Football should have proper added time (Stop time when ball is out of play)

[James Peril]

A lot of opinions, very few solutions - that’s what young, bored football fans are up to these days. As well as analyzing football players on YouTube with scarily simplistic stat usage. The problem isn’t the 45 minutes, they are great for the momentum of a football game. With the clock stopped, I fear momentum will severely drop - and the next step would be in-game commercials like in the US. Free-kick to Burnley? 45 second commercial break given to you by Budweiser or McDonald’s. Don’t tempt the ones holding the power...

The problem is obviously the introduction of VAR, as well as teams not being punished by the referee. I do agree the clock must be stopped when VAR-checks are involved, that’s 100% intuitive - not least, they are not the same for every game. We have seen checks lasting 4 minutes and 2 minutes added time, that makes no sense. We have seen 3-4 long checks and 3-4 minutes added in a second half, that too is ridiculous when there are subs, delays, injuries and so on and so forth.

As for shit teams wasting time, it’s down to the referee. Give them yellows and reds, that’s the simple answer. Gime them a reason to quit, make them all understand it’s dangerous to suddenly develop scurvy when you’re 1-0 up in the 70th minute and taking a free-kick. Oh you fake not managing to throw the ball? Yellow card. You kick it away the second after you’re obviously offside or caused a free-kick? Yellow card, or red if you’re already on one.

We also need to realize it’s part of football - for good and bad, not every game is won by the best team on paper, luckily. Millions of people are supporting the shit team or nation, they love the time wasting and agony it causes for the better team. No feelings, no football.

 

[Corey]

This is a nonsensical idea, and you'd just end up with other ways of time wasting.

Teams would just sit at the back playing it aimlessly between defence and keeper.

Or taking even longer for goal kicks, throws, corners etc.

Unless this magical stop watch stops for all of those as well.
It'd just end up being super annoying in different ways.

If teams want to play it aimlessly between defence and keeper, that's their prerogative. The ball is in play so the opposition have the chance to win the ball if they press effectively. By contrast, timewasting when the ball is out of play is unfair and tantamount to cheating as the opposition have no way to prevent it and the referees don't adequately compensate for it.

And yeah, the idea is that stop watch would stop whenever the ball is out of play. The same magical system they use in American sports.

 

[Sandikan]

If teams want to play it aimlessly between defence and keeper, that's their prerogative. The ball is in play so the opposition have the chance to win the ball if they press effectively. By contrast, timewasting when the ball is out of play is unfair and tantamount to cheating as the opposition have no way to prevent it and the referees don't adequately compensate for it.

And yeah, the idea is that stop watch would stop whenever the ball is out of play. The same magical system they use in American sports.

Trying to liken our sports to american ones would be a disaster straight away.
Totally different cultures and importances of sport.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Not sure about this thread's suggestion but a related thing that would be good is if the whistle only goes once the ball has gone dead, similar to in rugby union. That would add even more drama to the end of close games.

 

[tomaldinho1]

I don’t see the need to change this - what they need to do is clamp down on time wasting.

 

[rcoobc]

The problem is that, when the ball goes out of play, the game isn't dead. People jostle for position whilst a throw in is taken. People move about for a quick free kick

The solution is obvious.

Have a maximum time before the clock is stopped for each event

10 seconds for a throw in.
15 seconds for a free kick.
15 seconds for a corner.
Etc

After that stop the clock until play resumes

 

[Skills]

We need a shot clock and we need time outs

 

[Brightonian]

Nah. I like that I can sit down to watch a football match knowing how long it will take. If you shorten the halves then start adding 15-45 minutes of extra time depending on the kind of game it is, you give everyone involved in organising matches - including the players, clubs, managers, referees, fans, football authorities, police, local infrastructure - a massive headache.

They should instruct referees to be a little more willing to actually reflect a game with lots of stoppages up to more like 10 minutes if necessary, instead of the apparently regulation 3-5. That way shithouse time-wasting teams will know they might have to face a whole ten minutes extra under the cosh. But the principle that all games end up taking roughly the same amount of time should be preserved.

 

[Bebestation]

I'd keep it at 45 mins but subs to be allowed up to 5 a match.

Considering subs would stop the time/not be a time wasting method then it could lead to more tactically dense games where 5 players are used for fitness and attacking/defending decisions etc

 

[steeeb]

Potential issue is crunch games like on the last day. Or group games.

Teams can slow the first half down with lots of stoppages then decide to play out a draw since the other important game finished and there's still 25mins left!

Also, TV slots / advertising etc.

 

[Njord]

A possible solution could be to calculate extra time based on the deviation of "in action"-time from the normal. If we say that on average the ball is in play for 60 minutes of the 90, then in a given game where the ball has only been in play for 54 minutes, extra time is calculated to 6 minutes. If you go above 60 minutes, the ref blows at 90.

A separate ref is appointed to calculate extra time. This would be a minor change to the game, but it would provide a more fair solution than to leave it to the "feelings" of the ref, as it is now.

 

[Corey]

Trying to liken our sports to american ones would be a disaster straight away.
Totally different cultures and importances of sport.

Overall I’m not a fan of American sports either, but that doesn’t mean we should dismiss every specific feature of theirs.

In my opinion stop clocks are one of the few things they get right that we get wrong.

 

[Corey]

A possible solution could be to calculate extra time based on the deviation of "in action"-time from the normal. If we say that on average the ball is in play for 60 minutes of the 90, then in a given game where the ball has only been in play for 54 minutes, extra time is calculated to 6 minutes. If you go above 60 minutes, the ref blows at 90.

A separate ref is appointed to calculate extra time. This would be a minor change to the game, but it would provide a more fair solution than to leave it to the "feelings" of the ref, as it is now.

This is an interesting idea, but isn’t it just a more convoluted way of having a stop clock?

I agree about transferring the clock management away from the ref though. Their jobs are too difficult for them as it is.

 

[OrcaFat]

Yes I like it. Don’t know if anyone has a recent figure but ball-in-play average c. 1990s used to be about 58 mins (no credible source, I’m afraid, just my less-than-credible memory).

 

[Njord]

This is an interesting idea, but isn’t it just a more convoluted way of having a stop clock?

I agree about transferring the clock management away from the ref though. Their jobs are too difficult for them as it is.

Yes, and I agree that using a stop watch would probably be the best solution.

The problem is that changing from 45 min halves to 30 mins with effective playing time would be a massive change, that many throughout the sport would oppose. I can't see it happening.

Changing the way extra time is decided would be a small change, that a lot of the viewers wouldn't even notice.

 

[Corey]

Yes, and I agree that using a stop watch would probably be the best solution.

The problem is that changing from 45 min halves to 30 mins with effective playing time would be a massive change, that many throughout the sport would oppose. I can't see it happening.

Changing the way extra time is decided would be a small change, that a lot of the viewers wouldn't even notice.

Fair point. There is a lot of resistance to change within football, so your idea may be a more pragmatic solution that would actually be accepted.

 

[Corey]

Yes I like it. Don’t know if anyone has a recent figure but ball-in-play average c. 1990s used to be about 58 mins (no credible source, I’m afraid, just my less-than-credible memory).

For anyone interested, here are some recent figures from the 17-18 premier league season:

https://talksport.com/football/3159...emier-league-side-201718-season-171127263506/

It's in line with what you said - the median in play time was about 56 minutes.

Looking at the averages for each team, they ranged from 53.5 minutes to 58.5 minutes.

So that means that Chelsea's games were basically 9% longer than West Ham's in that season. I'd say that's quite a significant difference and eliminating it would surely create a fairer competition.

 

[Ayush_reddevil]

This sport is a joke. Palace spent so much time on throw ins and goalkicks and then we get 2 fecking minutes. Basically telling teams like Palace to keep doing this forever


P.s please don't tell me that the result had nothing to do with this . I know that

 

[FootballHQ]

Was a bit like that in my game.

The Jagielka red took minimum of three minutes to sort out. One for foul and standing around ready to take free kick while ref was getting info. Second minute for him to go over to the screen and look at incident and then a third showing red and Jagielka going off.

4 minutes added despite there also being 6 subs in the game.

Still though I relent from it too much if the team dosen't play well enough in the actual 90. It's a bit different if you're battering opposition with wave after wave of attack and they're clinging on for dear life.

 

[Gazza]

Long overdue. People all about wanting consistency in football, making sure each game is the same duration would be a good start.