Stoppage time

[wandyr79]

I think the comparisons with rugby and the playing time, flow of the game are correct. I don't think that there could necessarily be a perfect match between the 2 sports and how they time the game.

The one thing that Rugby does so well and should be gradually brought into the game is transparency. As people have mentioned, with the timing, everybody knows what the situation is. If the ref or 4th official are stopping their watch, to gauge the added time needed, we need to see that as well. Either stop it fully or have a stadium clock that shows actual time vs the time after the stoppages. I.e. 85 minutes on the clock but with the stoppages the real time is 80 minutes.

 

[Ray Purchase]

Dodgy, since the Prem and Skysports made refs wear these 'official' watches.

 

[James Patrick]

….should do like they do in Rugby, stop the clock when a trainer comes on & when a substitution is made. Take the responsibility away from the ref & a hooter blows at 90mins.

Clear to everybody then.

I think the amount of time to be added should at any point during the game be known to players and fans alike.
Given all the technology now available it should be easy to link the ref's watch to the scoreboards/big screens. To get to the end of the 45 minutes and only then find out "how long left" seems a bit dark ages and also lends itself to conspiracy theories.

 

[windymiller]

sorry i missed the bit regarding subs and injuries, that does make more sense

i honestly think a lot of the rules in sport need a real overhaul

cynical fouls on the half way line but essentially preventing a proper chance at goal and not actually trying to pay the ball only getting a yellow and a free kick miles from goal

essentially a worse foul than pushing a player in the box on a corner that the ball was going nowhere near, but you get a penalty for it . like the one on guehi the other day


time wasting only get a yellow card if that, send them off or reverse the ball to the other team and see how long that lasts

Time wasting could be solved really quickly, in my opinion, simply don't stop the play if a player goes down with anything other than a head injury. Refs should let play continue. In rugby they literally treat players on the pitch while play continues.

If I was a manager I would double down and state publicly, in my first press conference after being appointed, that my players have been instructed to never put the ball out of play if an opposition player goes down. I would make it clear that no amount of remonstrating from opposition players, booing from the crowd or opprobrium from opposing managers or pundits after the game would make a blind bit of difference. I would also say that I don't expect the opposition to put the ball out for us either and that my players have been instructed to get up asap. So many good counter attacking opportunities are quashed by snidey players pretending to be hurt. Ignore them.

 

[perth_blue]

Time wasting could be solved really quickly, in my opinion, simply don't stop the play if a player goes down with anything other than a head injury. Refs should let play continue. In rugby they literally treat players on the pitch while play continues.

If I was a manager I would double down and state publicly, in my first press conference after being appointed, that my players have been instructed to never put the ball out of play if an opposition player goes down. I would make it clear that no amount of remonstrating from opposition players, booing from the crowd or opprobrium from opposing managers or pundits after the game would make a blind bit of difference. I would also say that I don't expect the opposition to put the ball out for us either and that my players have been instructed to get up asap. So many good counter attacking opportunities are quashed by snidey players pretending to be hurt. Ignore them.

Next in line to be exploited. Head injuries should be mandatory time off the pitch, and the replay examined by an independent doctor to ensure the player is medically safe to continue.

 

[windymiller]

Next in line to be exploited. Head injuries should be mandatory time off the pitch, and the replay examined by an independent doctor to ensure the player is medically safe to continue.

Agreed. It's already a problem, I've seen loads of instances where someone gets nudged in the chest or arm but goes down clutching their head to try and get play stopped. Your idea of everyone claiming a head injury going through a mandatory 3 minute concussion test on the sidelines would help stop that nonsense.

 

[perth_blue]

Agreed. It's already a problem, I've seen loads of instances where someone gets nudged in the chest or arm but goes down clutching their head to try and get play stopped. Your idea of everyone claiming a head injury going through a mandatory 3 minute concussion test on the sidelines would help stop that nonsense.

We can only hope!

 

[windymiller]

We can only hope!

I don't think there's much appetite for change with the PL or PGMOL, unfortunately. Play acting and time wasting will still be a major problem for the foreseeable future, sadly.

 

[carolinablue232]

….should do like they do in Rugby, stop the clock when a trainer comes on & when a substitution is made. Take the responsibility away from the ref & a hooter blows at 90mins.

Clear to everybody then.

College game in the US does exactly this. Works like a peach. And anyone who says the game would take so long then is dead wrong. it actually speeds things up because there's no incentive to delay anything, so players just get on with the game.

 

[Lanolin]

Time wasting could be solved really quickly, in my opinion, simply don't stop the play if a player goes down with anything other than a head injury. Refs should let play continue. In rugby they literally treat players on the pitch while play continues.

If I was a manager I would double down and state publicly, in my first press conference after being appointed, that my players have been instructed to never put the ball out of play if an opposition player goes down. I would make it clear that no amount of remonstrating from opposition players, booing from the crowd or opprobrium from opposing managers or pundits after the game would make a blind bit of difference. I would also say that I don't expect the opposition to put the ball out for us either and that my players have been instructed to get up asap. So many good counter attacking opportunities are quashed by snidey players pretending to be hurt. Ignore them.

The difficulty with that is the difference in how phases of play work in the two sports. Generally speaking in rugby the player being treated is behind the play to begin with, and so not interfering with how the game pans out. Because of how the game works it's perfectly plausible that play won't get back to anywhere near where the injured player is for a number of minutes, and if it does they stop the game. In football the ball could have already changed hands 3 times before the physio even reaches the player, and literally any kick of the ball could theoretically go to where the player getting treatment is.

 

[windymiller]

The difficulty with that is the difference in how phases of play work in the two sports. Generally speaking in rugby the player being treated is behind the play to begin with, and so not interfering with how the game pans out. Because of how the game works it's perfectly plausible that play won't get back to anywhere near where the injured player is for a number of minutes. In football the ball could have already changed hands 3 times before the physio even reaches the player, and literally any kick of the ball could theoretically go to where the player getting treatment is.

I wasn't suggesting that we play around someone receiving treatment, I was just drawing parallels between how on field injuries, real or imaginary, are dealt with in different sports. I agree that specific example wouldn't work in football.

However, I stand by my suggestion that play should continue until the next break in play if a player goes down with anything other than a head injury. If someone has a leg injury, for example, it is highly unlikely to be life threatening and require instant medical care and so waiting 30s - 2 mins is neither here nor there and if the player isn't actually injured, which is the case most of the time, then there will be no incentive for them to lay about on the deck. Indeed it is in their team's interest for them to get up asap.

It's irrelevant anyway as there's no world in which football will enact any similar directive.

 

[Lanolin]

I wasn't suggesting that we play around someone receiving treatment, I was just drawing parallels between how on field injuries, real or imaginary, are dealt with in different sports. I agree that specific example wouldn't work in football.

However, I stand by my suggestion that play should continue until the next break in play if a player goes down with anything other than a head injury. If someone has a leg injury, for example, it is highly unlikely to be life threatening and require instant medical care and so waiting 30s - 2 mins is neither here nor there and if the player isn't actually injured, which is the case most of the time, then there will be no incentive for them to lay about on the deck. Indeed it is in their team's interest for them to get up asap.

It's irrelevant anyway as there's no world in which football will enact any similar directive.

Play isn't supposed to be stopped for things that aren't head injuries anyway, which is why I was evidently confused. What you're suggesting is already the way it happens and has done for ages, I assumed you were saying that we could take it further by not even stopping at the break in play and letting them be treated on the pitch while the game continues.

 

[windymiller]

Play isn't supposed to be stopped for things that aren't head injuries anyway, which is why I was evidently confused. What you're suggesting is already the way it happens and has done for ages, I assumed you were saying that we could take it further by not even stopping at the break in play and letting them be treated on the pitch while the game continues.

It isn't supposed to be stopped but it is, regularly. You also routinely see referees gesturing to the opposition team, once in control of the football, to put the ball out of play.

 

[judge]

….obviously it doesn’t stop every time the ball goes out of play, just when a trainer comes on, a substitute is made and VAR is considering a decision.

Not complicated.

but that's part of the problem, players going down 'injured' and wasting as much time as possible (but not needing the trainer to come on). There should be a stadium clock and, when a player is down/the game has stopped for more that 20 seconds, that clock gets rewound - a 4th (or 5th) official could be in charge of this. The polaxed player can then go off the field for treatment. If he miraculously recovers just as he's about to go off the pitch, it should be an automatic booking. I know this might catch a moniority of innocent players but the cheats have only brought it upon themselves!

 

[blueboy72]

Brothers and Sisters and I say this with respect, there is now way the premier league glitterati will allow changes.
It suits their cash cows the way it is now.
8 minutes yesterday from somewhere, but only 4 in the Derby.
It’s corrupt beyond belief

It was 3 shown on the board, Liverpool got 4 min yesterday at half time. I know macalister had an injury but it wasn’t 4 minutes. Liverpool have had about 40mins in over time in the games they have been drawing or loosing, the game they were winning 3 mins