop, Jaaskelainen used to blow about 5 minutes a game switching sides for goal kicks when they weren't getting beat.
Anyway hopefully teams will be scared of the consequences of daring to waste a second against Everton fro fear of their changing room being a pod that could be quickly detached by a russian sub & pulled to a siberian gulag.
 
Do what they do in rugby. If the ball is hoofed directly out then bring the play back and take the throw in from a line where the kicker kicked the ball out. I would guarantee that gratuitous hoofs would disappear......
 
Most games are well under an hour in live action. The rest are delays for free-kicks, substitutions, corners, goal-kicks, throw-ins, arguing with the ref, goal celebrations...
 

Personally I'm always fuming when I need an extra goal in a game (betting) and one side just decides to kill the game with 10 minutes to go. It's no exaggeration to say often up to those 5 of those minutes the ball isn't in play.

So yeah, from a selfish point of view penalise these teams with a penalty against them. From a rationale perspective, nah keep it as it is.


maybe bet on less goals and you'll be cheering the hoofs out of play?
 
Just be glad you don't have to ever deal with American sports. Outrageous amounts of commercial breaks, challenges over every close call, etc. It's insane.

Believe me, football's dead time is nothing like that. A game is over in two hours. Stoppages due to balls out of play or injuries, not something that's forced.

To be honest, you have nothing to complain about.
 

It's what we do in Sunday league when we're a goal up against a team we know is better than us and our legs have gone. Boot it as far away as you can and ideally in someone's garden/under a car.

Tactics lads.
 
If the clock stopped as soon as the ball was out of play for & even as the ref blows for a free kick etc then it wouldn't make a difference.

Wonder how much time over the course of the season is lost when the ball isn't actually in play ?

We're paying for 90 actual minutes of play but I bet over a year of a season ticket we're being done out of a fair bit of play, 1 of the only things I think we should adopt from other sports is to actually play the full amount of time with official timekeepers on the clock signalling the end of the match.

TV would obviously invest in the clock to the most decimal places on earth and have a whole team of folk coming up with the fact that they still played 0.00000000000000000000000000000000008 seconds short & the fact that the ball was being held in the least goal scoring position in the history of the game and that it has done Liverpool out of winning the league as there was still enough time left for a penalty to be given.

@Andy G

This sounds familiar!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top