Not exactly saints-related but this place has become deathly boring lately so maybe this will spark a debate? http://www.wsc.co.uk/wsc-daily/1158...body-should-be-putting-football-in-the-corner Interesting article, makes sense to me (and that's why nothing will be done). Hard to justify this kind of behaviour as it robs the spectators of a likely entertaining end to the game.
Mixed feelings on this, as it can really annoy me sometimes, but would I complain if 1 up against Stoke and needed win to stay up and we done it to see us through? Would I ****!
I find myself being horribly bias with this topic. I remember watching Arsenal and Saints in the FA cup final a few years back.. and getting extra pissed off as we were 1-0 and the Arsenals players were choosing to flounder around in the corner flag for almost a solid 2 minutes. But when we were 1-0 up against Villa i was screaming for the players to hoof it into the corner to kill the clock.
I don't really have a problem with it - it's frustrating as hell when it goes against you, but perfectly valid when it works for you. I can't see why a team should be under any obligation to mount an attack, so if they want to grind/bore out a win whilst the ball is in play, that's up to them. You need to be reasonably skillful to hold up the ball effectively anyway. I find the dying minutes substitution - where the player takes half an hour to saunter to the touchline - much more frustrating.
Sure, but that time is added on. Timewasting in the corner, as the ball is technically, if not actually, "in play" is not. As would I, under the current rules, but if the refs gave yellow cards and added the time on, I wouldn't.
What is wrong with keeping the ball in the corner? Nothing. It's a fair way of wasting time. But as a referee, I always look for a foul on the player trying to get the ball back and give free kicks against the attacker at the first opportunity.
Referees do add time on for substitutions so that raises the question - why not add time on for obvious timewasting? If a player chooses to loiter in the corner for 2 minutes then just add 2 minutes on. If this became standard practice then people would stop going for the corner. It would encourage teams to run the clock down by legitimately retaining possession in open play, by passing the ball around and so on. The opposing team still has a chance to get the ball back but it becomes a contest of skill rather than just gamesmanship.
I take your point, but there is no real encouragement to behave in a sporting manner, only sanctions against behaving in an unsporting manner. Most of what we see is, of course, neither.
Seems like a fair strategy to me. If the crime is not entertaining the fans, then Stoke are going to be picking up a whole lot of bookings. It sounds a lot like the author of this article has just watched his team lose and is still a little sore about it.
It is part of the game and would expect Saints to behave similarly if we were winning an essential game...and lets face it they are all essential at the moment. The other team has to get the ball off you...there is no obligation to make it easy for them. If it was banned....what about shielding the ball out of play for a goal kick...do you ban that as well?
Very good point. As PSF mentions, the forum has become boring and desperately needs a match, and all of its fallout, to comment on. So, going through a few recent games on Saints Player, I watched all of the highlights of ManU [no, not City] v Saints at Old Trafford. On the sportsmanship side, there was a point where Rooney was zeroing in on Boruc, with inevitable results, after a heavy touch. Boruc took the ball, but Rooney went flying. Boruc threw the ball out, and walked back to his goal, tapping Rooney on the shoulder, who held out his hand to touch, in reply. I thought that was sporting of both. Rooney had been jarred by the incident and moments later crouched down to feel his ankle. A Saints player came to his side and put a hand on his shoulder and Rooney touched the players leg. These were all footballing signs of concern and acknowledgement of sportsmanship. In such a good game these moments can be lost. They would have been lost to me also, but going a fortnight without a Saints game leads one to look at previous ones for other things to see. I was pleased to see sportsmanship being displayed in both teams.
Very true. I suppose my issue is that the tactical substitution messes with the flow of the game (which it's supposed to of course) & therefore my sanity. The worst one I've seen this season was Clint Dempsey - he did that fake jogging thing & I swear he was moving slower than his natural walking speed.
I can tell you've put your customary high level of thought into this post. The crime is not "not entertaining the fans" that is just one negative effect of this form of the crime of "unsportsmanlike conduct" which you might be aware is against the rules.
It's fair. It's within the rules. When teams do it against us I'm perfectly happy with them doing it in terms of the fact I think it's fair. It's within the rules and never been considered against the spirit of the game. What I have a problem is is players not kicking the ball out of play when an opponent player is injured. But I suppose players diving and feigning injury has a lot to do with that
Indeed. What about substitution of an injured player..? Would teams get around your ban by having players go down with fake cramp..? It's not workable. The issue with playing the ball into the corners is that it can't really be ruled out. It is a useful tactic that neither I or a lot of other football supporters like to see. It certainly isn't in the spirit of the game at all, but there is nothing foolproof that one can do to stop it. Footballers could become more sportsmanship like and not indulge in such a tactic, but that sort of thing leads to Everton equalising at St Mary's. Just trying to think when I first saw it being used as a pure timewasting exercise, rather than just the ball becoming stuck in the corner at any point in the match. The name Robert Pires springs to mind, as it usually does when I'm thinking of players who try to bend, if not break, the rules, so around 2000 seems likely.
Fine, have some more thought: - What is unsportsmanlike about trying to deny the opposition the ball? - How do the officials determine when exactly it becomes unsportsmanlike? Where do they draw the line? - Do you reckon the fans of the winning team are particularly fussed if the last couple of minutes are boring? - Say the winning team are defending their lead by playing a 5-4-1 (or is that unsportsmanlike as well?), they hoof the ball clear and their lone striker picks up the ball in the opposition half. He's got no support up there with him, he's been pushed wide by the opposition defense and has no option but to just run with the ball or shoot from a mile out. Is he allowed to run into a corner and wait for support? For how long should he be allowed to dwell on the ball? Or should he just have a pot shot at goal for fear or being penalised?
It's just a method of one side keeping possession. Who says you have to run around or attack all the time? Then you'd have to start banning just knocking it around the back 4... The other team can still get the ball back if they work hard enough. Reminds me of a time playing 5aside, one of the opposition got the wrong end of the stick & ran the ball into the corner at his OWN end. We nabbed the ball & scored... Muppet!
