Deuce Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 To be honest. I'm more and more becoming in favour of that stopping the clock everytime it goes out of play rule. Yeah, I'm with this solution. 60 minutes, ball stops everytime it goes out or play is stopped for whatever reason. Cuts out diving and time wasting near the end of the match etc too. *filthy, forrin idea klaxon* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
louistoon Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 if a draw was not possible who do we actually want to win this game? Palace have lost 3 in 3 but looking at the squads burnley have to be favorites for relegation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikon Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Cuntface talking about "passing"! Fuck off! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Tim Vickery makes an interesting point that although stopping the clock may stop the actual wasting of time, it will encourage the main problem with time wasting which is stopping the flow of the game. Players don't just lie down and pretend to be injured, or lie on the ball for an age after catching it in a keeper's case, to run down the clock, they do it to cut out any momentum the opposition may have. Knowing they're not going to be punished because "time wasting" no longer exists will give carte blanche to do this even more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Tim Vickery makes an interesting point that although stopping the clock may stop the actual wasting of time, it will encourage the main problem with time wasting which is stopping the flow of the game. Players don't just lie down and pretend to be injured, or lie on the ball for an age after catching it in a keeper's case, to run down the clock, they do it to cut out any momentum the opposition may have. Knowing they're not going to be punished because "time wasting" no longer exists will give carte blanche to do this even more. Aye I made this point recently too. It's something Vickery will be all too well used to watching South American club football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Cuntface talking about "passing"! f*** off! Talking about Chung Lee he gans "i call him chungy". What a fucking utter pillock he is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Tim Vickery makes an interesting point that although stopping the clock may stop the actual wasting of time, it will encourage the main problem with time wasting which is stopping the flow of the game. Players don't just lie down and pretend to be injured, or lie on the ball for an age after catching it in a keeper's case, to run down the clock, they do it to cut out any momentum the opposition may have. Knowing they're not going to be punished because "time wasting" no longer exists will give carte blanche to do this even more. Well, you just get booked for it then if it's to do with staying down etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Didn't realise Hennessey was out his box and tried to save it with his dish. So relentlessly shit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Tim Vickery makes an interesting point that although stopping the clock may stop the actual wasting of time, it will encourage the main problem with time wasting which is stopping the flow of the game. Players don't just lie down and pretend to be injured, or lie on the ball for an age after catching it in a keeper's case, to run down the clock, they do it to cut out any momentum the opposition may have. Knowing they're not going to be punished because "time wasting" no longer exists will give carte blanche to do this even more. Aye I made this point recently too. It's something Vickery will be all too well used to watching South American club football. What would it consist of? Passing around at the back? I don't see what could be done to slow the game down that the other team could not react to, if the ball is in play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberto2005 Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 "Chungy" ffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Hellas losing 0-3 at home to Fiorentina who have sold their entire team. Not surprising after seeing them at SJP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Tim Vickery makes an interesting point that although stopping the clock may stop the actual wasting of time, it will encourage the main problem with time wasting which is stopping the flow of the game. Players don't just lie down and pretend to be injured, or lie on the ball for an age after catching it in a keeper's case, to run down the clock, they do it to cut out any momentum the opposition may have. Knowing they're not going to be punished because "time wasting" no longer exists will give carte blanche to do this even more. Aye I made this point recently too. It's something Vickery will be all too well used to watching South American club football. What would it consist of? Passing around at the back? I don't see what could be done to slow the game down that the other team could not react to, if the ball is in play. The same as it does now. Players don't feign injury, kick the ball away etc to waste time. I mean they do, but it's hardly the only reason, considering that time is (usually) added on at the end anyway. It's done to interrupt the momentum and flow of the game. This problem is still there even if you stop the clock, and in fact becomes an even greater weapon if players aren't being punished for it anymore because 'time wasting' doesn't exist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foluwashola Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 I still am convinced there is an inherent and unworkable contradiction to the entire concept when applied to a sport like football. At the moment in Serie A they are spending a huge amount of time on multiple decisions during a game. This last one was a free-kick given at the edge of the box that was reviewed by the ref under pressure from Inter players. 5 minutes was spent as the video ref reviewed a very close call. Obviously multiple angles needed to be watched as it was very marginal and difficult to tell. Eventually the decision was changed and given as a penalty instead. Perhaps - from watching it - the correct decision was made. However it was extremely close, and still could be debated. Then they added 2 minutes on at the end of the half, despite wasting at least 4 minutes on this decision. The argument is that these problems of time waste will be ironed out as the actors become more used to the system. I'm not convinced, but I will admit it's likely to improve. This is not my major issue though. My issue is that there is a continued unfairness to the choice of decisions that are being reviewed. If you only review certain decisions in a match then there is an unfairness in the decisions which don't get reviewed. You may correctly call a 'big' decision in favour of a team on review, but this counts for little if you don't review one for the other team. Or what is more likely is you correctly review a big decision in favour of one team, but then don't review numerous small decisions against the opposition. Small decisions which are not judged suitable for a review, but cumulatively are just as damaging to this team's efforts. Basically, there is an inherent problem whatever you try to do. Review too little and there is a risk of unfairness, review too much and you destroy the flow and momentum of a sport where the clock doesn't stop. I'm not sure this can ever be fixed sufficiently. Excellent post! Spot on. Of all the issues football has, this resolves none. Adds to them if anything and dampens the spectacle. As Wullie says, the Mane one is an example of an incident that people will still argue about after 50 replays. Fuck it right off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 I still am convinced there is an inherent and unworkable contradiction to the entire concept when applied to a sport like football. At the moment in Serie A they are spending a huge amount of time on multiple decisions during a game. This last one was a free-kick given at the edge of the box that was reviewed by the ref under pressure from Inter players. 5 minutes was spent as the video ref reviewed a very close call. Obviously multiple angles needed to be watched as it was very marginal and difficult to tell. Eventually the decision was changed and given as a penalty instead. Perhaps - from watching it - the correct decision was made. However it was extremely close, and still could be debated. Then they added 2 minutes on at the end of the half, despite wasting at least 4 minutes on this decision. The argument is that these problems of time waste will be ironed out as the actors become more used to the system. I'm not convinced, but I will admit it's likely to improve. This is not my major issue though. My issue is that there is a continued unfairness to the choice of decisions that are being reviewed. If you only review certain decisions in a match then there is an unfairness in the decisions which don't get reviewed. You may correctly call a 'big' decision in favour of a team on review, but this counts for little if you don't review one for the other team. Or what is more likely is you correctly review a big decision in favour of one team, but then don't review numerous small decisions against the opposition. Small decisions which are not judged suitable for a review, but cumulatively are just as damaging to this team's efforts. Basically, there is an inherent problem whatever you try to do. Review too little and there is a risk of unfairness, review too much and you destroy the flow and momentum of a sport where the clock doesn't stop. I'm not sure this can ever be fixed sufficiently. Excellent post! Spot on. Of all the issues football has, this resolves none. Adds to them if anything and dampens the spectacle. As Wullie says, the Mane one is an example of an incident that people will still argue about after 50 replays. Fuck it right off. goal line technology was as far as it needed to go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Being able to constantly break up the flow of games in small incremental amounts by time wasting every time there is a break in play, but not being punished for it, would be a huge boon for negatively minded sides. Particularly teams who play a strong defensive cage who don't want the game to flow and be stretched. It'd become almost an art form in itself. At the moment if they do it they're at least having yellows dished out every time they take the piss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henke Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Just give the ref a tazer. Anyone acts the cunt he can effectively sin bin them for ten minutes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Just give the ref a tazer. Anyone acts the c*** he can effectively sin bin them for ten minutes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 3 challenges a game and if you challenge incorrectly you lose a substitution. Challenge incorrectly when you have used all of your subs and you lose a player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xLiaaamx Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Cabaye looks about half the player he did here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Cabella scored in 1st minute of his St Etienne debut. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Cabella scored in 1st minute of his St Etienne debut. Was randomly watching highlights of when we beat Spurs 1-2 a few years ago and he got a lovely assist for Perez in that game Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 I still am convinced there is an inherent and unworkable contradiction to the entire concept when applied to a sport like football. At the moment in Serie A they are spending a huge amount of time on multiple decisions during a game. This last one was a free-kick given at the edge of the box that was reviewed by the ref under pressure from Inter players. 5 minutes was spent as the video ref reviewed a very close call. Obviously multiple angles needed to be watched as it was very marginal and difficult to tell. Eventually the decision was changed and given as a penalty instead. Perhaps - from watching it - the correct decision was made. However it was extremely close, and still could be debated. Then they added 2 minutes on at the end of the half, despite wasting at least 4 minutes on this decision. The argument is that these problems of time waste will be ironed out as the actors become more used to the system. I'm not convinced, but I will admit it's likely to improve. This is not my major issue though. My issue is that there is a continued unfairness to the choice of decisions that are being reviewed. If you only review certain decisions in a match then there is an unfairness in the decisions which don't get reviewed. You may correctly call a 'big' decision in favour of a team on review, but this counts for little if you don't review one for the other team. Or what is more likely is you correctly review a big decision in favour of one team, but then don't review numerous small decisions against the opposition. Small decisions which are not judged suitable for a review, but cumulatively are just as damaging to this team's efforts. Basically, there is an inherent problem whatever you try to do. Review too little and there is a risk of unfairness, review too much and you destroy the flow and momentum of a sport where the clock doesn't stop. I'm not sure this can ever be fixed sufficiently. Excellent post! Spot on. Of all the issues football has, this resolves none. Adds to them if anything and dampens the spectacle. As Wullie says, the Mane one is an example of an incident that people will still argue about after 50 replays. Fuck it right off. goal line technology was as far as it needed to go. We're about 5 years away from all ball out of play situations can be decided by a computer. The ref would only have to decide who it touched last. I would be in favour of this. We're also not too far away from offsides being automated. 10 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Tim Vickery makes an interesting point that although stopping the clock may stop the actual wasting of time, it will encourage the main problem with time wasting which is stopping the flow of the game. Players don't just lie down and pretend to be injured, or lie on the ball for an age after catching it in a keeper's case, to run down the clock, they do it to cut out any momentum the opposition may have. Knowing they're not going to be punished because "time wasting" no longer exists will give carte blanche to do this even more. They should do tests. If a player stays down claiming a foul, fire off a fake stadium evacuation and everybody legs it off the pitch leaving him there. If they're faking they'll be running off the pitch with the rest of them, add extra time at the end of the game. If they're real they'll be screaming and the ref can say 'There there, there's a free-kick.' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2 Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 73rd minute applause at Burnley. Lets see how long that lasts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54 Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 That move deserved a goal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts