Abolish Injury Time

[tommysvr]

How is advertising and TV schedule relevant at all? It's no different to a player being injured for 10 mins and playing 10 mins of injury team.

I think it's a good idea. I'd be all for it.

 

[tommysvr]

Personally, I think if there are 3 minutes injury time the game STOPS at 3 minutes, no sooner, no later.

I don't care if a corner is awarded, you're through on goal, 3 minutes hits the clock, the whistle is blown.

That is the rule, for some reason refs don't enforce it. I guess because they'd get slaughtered by the team on the attack.

 

[Baleforce]

is the injury time not a minimum of though rather than a maximum

 

[DHSF]

Maybe they need to establish a rugby style time management process.

I think there are a number of things we can take from rugby and time management is certainly one of those aspects.

One thing that I do not like is the lack of transparency of stoppage time especially at WHL. I am at a game and cannot see how much of the stoppage time is played, yes I can make my own deductions, but its not the point. I know why they do it as stoppage time is ultimately at the referees discretion but thats also the problem - lack of transparency.

This leads me on to why referees arent interviewed after EVERY match - I think that is important too. Managers, coaches and players do it so why is the main man in the middle not able to undertake such interviews. The reason for all this fiasco is one thing - lack of transparency.

 

[FatBloke]

This leads me on to why referees arent interviewed after EVERY match - I think that is important too. Managers, coaches and players do it so why is the main man in the middle not able to undertake such interviews. The reason for all this fiasco is one thing - lack of transparency.

That, sir, is an excellent point. I'd love to see this.

But back to stoppage time. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that, for an average football match, the ball is in play for something like 50 minutes. So that's probably not the way to go. Unless you're going to have half an hour of stoppage time!

Hockey is similar to rugby, in that the umpire stops the clock for things like injuries, setting up certain set pieces (penalties), consulting the other umpire (there are two -- one for each half of the pitch), and giving players a talking to (with or without a card being shown). That's how it works all the way down the league structure in the UK. In higher-level matches, there'll be a separate timekeeper, but I'm pretty sure he just takes direction from the ref. Completely transparent.

The key thing is that it's under the umpire's control. He blows the whistle and signals to stop the clock. There's no concept of "stoppage time", but the umpire always knows how long is left. Again, at higher-level matches, it'll be on a board somewhere.

What we really don't want is to make it like the NFL. I remember tuning into the SuperBowl a few years ago, while flicking channels late one night, to see that there was about 10 minutes left. Decided to watch it. I was still there OVER AN HOUR LATER. Apparently it was the most exciting finish to a game in years. I just wanted to go to bed.

 

[clevelandspur]

I agree and it could be instituted very easily. Also, you wouldn't have to stop the clock for throw ins corners etc.. but it would totally cut out play acting for injuries. As soon as a player goes down for injury the ref blows his whistle the timekeeper stops the clock.

Also stop for substitutions, goal restarts and blatant time wasting. I don't think it would lengthen the game that much at all because once the new rules are instituted players will see there is no further need to fake injuries and time waste.

 

[Spursalot]

Maybe they need to establish a rugby style time management process.

I think there are a number of things we can take from rugby and time management is certainly one of those aspects.

One thing that I do not like is the lack of transparency of stoppage time especially at WHL. I am at a game and cannot see how much of the stoppage time is played, yes I can make my own deductions, but its not the point. I know why they do it as stoppage time is ultimately at the referees discretion but thats also the problem - lack of transparency.

This leads me on to why referees arent interviewed after EVERY match - I think that is important too. Managers, coaches and players do it so why is the main man in the middle not able to undertake such interviews. The reason for all this fiasco is one thing - lack of transparency.

Brilliant idea. Lets add even more pressure and media scrutiny onto referees. That will improve their performances.

 

[DHSF]

Brilliant idea. Lets add even more pressure and media scrutiny onto referees. That will improve their performances.

Thats the spirit.

 

[Icelander]

Regarding injury time drama: Wouldn't the same drama apply if people knew the game would end at 90 instead of 92, 93 etc.?

As to time stoppage: Not sure if you lot watch or even know of Team Handball, but there we have two refs and a time operator. Time only stops at certain points; player injuries, fouls that require more than a yellow card etc. The refs simply give a signal with their whistle and hands, and time stops. In football, this would be so simple to implement, all the way from Champions League, down to kids games.

I'm not sure this would eliminate time wasting, because stopping the time for every throw in and free kick is insane. How about a rule; from the moment you get the ball in your hands for throw ins, or place the ball on the ground for a goal kick, you have 5-7 seconds to complete it, otherwise the other team gets the throw in. As for the goal kick time wasting...perhaps the other team gets a throw in, right by the corner flag?

 

[Icelander]

Brilliant idea. Lets add even more pressure and media scrutiny onto referees. That will improve their performances.

Anyone see the new rugby RefCam?

[video=youtube;4lxXU-5rbPo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lxXU-5rbPo[/video]

Imagine what this would be like in football? If FIFA, UEFA etc. want a culture change regarding the behavior of professional players towards refs, this would be a great step IMO. If players want to attack refs and hurl abuse at them like in today's game, maybe Nike, Adidas and others won't feel like paying them millions to be the face of their products anymore...?

 

[Richie]

Anyone see the new rugby RefCam?

[video=youtube;4lxXU-5rbPo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lxXU-5rbPo[/video]

Imagine what this would be like in football? If FIFA, UEFA etc. want a culture change regarding the behavior of professional players towards refs, this would be a great step IMO. If players want to attack refs and hurl abuse at them like in today's game, maybe Nike, Adidas and others won't feel like paying them millions to be the face of their products anymore...?

Would love to see this.

 

[clevelandspur]

Don't know if you know this but they already do this in NCAA and high school soccer/football here in the states and it works fine. Clock only stops for injuries and for refs to talk to players on a bad foul/give card etc..

The drama argument is stupid it is only drama because it is the end of the game it would be the same if it was stopped at 90

 

[braineclipse]

Not sure if abolishing injury time is the way to do it, but FIFA/UEFA should look to do something to limit the advantage currently gained by time wasting. It's boring, it's anti-football, it makes for less exciting games and less actual football being played and it's unfair.

I think there are several possible, easy to implement, fairly cheap solutions to this although I'm no expert.

I just don't think FIFA or UEFA are particularly interested in it as those problems aren't exactly on the top of their priorities.