Stop the clock

Should we move to a 60 minute “stop clock” system?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 32.6%
  • No

    Votes: 58 67.4%

  • Total voters
    86

Otis

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2011
72,594
33,869
813
A lot of that isn't about wasting time though per sé, it's more about disrupting momentum - that won't be changed by stopping the clock, it just means games will go on for considerably longer.

I am not against the notion of trialling it, in fact I believe it has been done at very low levels (although the lower the level, the lower the stakes & less of an issue I'd wager) but let's say miraculously the FA decided "Yep, it works, let's implement it" you would need every other nation that plays the game to agree & adopt it too. Will never happen.

Never get the complaints about the ball in the corner tactic either, that is proper game management, ball is in play, time is ticking on - perfectly legitimate. What next, ban teams from keeping possession when leading?

The simple fact is, the issues people are raising all have solutions already in the Laws of the Game, they just aren't implemented.
Not sure they all are, but some are for sure. Refs clearly are not allocating the correct amount of minutes in games. No idea why. It nearly always causes puzzlement.

I wonder what refs and office think on this matter. Would be interesting to gauge
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2018
13,616
9,382
263
The simple fact is, the issues people are raising all have solutions already in the Laws of the Game, they just aren't implemented.
I disagree. The laws are wholly inadequate to deal with this problem and situations are far too open to interpretation for there to be any consistency.
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2011
7,226
8,176
313
I disagree. The laws are wholly inadequate to deal with this problem and situations are far too open to interpretation for there to be any consistency.
What isn't covered under the current laws?

Agree on the open to interpretation bit, as I said before the new guidelines for EFL officials can only be seen as a positive step but we'll have to see how it plays out.

There was definitely an increased threshold for fouls vs Sunderland - both Gyökeres & Stewart got some pretty tough treatment without winning free-kicks, but the supposed clamp downs on holding at set-pieces & time wasting clearly didn't happen.


 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2013
25,000
31,372
313
Brizzle
I voted yes but I think a compromise would be keeping it as it is but adding a timekeeping official and putting in the correct added time.

A few weeks of 15 minutes added each half would probably sort them out.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2011
72,594
33,869
813
This is the 21st century. We have the technology and digital watches. Wouldn't be at all hard to have the ref's watch linked to the scoreboard.

I just think there is far too much for the referees to already contend with what with players surrounding them, dissent, being right up in their faces and chipping in their ears all game. This would clearly help refs do their jobs better in my opinion.

As I say, I think we should trial it. Meanwhile, officials have to clamp down on all the timewasting that's killing the game.
 

Irish Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2014
3,691
5,180
313
North Warwickshire
What isn't covered under the current laws?

Agree on the open to interpretation bit, as I said before the new guidelines for EFL officials can only be seen as a positive step but we'll have to see how it plays out.

There was definitely an increased threshold for fouls vs Sunderland - both Gyökeres & Stewart got some pretty tough treatment without winning free-kicks, but the supposed clamp downs on holding at set-pieces & time wasting clearly didn't happen.


The fact is that even the more simple and easy to enforce rules are often ignored. Why are keepers not held to the six second rule for example. You can bank on the keeper holding the ball for as long as they can get away with if their team is in the lead.The falling on the floor each time they catch the ball is just ridiculous.
With regards to taking the ball into the corners, no it’s not against the laws of the game but it is certainly against the spirit. If football is meant to be an entertainment for paying spectators then why allow tactics like these to flourish? Do you enjoy watching that?
We aren’t very good at it but even if we were I would still hate it. Why not back yourself to score another goal or at least back yourself to keep the other team out by playing in the way you have for the previous 85 to 90 minutes.
All of the ‘game management’ tactics, time wasting, feigning fouls or injuries, rotational fouling, harassment of the ref and the ball in the corner routine are anti-football but are on the increase.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2011
72,594
33,869
813
The fact is that even the more simple and easy to enforce rules are often ignored. Why are keepers not held to the six second rule for example. You can bank on the keeper holding the ball for as long as they can get away with if their team is in the lead.The falling on the floor each time they catch the ball is just ridiculous.
With regards to taking the ball into the corners, no it’s not against the laws of the game but it is certainly against the spirit. If football is meant to be an entertainment for paying spectators then why allow tactics like these to flourish? Do you enjoy watching that?
We aren’t very good at it but even if we were I would still hate it. Why not back yourself to score another goal or at least back yourself to keep the other team out by playing in the way you have for the previous 85 to 90 minutes.
All of the ‘game management’ tactics, time wasting, feigning fouls or injuries, rotational fouling, harassment of the ref and the ball in the corner routine are anti-football but are on the increase.
I do hate the taking the ball to the corners and yes, even when we do it.

Not.sure how you can eradicate that though.

It's great you can win a game by doing that in some ways, but it's awful to watch.
 

Legia Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2017
1,766
1,660
163
The ball in the corner thing is still there for the ref to deal with in the existing rules. Most of the time the player protecting the ball has no intention of playing it. Likewise there is normally an additional team mate nearby solely acting as a blocker. It is to all intents deliberate obstruction and therefore a foul, but for some reason refs are averse to making such a decision.
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2011
7,226
8,176
313
The ball in the corner thing is still there for the ref to deal with in the existing rules. Most of the time the player protecting the ball has no intention of playing it. Likewise there is normally an additional team mate nearby solely acting as a blocker. It is to all intents deliberate obstruction and therefore a foul, but for some reason refs are averse to making such a decision.
Obstruction as a law doesn't exist anymore. This was clamped down on a few years back now. You used to see players taking the ball to the corner & then not even being in possession or playable distance of it but blocking their opponents - this is now correctly penalised. Players as always get wiser/smarter though and have got better at protecting it properly within the laws.
 

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
May 13, 2016
5,771
5,274
263
Ball in the corner is fine for me - it’s within the rules of the game and it’s high risk…if they lose it then they are kind of fucked a lot of the time.

For me it’s about the “against the rules but hard to punish” stuff…the fake head injuries, the time taken to take a throw in, the taking ages to take a goal kick, the fake cramp, the ridiculous time taken to make a sub.

That stuff would either stop or the unfair advantage would be massively reduced. Yes you can argue that some of this is done to disrupt momentum and that will not change with a stop clock method. What will change is the ONLY potential advantage they will get is disrupting play. Time wise though it will all be added back on and you could argue that they are piling more pressure on themselves.

One thing that would concern me though is the potential to turn it into an American football style game where people plan for the ball being out after each “play”. Would hate that
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky_Blue_Dreamer

COVKIDSNEVERQUIT

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2016
3,168
1,769
213
The Cayman Islands.
The ball in the corner thing is still there for the ref to deal with in the existing rules. Most of the time the player protecting the ball has no intention of playing it. Likewise there is normally an additional team mate nearby solely acting as a blocker. It is to all intents deliberate obstruction and therefore a foul, but for some reason refs are averse to making such a decision.


"Shielding the ball is obstruction " well I never.
 

Legia Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2017
1,766
1,660
163
"Shielding the ball is obstruction " well I never.
No, blocking someone when you have no intention of playing the ball is.

To be honest its not so much the player 'in possession' I'm that bothered about, but more the secondary player who acts as a blocking screen to prevent players easily getting to the man 'in possession'. That to me is a foul.