There is a story on the BBC website that there is a proposal to scrap 45 minute halves and have 2 x30 min halves and stop the clock when the ball goes out of play. Also being looked at is penalties. After a spot kick is taken if it is saved it is a dead ball. Any thoughts?
Quote from: Andy S on June 17, 2017, 11:05:37 PM
There is a story on the BBC website that there is a proposal to scrap 45 minute halves and have 2 x30 min halves and stop the clock when the ball goes out of play. Also being looked at is penalties. After a spot kick is taken if it is saved it is a dead ball. Any thoughts?
No to both. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40311889
Just reading the ops description of the proposed changes, my view is what a load of nonsense. Surely once a penalty is taken the ball is back in open play, you wouldn't start from a drop ball if a keeper saved a free-kick. Weird idea.
The other one is even worse. I understand that there is never 90 mins of football played in any game but can they guarantee that a match lasting 90mins with no stop clock will be in play less than 60minutes exactly? I find that very hard to believe.
Maybe these 'smart' people at the top of football should be working out how they stop owners like the Leyton Orient one destroy a club. Not just Orient but several others, some of which sadly no longer exist.
If not broke, don't fix it. Fix the bloody things that are broken and ruining the little clubs.
Cheers Andy for the info. I hadn't heard of this
I appreciate the link, Mr. Maestro. Otherwise I'd have sworn this was something from the Daily Mash.
Does the ball have to be round? It seems to me it should be shaped like a dice. So when players kick it and it lands. The opposition should then have the number showing in passes to get to the goal. If they fail then we should have a bunch of drunks and idiots thinking up new rules until the sand runs out of the hour glass to signify the time played. Every time there is a stoppage the hour glass could be turned back.
Let's face it, under the present system the game has never really taken off. Best make needless changes and spoil it completely.
This is out of the blue. I have never heard of this or anything like it being discussed anywhere. Would Tv accept it? Let's face it nobody bothers about the fans anymore.
These sorts of proposals often have a hidden agenda. Someone looking for an opportunity to make money, usually by advertising.
In Australia, the Aussie rules matches are stopped after every goal for ads, and the umpire can't restart until a light flashes to show the ad has finished. Remember there can be 20 or 30 goals in a afl match so that's a lot of ads plus ads at the end of each quarter. Same in cricket- ads after every over, and even scrolling ads whilst the bowler is running in
I hate it.
Football (aka soccer) has much fewer natural breaks where advertising can infiltrate. Stopping the clock would let the advertisers get more control of the game. I'd be very suspicious.
I can only shake my head in disbelief.
Why not focus on divers, that would make the game more enjoyable, all 90 minutes of it.
The only group of people for whom this would be attractive is the television moguls
Have to admit when I first saw a written piece on this I was a bit wary about someone advocating law changes that shorten halves, but the proposals which also include abandoning penalty kick follow ups, taking free kicks to yourself, in addition to stopping clocks whenever play stops, are all things which have succeeded to improve spectacle in other sports which have changed and are at least worth a try. However, I wouldn't shorten the length of the half since none of the other sports which have changed rules and are now played at faster pace with the ball in play for longer have done so, and players are paid enough to have them perform 100% of the time and not a lot less than that.
Now if we can just get the foul, penalty, offside, carding, and 'was the ball over the line?' offenses and decisions correct football's improvement could be promising.
Quote from: dannyboi-ffc on June 17, 2017, 11:33:35 PM
Maybe these 'smart' people at the top of football should be working out how they stop owners like the Leyton Orient one destroy a club. Not just Orient but several others, some of which sadly no longer exist.
I wholeheartedly concur with your sentiments about football clubs being destroyed by despicable owners, dannyboi, and its is clearly the responsibility of the football authorities to start acting for supporters and not ignoring them.
Some good ideas worth discussion, consideration and trialling. Just responding with "change is bad" comments seems a little narrow minded.
Quote from: toshes mate on June 18, 2017, 06:41:24 AM
Quote from: dannyboi-ffc on June 17, 2017, 11:33:35 PM
Maybe these 'smart' people at the top of football should be working out how they stop owners like the Leyton Orient one destroy a club. Not just Orient but several others, some of which sadly no longer exist.
I wholeheartedly concur with your sentiments about football clubs being destroyed by despicable owners, dannyboi, and its is clearly the responsibility of the football authorities to start acting for supporters and not ignoring them.
It's so frustrating isn't It!
Quote from: Wolf on June 18, 2017, 07:17:24 AM
Some good ideas worth discussion, consideration and trialling. Just responding with "change is bad" comments seems a little narrow minded.
If you have that attitude towards any changes then I do agree. Look at how great goal line technology is for example. But a 60minute match stopping the clock for everything, I'm almost certain we would lose as supporters.
Why? Firstly as much as teams time waste and the ball is out of play for goal kicks etc I find it hard to believe that not a single game in the football league last season saw more than 60 minutes of action. If I'm right then we would be losing out even if it was just by a few minutes.
Secondly how dull would it be without injury time? It adds to the drama, if you were on the attack with 5 seconds to go, the ball goes out for a potential long throw as the clock strikes 90mins, everyone turns to the board to see how many minutes are added in hope. But this rule would say sorry game over, you can't have the throw in.
Thirdly I could almost guarantee that every time the ball went out the screens in a ground would advertise something. And only show the clock/scoreboard when it came back into play. And there would be mini adverts on the TV every time there was a stoppage. Money money money imo.
So I'm open to change if it's going to benefit the game, not silly unnecessary ideas just to make a few people at the top even richer.
A load of cobblers. The same twit probably thinks that Arsenal v Manchester City is a local derby. Bog off! :doh: fp.gif
092.gif
So being open minded what changes would you make that would be acceptable? May be Quarters or even extend the game to two hours instead of 90 mins. No limit on substitutes and how thy are used? I would allow drinks breaks only at set times
I would change the substitute rule to only allow subs for injuries
Changes I would make. Offside back to the old rule of a player being offside even if he isn't interfering with a member of the public. Each manager can have two occasions when he can refer to the third referee if he has an objection to a decision. Only two. Goal line tech should be used as widely as possible. Shootouts in cup games should be like the American league used to have. Players running with the ball from a set distance and only having a set amount of time to score.
Revolutionary and yet sensible within the confines of the structure of the game.
Impressed with your determination, Andy S. Can you play up top?
I don't think quarters would serve any useful purpose except for adding to the advertising space that corporate wallahs so love, and interfere with the natural flow of a game. Beneficial rule changes are things that add to a game, and do not take stuff away from it, and football has ninety minutes because that was seen as just enough time to see some players visibly tiring towards the final fifteen minutes or so, adding a little more spice to things. Substitutions started as a hedge against injury but have also developed into a tactical game, giving us a new dimension. Changes to the offside rule was intended to stop the infuriating practice of a flag being hoisted when the offending player was nowhere near interfering with play; it has also developed into different approaches to game play although frankly I have always loved the game when wingers would get to the byline and cross so no one would/could be offside.
I would like there to be improvements in officiating which take out some of the more controversial aspects of football (any sport for that matter) as a priority and you don't get that by having more officials you get it by improving the ones you already have. Time wise and clock watching I would take the matter of timekeeping away from the referee completely, and have the clocked stopped as a matter of course whenever a stoppage occurs, but, having said that, and echoing dannyboi, time added on does provide an edge of drama to those last minutes, and football, as an entertainment, needs all the drama it can get. What I don't want to see is more media diktat over how the game develops because it isn't done in the interests of the sport, it is done for more and more money into the coffers that don't care if they destroy something whilst getting rich.
There's a reason why Football is far and away the "World" game, in fact there are many reasons so if you chip away at the fundamentals its going to loose more than it gains!
The reason other sports change their formats are generally to make it easier to attract new participants and fans and package it for TV.
There have been success's going back to limited over Cricket et al but FOOTBALL has no need of such changes!
Leave the game alone, surely we don't want it ending up like pyjama cricket.
Don't panic Mr Mainwaring. At the bottom of the document it states "The aim of this document is to generate discussion and take a 'fresh' look at how the Laws could make the game better". It does not mean they will be implemented.
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on June 18, 2017, 10:21:14 AM
FOOTBALL has no need of such changes!
Oh I don't know: surely there are a few numbskulls in FIFA, UEFA, and the FA that need to be placed in rehabilitation for a few decades before being let near a football matter again.
Quote from: toshes mate on June 18, 2017, 01:05:04 PM
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on June 18, 2017, 10:21:14 AM
FOOTBALL has no need of such changes!
Oh I don't know: surely there are a few numbskulls in FIFA, UEFA, and the FA that need to be placed in rehabilitation for a few decades before being let near a football matter again.
Only a few decades lol?
Quote from: dannyboi-ffc on June 18, 2017, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: toshes mate on June 18, 2017, 01:05:04 PM
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on June 18, 2017, 10:21:14 AM
FOOTBALL has no need of such changes!
Oh I don't know: surely there are a few numbskulls in FIFA, UEFA, and the FA that need to be placed in rehabilitation for a few decades before being let near a football matter again.
Only a few decades lol?
That was my nice side.....
Quote from: toshes mate on June 18, 2017, 02:13:27 PM
Quote from: dannyboi-ffc on June 18, 2017, 01:17:15 PM
Quote from: toshes mate on June 18, 2017, 01:05:04 PM
Quote from: bill taylors apprentice on June 18, 2017, 10:21:14 AM
FOOTBALL has no need of such changes!
Oh I don't know: surely there are a few numbskulls in FIFA, UEFA, and the FA that need to be placed in rehabilitation for a few decades before being let near a football matter again.
Only a few decades lol?
That was my nice side.....
Typical nice Fulham supporter lol
These people are probably the same ones who put traffic in lights on roundabouts and leave the working all night.
I reckon we should stop every 15 mins for a break to let people with small bladders go to the toilet.
While half of the crowd are away relieving themselves the players could tuck into cucumber sarnies and Pimms and ice,while discussing which part of their bodies they are going to hideously tattoo next..
Coyw..
God please don't change things. They are already looking at using a video referee. That's enough change for me.
Do not let the Lunatics take over the Asylum.
Well, I suppose someone has got to be in charge of the rules of the game. Having been appointed, they are going to meet up from time to time...and find something to talk about. The anti-timewasting suggestion seems well meaning enough, but frankly a competent referee applying the rules seems a better solution.
But I'm scratching my head over the penalty rebound idea. I think the basic direction of it is questionable.. more goals from penalties, not fewer seems a better target. It's almost as if the inconvenient rebound goal spoils the opportunity of a saved-penalty talking point. A way to stop goalkeepers moving forwards before the kick would be better...if only there were sensors on the goal line that could detect things like that.
Nope,
Both stupid ideas. The game is fine on both those fronts, and stoppage time can be excruciating but often the most exciting part of a match. I understand that it will still exist to a degree in the closing minutes of the game, but I doubt it would have the same urgency/excitement. "Wonder how much added time there will be?". Tom Cairney vs. Leeds comes to mind.
All change appears stupid until that one moment you decide to change and discover it's so much different to what you thought it would be and all the better for it. Yes, change is a risky business, but sometimes you just have to take the risk.
A clear and definite "NO" to both proposals, we really don't want unnecessary changes to the rules of the game.
However I would like to see refs. being more strict with time wasters and adding on time for every little bit of obvious time wasting and delays as they are entitled to under existing rules.
This makes no sense to me. As others have said this is a money making scheme and that's all there is to it. Rubbish.
This would end up as the worst thing ever for the sport. The stoppages will end up taking longer and longer and it will end up like baseball, where the players are all standing around waiting for the countdown timer to say the tv commercial is finished and they can start to play again. As is stands the 90 minute game takes up a 2 hour time slot, which is perfect.
A 48 minute Basketball game takes up a 2 hour time slot with all its stoppages and time outs and a 60 minute hockey game goes for 3 hours, it's ridiculous. Cutting 30 minutes off the playing time to create extra advertising slots will kill interest in the game going forward. I can't see it happening though unless some how an American ends up taking over FIFA
If they have to change anything, I would like to see a video reff added to the game solely for calls where a player goes down and play is stopped anyway. If it turns out there was no contact and it was a dive, for instant action to be taken i.e sent off for unsportsman like behavior. That should stamp out diving pretty quick.
Nothing else needs to be changed.
As has already been pointed out, there is money to made behind it somewhere. There are always hidden agendas on these issues creeping around in the background.
Ever since Adam met Eve, and said stand back I don't know how big this thing gets, there has always been corruption in football by the individuals who have the power to influence and will squeeze out the last penny they can make when it comes to profit.
Deals made behind closed doors and in corridors.
If you want proof, then visit Rogues Gallery, whereupon you will observe portraits and photographs of these Herbert's some hanging on the walls, some hanging with a noose tightened around their corrupt necks.
But they have always been there, like a virus waiting to breakout.
The one thing I am unhappy about is the authorities suggesting, canvassing opinion about or even thinking that sixty minutes without stoppages is anything like ninety minutes with. That bothers me as even being something to trifle with. Most sports go out of their way these days to avoid unnecessary stoppage time and officials are strict about the observance of continuity in the game. That is why I believe we need better referees period, and it isn't necessary to have more than three good officials of the field - you could have ten officials in the game but if they are rubbish then the result is the same old rubbish. I just wish the laws were properly enforced in every game as a first stage in cleaning football up. Then we can have a look at changing other laws that may help to improve the spectacle for supporters. I personally would like to see a trial of active penalties in football where one player and a goalkeeper fight out a time limited duel with nobody else involved. If it works then it can be implemented and if it doesn't then it can be forgotten about.
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on June 20, 2017, 09:39:14 AM
As has already been pointed out, there is money to made behind it somewhere. There are always hidden agendas on these issues creeping around in the background.
Ever since Adam meet Eve, and said stand back I don't know how big this thing gets, there has always been corruption in football by the individuals who have the power to influence and will squeeze out the last penny they can make when it comes to profit.
Deals made behind closed doors and in corridors.
If you want proof, then visit Rogues Gallery, whereupon you will observe portraits and photographs of these Herbert's some hanging on the walls, some hanging with a noose tightened around their corrupt necks.
But they have always been there, like a virus waiting to breakout.
I like a good conspiracy theory and here it is (not mine what I heard from a man who knows a man etc)
They want to encourage planned stoppages to make advertising easier during the game, especially betting. So players will be encouraged to fall over at regul;ar intervals, that will suit sheff wed and reading's goalkeepers down to the ground (no pun intended).
Quote from: nose on June 20, 2017, 11:37:23 AM
Quote from: Woolly Mammoth on June 20, 2017, 09:39:14 AM
As has already been pointed out, there is money to made behind it somewhere. There are always hidden agendas on these issues creeping around in the background.
Ever since Adam meet Eve, and said stand back I don't know how big this thing gets, there has always been corruption in football by the individuals who have the power to influence and will squeeze out the last penny they can make when it comes to profit.
Deals made behind closed doors and in corridors.
If you want proof, then visit Rogues Gallery, whereupon you will observe portraits and photographs of these Herbert's some hanging on the walls, some hanging with a noose tightened around their corrupt necks.
But they have always been there, like a virus waiting to breakout.
I like a good conspiracy theory and here it is (not mine what I heard from a man who knows a man etc)
They want to encourage planned stoppages to make advertising easier during the game, especially betting. So players will be encouraged to fall over at regul;ar intervals, that will suit sheff wed and reading's goalkeepers down to the ground (no pun intended).
An interesting theory, and no doubt players could be offered various commision rates to mirror their contribution in making this work for their masters, which will also run in conjunction with falling over at various intervals as we already have the misfortune of being indulged every week in certain Stadia.
And so it wouldn't be long before football is as tainted as cricket was with spread betting about numbers of times a game is stopped up to a certain point of time. The bookies are certainly people who cannot be trusted at any level.
As a fan of watching tennis I am sorry that they are putting forward ideas to change that game. I guess in future as the attention span of the yoof seem to be unable to concentrate on anything for more than a few seconds. It makes sense. I just hope I don't have to endure it. I know many people like limited over cricket. I don't and while new ideas are fine. Changing the game fundamentally would be a mistake.
I guess the sport will chase the money, then appear exclusively again on Sky and like boxing and cricket and as racing has learned. Almost disappear from popularity.
