55 minutes was the average in the Prem this season
Will they ever introduce a stop clock in football?
- Thread starter sugar_kane
- Start date
Jeez that's so bad.
The way they work is
Normal subs + goals + stoppages (regardless of number of goals and stoppages and injuries) = 3 minutes.
All of the above + someone had a serious injury for which the game stopped for more than a normal injury = 5 minutes.
Normal scenario above + something truly severe like player going unconscious which took 10-15 minutes = 8 minutes!
It's atrocious.
I can see how it would work and fail. Lower standard teams have a horrible time keeping the ball in play, can you imagine the ball going out so much that the clock hardly moves forward.
Would it only be introduced to the top leagues or across all standards of football?
Would it only be introduced to the top leagues or across all standards of football?
I think you’d have to allow 5-10 seconds from the ball going out of play before the clock is stopped. Then you could play a 90 minute match with only genuinely unfair time wasting being added on.
Refs should not be in charge of the clock. It should be independent and we should see the amount of time to be added.
Constant time wasting should result in a warning, then yellow cards for the team captain and/ or manager.
Refs should have a mic and bodycam, like in rugby, with only the captain being able to approach.
Refs should not be in charge of the clock. It should be independent and we should see the amount of time to be added.
Constant time wasting should result in a warning, then yellow cards for the team captain and/ or manager.
Refs should have a mic and bodycam, like in rugby, with only the captain being able to approach.
It would obviously end after the last play goes out, crosses the mid line or ends in a goal.
I think it's a great idea.
I don't think the amount of actual football being played should be left down to the vagaries of how many times teams waste time in between set pieces and throw ins or playacting. Nor should any of that be a weapon. There's only sport when the game is being played and that's why we're tuning in.
I don't think the amount of actual football being played should be left down to the vagaries of how many times teams waste time in between set pieces and throw ins or playacting. Nor should any of that be a weapon. There's only sport when the game is being played and that's why we're tuning in.
Normally, the clock only stops after 90 mins when the ball goes dead i.e. out of play, so this wouldn't be a concern.
As for this idea, I have been a big supporter of it and saying it should be implemented for more than 15 years to anyone that would listen. This for me is honestly the biggest improvement that could happen.
God I hope not, sounds awful.
An actual shot clock for shooting would be horrendous.
An anti time wasting clock would be amazing - the crowd would love it. Give GK's no leeway for holding the ball in hands and goal kicks and after a moth of carnage and protest they'd be towing the line and we'd be getting to watch way more football. Also VAR offside rule should simply be if you can't rule it out within 5 secs, it's a goal.
An anti time wasting clock would be amazing - the crowd would love it. Give GK's no leeway for holding the ball in hands and goal kicks and after a moth of carnage and protest they'd be towing the line and we'd be getting to watch way more football. Also VAR offside rule should simply be if you can't rule it out within 5 secs, it's a goal.
Pretty much, but then also add 1 minute if there's one goal in it (+2 if it's a particularly exciting game) , and minus 1 minute if one side are winning by 2 goals or more.
If one team is getting absolutely thrashed by 5 or more, it's 2 minutes max regardless of whats happened, but can also be 1 minute if the ref also can't be arsed.
If there is a stop clock, it's not a big issue anymore if teams take a while to take a free kick or thrown up. So teams can start using that tactically, basically create mini time-outs. Someone pointed out that Southampton(?) seem to have done something like that on occasion this season, by creating a longer break due to 'injury' treatment. In theory, that would benefit both teams, but it obviously benefits the team most that has prepared for the situation. (For Southampton(?), there would be drinks ready and there would be a tiny team talk - if I remember correctly.)
I suppose there could be other scenarios as well, but long story short - if there is a stop clock, there should still be something to make sure players take free kicks etc. quickly anyway, both to keep matches flowing and to prevent an unfair disadvantage to the team creating the mini-break.
Wait.............
added on time, when the clock is stopped every time the ball isn't in play.
Hopefully
If there is a stoppage without an injury you still need to take it in due time even if the clock is stopped. Like players in basketball can't go to take a leak or something if it's a free throw. They have to take it right then. A stopped clock and rules to ask players to take a set piece without any delay would coexist.
What Soton did was feign injuries to get timeouts. That can happen either ways regardless of timekeeping (as it's already happened whole of last season) and there's not much to counter that. In case of injury you can't be asked to hurry up.
i wish... 30 minutes and i have doubts about how to handle the last play.
5 seconds is not enough for corners and many times it takes 5 seconds only to pick up the ball. not duable
It would eradicate or neuter a lot of bs from the game if run to a 60 minute stop clock.
I don't think the sport would be willing to give up the 90 minutes due to tradition, the poetic appeal of "an injury time winner", "Fergie time", and all the nostalgia/lore around such things.
Sometimes it is better to accept the flaws, we could endlessly debate whether VAR has improved the game but the truth is that we have simply covered over flaws with a system that suffers the same flaws (human error and interpretation). An almost macro to micro switch whereby we are now seeing that rules are not robust enough for the level of examination we apply to each event, leading to the need for further change to rules in order to keep up with the technology.
I don't think a stop clock would cause such issues but we already have the tools/rules to address most of the problems it seeks to solve.
I don't think the sport would be willing to give up the 90 minutes due to tradition, the poetic appeal of "an injury time winner", "Fergie time", and all the nostalgia/lore around such things.
Sometimes it is better to accept the flaws, we could endlessly debate whether VAR has improved the game but the truth is that we have simply covered over flaws with a system that suffers the same flaws (human error and interpretation). An almost macro to micro switch whereby we are now seeing that rules are not robust enough for the level of examination we apply to each event, leading to the need for further change to rules in order to keep up with the technology.
I don't think a stop clock would cause such issues but we already have the tools/rules to address most of the problems it seeks to solve.
Dont feck with my sport.
They want a pilot for it in the Dutch 2nd division in the 22-23 season (or 23-24, I forgot and am too lazy to look it up). They will combine it with a few other changes; kick-in instead of throw in, dribbled (or self pass) free kick and unlimited subs.
Clubs are whinging the FA didn't actually consult them in the decision making process (typical Dutch FA feckwittery), so they had to issue an aoology to them.
Hope they still do it though. Football could use some innovation. Especially the kind that impacts time wasting and all the play acting that comes with it.
Clubs are whinging the FA didn't actually consult them in the decision making process (typical Dutch FA feckwittery), so they had to issue an aoology to them.
Hope they still do it though. Football could use some innovation. Especially the kind that impacts time wasting and all the play acting that comes with it.
Yeah I would absolutely love this, and for it to end the ball has to be kicked out of the pitch for a goal, goal kick, corner (not a foul, as you could just clean someone out for the game to end), so you could almost have an injury time at the end if a team desperately needs a goal and they can't lose the ball, a little like Rugby.
It's the players own fault, Atletico in February in the second half were absolutely laughable. I don't pay to watch the ball be out of play. I went to Villa last season and they equally took the absolute mick with the time taken on set pieces.
It's the players own fault, Atletico in February in the second half were absolutely laughable. I don't pay to watch the ball be out of play. I went to Villa last season and they equally took the absolute mick with the time taken on set pieces.
They really need to do something to fix the issue with teams time wasting.
My major pet peeves are when teams take forever with late substitutions and free kicks. The other one that annoys me is when a player gets 'injured" close to the touchline but needs 5 mins of medical attention rather than moving a few inches so they could get the attention off the pitch and allow play to resume.
My major pet peeves are when teams take forever with late substitutions and free kicks. The other one that annoys me is when a player gets 'injured" close to the touchline but needs 5 mins of medical attention rather than moving a few inches so they could get the attention off the pitch and allow play to resume.
Think good thing to implement would be ditching 30 seconds added on at end for every goal scored during the game.
That always feel unneccesary to me given the team who've just conceded can be having a quick chat to regroup while other team celebrates. Can also send a sub or two on in the meantime. And not much gets added on if a team is 5-0 up and has scored 4 in second half so it's not enforced either at times.
That way you could solely concentrate on adding time on for teams that take ages over throw ins, goal kicks and proper time wasting subs so you can get to 7-8 minutes added on that way.
Kind of feels to me all the time wasting gets losts in all the other things a ref typically has to remember to add on for injury time.
That always feel unneccesary to me given the team who've just conceded can be having a quick chat to regroup while other team celebrates. Can also send a sub or two on in the meantime. And not much gets added on if a team is 5-0 up and has scored 4 in second half so it's not enforced either at times.
That way you could solely concentrate on adding time on for teams that take ages over throw ins, goal kicks and proper time wasting subs so you can get to 7-8 minutes added on that way.
Kind of feels to me all the time wasting gets losts in all the other things a ref typically has to remember to add on for injury time.
Nah. I do think stoppages in stoppage time needs to be better regulated. If there’s a minimum of four minutes added on and in the four minutes there’s a goal and two substitutions yet the whistle goes at 93:47 how can that be right?
I am waiting desperately for this to happen. It is long overdue.
Before such a sweeping change better do some small changes that might just solve the issue anyways.
Mic’ing up the refs and having them do post game press conferences where they actually have to answer to the press about their decisions would be an easy one.
Mic’ing up the refs and having them do post game press conferences where they actually have to answer to the press about their decisions would be an easy one.
You already have terrible transport to and from games. Especially late kick offs in the winter. Let’s add even more time on. Yes great idea.
When some kind of incident happens, and then play continues for say 30 second longer, and then VAR goes back and awards a penalty for the original incident, is that 30 seconds put back on the clock?
Who's adding more time on?
It really needs to be changed. The current system is basically encouraging teams to time waste when they are not the favorite. If they manage to waste the ~35minutes on average that we currently see with the ball not in play, that is less time they actually have to play and try to hold on. Anything that removes that problem, and actually makes the two teams play for the whole time, whether that is shortened compared to now or not to compensate would be the next discussion
Do you think it'll work as intended? after the disaster that is VAR, that made some of the cases better but the rest worse. Almost like they cancel out each other.
This and add a third card. This may stop the tactical 'clever' fouls that stop counter attacks. Referees won't be afraid to take out cards for all the excessive fouling teams and no one can really complain after sent off for three tactical fouls.
VAR is still a major improvement on how things used to be.
I think the issues can be resolved by instructing referees (or a pitchside official) to do better timekeeping. At the moment it’s so convention driven that injury time is often inaccurate and manipulated. Easily changed though and just needs the referee team to be brave to add more time on.
Agreed. It’s simple timekeeping that isn’t hard to get right. Referees are ruled by convention that they need to feel empowered to routinely add on an extra 2-4 minutes on top of the original typical 3-5 minutes.
There are things they could do before doing something as drastic as reducing the overall advertised game-time
1) Each team can only make 3 substitutions after 75-minutes all season (idea is they should only be used for serious injury)
2) Green 'sin-bin' cards for persistent fouling i.e. 3 fouls from the same player = automatic 10-minute sin-bin
3) Players who require the game to be stopped for an injury must remain off the pitch for 5-minutes - unless a substitution is made
4) Only the referee should stop the game. The 'etiquette' of kicking the ball out and returning it should be discouraged.
5) If a GK takes more than 30-seconds to get the ball back into play from a GK, a corner is awarded
1) Each team can only make 3 substitutions after 75-minutes all season (idea is they should only be used for serious injury)
2) Green 'sin-bin' cards for persistent fouling i.e. 3 fouls from the same player = automatic 10-minute sin-bin
3) Players who require the game to be stopped for an injury must remain off the pitch for 5-minutes - unless a substitution is made
4) Only the referee should stop the game. The 'etiquette' of kicking the ball out and returning it should be discouraged.
5) If a GK takes more than 30-seconds to get the ball back into play from a GK, a corner is awarded
OP stated 60 minutes. Be much easier if Refs went to the rule of the law and actually added on time and booked players for time wasting. It only happens as the refs don’t stamp it out.
Given the stats showing the actual time of play during a football match (50-55 mins), that would in practice make the active part of football games almost twice as long. Which is clearly not workable for the dudes running around out there doing the actual playing. Even putting it at 60 would mean more playing time. You can't move to effective playing time and keep a 90-minute format.
I don't think they can.
This would affect the lower leagues and amateur football too much, and possibly not be replicable at those levels.
This would affect the lower leagues and amateur football too much, and possibly not be replicable at those levels.
Is this not also the case with VAR though? Didn't stop it happening. Also, having a stop clock isn't that technically complex surely?
The general sentiment seems to be that this would be a good move, with most opposition centering around it messing with the traditions of the game. Honestly though, if it meant the end of watching shithouse teams waste time almost from minute one it wouldn't bother me in the slightest for the game to no longer be '90 minutes'.
I couldn't believe the spectrum of 'in play' minutes in that BBC article - the highest example was 70 minutes active play in Burnley vs. City vs. 39 in Stoke vs. Blackburn. The latter is shitting on the fans who have paid money to watch a game of football.
The game since the PL began has changed so much and while some of it has improved the game eg throw in back to the keeper can't be picked up. I also think goal line technology was a big plus.
However the constant tinkering of off side rules, hand balls, words like intent added in, var, a million subs on the bench and from next season being able to change half your outfield in a game is taking the game away for me.
Stop clock to me is just another step towards an Americanisation of this great sport.
Soon we're going to be bringing on a specialised free kick taker and the opposition will be able to bring on a defence for it, once the ball gets turned over the offence then come back onto the pitch.
However the constant tinkering of off side rules, hand balls, words like intent added in, var, a million subs on the bench and from next season being able to change half your outfield in a game is taking the game away for me.
Stop clock to me is just another step towards an Americanisation of this great sport.
Soon we're going to be bringing on a specialised free kick taker and the opposition will be able to bring on a defence for it, once the ball gets turned over the offence then come back onto the pitch.
Well that part would be easy to fix: when the time runs out, a loud horn goes off signaling that the current one is the last play of the game. The match actually ends when the ball goes off the field or in goal (if there's a foul, the play is restarted)
[ edit: ninja-ed by, like, two days... =D ]