Is it time to introduce a stop clock?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Stopclock in football?

  • Yay

    Votes: 129 75.4%

  • Nay

    Votes: 42 24.6%
  • Total voters
    171
FatPaul

FatPaul

Active Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
1,181
Reaction score
2,190
Given the amount of time wasting that goes on, surely its time we think about stopping the clock when the ball is out of play.

The referees are clearly not up to task, as they never can seem to find the "stop" button.

I'm sure I once read that the ball is only in play for an avarage of 60 minutes, and by stopping the clock it could end the scraps that take place whenever the opposition refuses to give up the ball.
 

There just needs to be a more robust approach to dealing with time wasters.

First offence gets a yellow card, then in the event of any second offence, the culprit is sent off then made to lie down on a bed and have their fucking ankles smashed against a wooden block with a hammer, like James Caan's character from the film, Misery.
 
FatPaul said:
Given the amount of time wasting that goes on, surely its time we think about stopping the clock when the ball is out of play.

The referees are clearly not up to task, as they never can seem to find the "stop" button.

I'm sure I once read that the ball is only in play for an avarage of 60 minutes, and by stopping the clock it could end the scraps that take place whenever the opposition refuses to give up the ball.
Click to expand...
The time keeping just needs taking off the ref.
If you introduce a stopwatch you'll just have advertising and music during the breaks as per NFL and ice hockey
 
I don't think I've ever seen a game as bad for timewasting as the Birmingham one. They were just sitting down every couple of minutes and inviting the trainer on, then sprinting back on the pitch a second later.

Either introduce a stop clock or make all injured players wait 3, 4, 5 minutes until they can re-enter the field.
 
Woolford of Wall Street said:
There just needs to be a more robust approach to dealing with time wasters.

First offence gets a yellow card, then in the event of any second offence, the culprit is sent off then made to lie down on a bed and have their fucking ankles smashed against a wooden block with a hammer, like James Caan's character from the film, Misery.
Click to expand...
Even that wouldn't work because you don't get consistent application of the rules by refs.
Timekeeping is one thing you can take off refs + make consistent.
 
bakeblade said:
The time keeping just needs taking off the ref.
If you introduce a stopwatch you'll just have advertising and music during the breaks as per NFL and ice hockey
Click to expand...
How so, it'd be exactly the same.
 
It really is simple. Every game has an officials observer he could operate a chess clock. Ball out of play/game stopped clocked stopped. Play resumed clock started. 90 minutes of football that people have paid for and an end of timewasting with players knowing every second would be added back. In fact let the bloke who s incredibly vital job it is to hold up the subs/ added time board do it.
 
I've been watching football for 40(ish) years and, honestly, l thought there was a stop clock. It seems like such an obvious thing to have, especially back in the single ball era of the sport. It's so logical to have one that as a kid it just seemed clear that without one, people would just boot the ball out to kill time etc. so I've grown up assuming that there is one, but it's used at the ref's discretion.

Not sure about the 60 min game idea, but if the stats back it up, it's 100% something that needs looking at.
 
A stop clock could work, however, if you have to catch a train or bus you have to risk it or leave early.
I think the referee is just at fault for allowing time-wasting/black tactics. they should give the goalkeepers 10 seconds to kick the ball. stop the pulling and shoving at corners/freekicks.10 seconds to take a throw-in. make sure the players are ten yards away from free kick/corners.ball is in the quadrant at corners. show a yellow card at the first player cheating. that should make other players think twice about cheating. allow 30 seconds for a substitution to be made.var could be brought in. the var should be at the ground, not Stockley park. the big screen should show the crowd commentary like in cricket. to show the fans. that is my opinion. what do you think fellow Blades? What is your opinion?.
 
I once reffed a U 14 game where there was a steep hill at one side of the pitch .
The winning team were constantly clearing the ball down the hill so I added time on at the end.
After 90 minutes the time added on was 18 minutes …
They weren’t happy though still won .
 
It can be a difficult thing to get your head around, so let's think about it differently:

At the moment, the clock stops when the ref blows the whistle and it restarts when the whistle is blown again.

In reality, the clock doesn't actually stop but a second clock runs during those stoppages which is then totted up at the end of each half to determine "stoppage time".

The issue with this system is that there are many situations during a game where the ball is not in play but the whistle isn't blown. Goal kicks, corners, throw-ins. These situations are a genuine cause of timewasting because this time lost isn't added on, and according to the LotG, shouldn't be. A "stopclock" would solve this problem because it wouldn't run unless the ball was in play.

The biggest cause of timewasting debates is a player going down and/or receiving treatment. This can only happen if the physio is signalled on by the ref, who must blow the whistle to allow that to happen. Time lost here should absolutely be added on and the ref is responsible for it. A "stopclock" would solve this problem and it should guarantee that no time is lost. There would still be a debate about breaking up the game / momentum but no solution is perfect.

That gives us two problem areas which would be solved by a stopclock.

This is a breakdown of the top 4 English divisions. In the Championship we typically watch only 52 minutes of play and in League Two that figure is just under 50 minutes.

IMG-20220407-WA0009.jpg

There would be a bit of a transition period, but under the current conditions a 3pm Saturday game in the Championship would finish at 5.06pm in order to get 60 minutes of play. However the game would soon adapt, as there would be no longer be such an incentive to waste time. I'd expect games to quickly start finishing roughly when they do now, around 4.50pm.

I think some people are seeing "60 minutes" and thinking games might finish at 4.15pm, but this misses the point. Some of the stoppages will still happen, the natural ones like fetching the ball back from the stands, but that time will no longer be counted towards playing time. So you'll be watching a game that takes around 90 minutes to complete from kickoff, but you'll be guaranteed 60 minutes of actual play.
 

I said yay but if referees booked players for time wasting, and sent them off for doing it again, it wouldn't be necessary. There might be 5 red cards per game but it'd soon stop. Hecky came across very well when discussing it I thought. The referee tapping his watch is just a blatant lie.
 
In theory a good idea, a 60-minute ball in play rule could work. However, there is another tactic behind timewasting and that is disruption, such as making subs on 89-minutes, the tactic is to disrupt the oppositions impetus and flow and no manner of time management will be able to alter that.
 
reedy63 said:
A stop clock could work, however, if you have to catch a train or bus you have to risk it or leave early.
I think the referee is just at fault for allowing time-wasting/black tactics. they should give the goalkeepers 10 seconds to kick the ball. stop the pulling and shoving at corners/freekicks.10 seconds to take a throw-in. make sure the players are ten yards away from free kick/corners.ball is in the quadrant at corners. show a yellow card at the first player cheating. that should make other players think twice about cheating. allow 30 seconds for a substitution to be made.var could be brought in. the var should be at the ground, not Stockley park. the big screen should show the crowd commentary like in cricket. to show the fans. that is my opinion. what do you think fellow Blades? What is your opinion?.
Click to expand...
GK are supposed to get rid of the ball with just six seconds holding time. This was brought in a few years ago, but Refs dont punish the keepers so it gets worse. same with simulation, if the refs punished with a card then it would soon stop. However refs appear to be immune from fault in the game, its always anothers fault.
 
It needs to be trailed. Why not in the piss pot cup? I think part of the problem is some of our commercial sponsors might take advantage and ask for ad breaks and special time outs for such nonesense. Furthermore, watching US sports - NFL, NHL, NBA, these games do get dragged out with all the stoppages.
 
It’ has good intentions but will have terrible consequences. The game will become more stop start because people will be arsing about when the clock isn’t running. It will make it a worse spectacle. Look at some of the US sports to see what I mean. You’ll get commercials in that gaps. No thanks. Enforce existing laws better.
 
My simple solution is make the 4th official responsible for timings he has fuck all else to do really

Also with time wasting first offence even if its 1st minute of game is give a warning to that teams captain and then every time after that book the offending player with an automatic 1 game ban for receiving a caution for time wasting
 
I'd just introduce a "play clock" after a goal is scored.
Once the goal is given it's set to 20 seconds and a ball boy runs on and puts the ball on the Centre Spot. If you want to spend 2 minutes celebrating, fine, but after the allotted 20 secs the other team can kick off and attack.
Has the added advantage of if the scoring team is behind they don't feel the need to fight with the Goalkeeper in the back of the net in order to get the ball back leading to a pointless brawl.

I agree entirely it shouldn't be needed if the refs made even a basic show of stamping down. I just think the game is too fast for the officials now and they see time wasting as a much needed breather for themselves. Perhaps subbing the ref at half time might keep them fresher and more motivated to crack down.
Something DOES have to be done.
 
Said it a few times, rugby officiating is far superior to football.

Stopping the clock is great. Game finishes on 80 minutes when the ball goes dead.
Very easy to follow.

Refs are mic'd up and you can hear, clearly, how they have reached their decision.
Fans can listen to this inside the ground via referee headsets (£5 a pop) and on TV.
Video referees are used properly.

Back-chatting is a yellow card.
Conversations with referees go through your Captain, unless you're spoken to or have been given permission by the referee.
 
CaptainMorgans said:
Said it a few times, rugby officiating is far superior to football.

Stopping the clock is great. Game finishes on 80 minutes when the ball goes dead.
Very easy to follow.

Refs are mic'd up and you can hear, clearly, how they have reached their decision.
Fans can listen to this inside the ground via referee headsets (£5 a pop) and on TV.
Video referees are used properly.

Back-chatting is a yellow card.
Conversations with referees go through your Captain, unless you're spoken to or have been given permission by the referee.
Click to expand...
But the game is unwatchable due to the amount of standing around they are doing due to the constant stoppages.

And Union fans are constantly whinging about tinkering with the rules and different refs in different countries interpreting things different ways.

They can’t even decide what’s a try. Even with video.

I think their rules on dissent are great. The rest of it is a shambles.

They are the last sport football should be copying.
 
The referees should be stronger on punishing time wasting and making sure that they add the appropriate amount of time on. It isn’t made easier for them by the actions of others though. For example the terrible sky commentator who made a point of suggesting that there was an excessive amount of time yesterday in the Arsenal v Liverpool game when Michael Oliver got it spot on because there was a lengthy stoppage during added on time. Also by the changes to allow 5 subs, yes it’s only 3 stoppages, but multi substitutions are now often serial and drawn out. I also don’t like the 5 subs rule as it becomes easier for a team to have players ‘walking a fine line‘ on yellow cards replaced.
 
It's a bit too NHL for me. We don't need drastic changes, just need to apply the rules. Blatant timewasting is a yellow card. Then a second yellow as applicable.

New rule proposal: If teams persist timewasting in-game then the entire management/coaching team should get a yellow/red card and then miss the next match (i.e. nobody on sidelines at all for their next match).
 
Ralph Blade said:
For example the terrible sky commentator who made a point of suggesting that there was an excessive amount of time yesterday in the Arsenal v Liverpool game when Michael Oliver got it spot on because there was a lengthy stoppage during added on time
Click to expand...

Well that is partly because all media have this issue of not understanding that "a minimum" amount of time means that there is at least that amount of time, but yes, you're right.

Clearly can't stop the clock every time the ball is out of play, that is ridiculous, but timekeeping should be outside of the referee's control (as someone's stated earlier, the fourth official would be ideal for this). Would make it extremely clear when time is being added, nowhere near enough is added on right now
 
Ainsley Harriott said:
I said yay but if referees booked players for time wasting, and sent them off for doing it again, it wouldn't be necessary. There might be 5 red cards per game but it'd soon stop. Hecky came across very well when discussing it I thought. The referee tapping his watch is just a blatant lie.
Click to expand...
Agreed and that is the issue with refs and no bottle. When have you ever seen a player sent off from having 2 yellows for time wasting? I can't remember any occasion. It seems that when you have received a yellow for time wasting then that gives you a free pass to continue with it.

Refs need to be stricter with it. A warning for blatant time wasting swiftly followed by a yellow for the next. If needs be a 2nd yellow should automatically follow for a 3rd offence.

I know this rule will not be implemented, but what about a 5 minute sin bin for a yellow gained by timewasting? It will stop then I can tell you.
 

I've said this before ages ago on here that its something that we need to happen.

If someone is pissing about, the ref just signals for the clock to stop. I'm not sure we need to stop it every time there's a throw in or a foul but for things that are obvious like injuries, subs, setting up free kicks near the goal and players generally idling.

The stoppage time we get at the end of the game at the moment seems to just be a finger in the air, guessing job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom