It's telling that certain managers have adopted timewasting into their tactical plan, knowing they can get away with it Southampton certainly have, because when they're leading in games it's guaranteed that one of their player will go down "injured" in the 60th minute and while they're being treated the rest of the team wander off to the sideline for a drinks break and then wander back on, and yesterday Brighton did likewise when somebody went down "injured" around the 60th minute and then dragged it out further by leaving on the opposite side of the pitch and walking around the touchline to the dugouts (which, of course, Pawson did **** all about) and their players ambled back into position and took a breather while the whole pantomime was going on
Happens every game and happens every time a team is in the lead. Personally would **** sponsors off and gave a 35 minute play clock that stops everytime the ball goes dead that stops. It will stop time being wasted although it wont stop teams breaking up play/getting a breather but that's not been solved in any sport (maybe nfl)
NFL is effectively based on timewasting now, but for advertisers rather than any tactical advantage, so every time the ball goes dead it's time for another ad break - which is night and day with college football, where if the ball goes dead they restart in around as much time as it takes a non-Pulis team to take a throw-in, as opposed to enough time to plug beer, batteries and cars with terrible steering
Rugby union seems to be accurate on time keeping, primarily that the on-pitch officials are not tracking it. They do not do "time on/off" for mundane stuff like the ball going out of play, but do for stuff like the ref having to talk to players when the scrum is repeatedly collapsing etc. Next time you watch a full half of rugby, note the KO time and the time at which the match clock says 40 mins have passed : the difference in time is rarely more than a couple of mins over the 40. For football time-wasting, the ref can just go meh on the time (as they know tis being accounted for off-pitch) , and just deal with the blatant / cumulative infringements by players.
I doubt he'll still be there after the summer, especially if they go down. He'd improve plenty of teams and there'll be a few looking for a new keeper. Wouldn't surprise me to see your lot try their hand, given Fabianski's age.
Because Southgate is loyal to those who have served him well and Pickford (like Maguire) has never let him down.
My thinking on our squad players and indeed any successful bench on a match day is that is should be compromised of four elements: Goalkeeping/general cover in case of injury or fatigue, a midfield workhorse to see out a win, a promising youngster breaking through to the first team and 2 or 3 attacking options who make the opposition stop and think. It's the latter that we desperately lack, as our current options are almost copies of the players they usually replace just with less ability and talent. So the only real gain you get from introducing a Lucas or a Bergwijn is fresh legs - something most competent PL level sides can cope with amply unless like Leicester they completely implode and gift those legs with opportunities to score. Otherwise, their additions bring nothing new to the game and in an ironic way will make the more competent sides play with less fear and more confidence, which is exactly what happened against Brighton and gave them the courage to push for a late winner. For me, it really is as simple as being able to bring on a Llorente or Defoe type - someone with a skill set and positional play that is so different to the players they'd replace that it makes the opposition stop and take notice, usually even making tactical changes to adapt and certainly not growing in courage with their introductions. Bale coming on will do that as there is no way of knowing what he'll do next and opposition sides know that if they leave him with too much space for a second, he'll punish them. The extent to which we have allowed the wider squad to decay is staggering and although I am confident that we're on the right track to fixing it, it'll take more than one window and may well be held back by Conte's tactical stubborness. I do wonder: if he had a Llorente type to break through physically tough defences and hold the ball up for runners, would he utilise that tool or would he continue to insist that everything must come via the wing backs and the front 3 must be fluid by design?
I can't think of a good reason why the time should not be operated remotely. Everyone should know how long a game is, and to give the refs control makes things more subjective. Subjective equals bias. May not be intentional, but bias it is, and I'm all for minimising the chances of it. So take timekeeping out of their hands, make a clock everyone can see, and stop it when the players are wasting it. They'll soon stop if they see they're achieving nothing. Goes without saying (stupid phrase as I'm going to say it anyway) that you then don't have Fergie time (as required). The other thing it will even out is one that may or may not happen (my feeling is that it does) which is there seems to be more time added at the end of the game than in the first half, even if the same stoppages have happened. Point is that whether I'm right or wrong, if you have an independent clock it's much more of an 'even playing field' than currently.
I would add to my point above that Liverpool are the closest side to using a like for like system and it being highly effective, but to do that they had to sign players of the quality of Diogo Jota and Luis Diaz. Didn't work nearly as well when their options were Shaqiri and Llalalalalana, which might explain why despite winning the league, they crashed out of all cup competitions earlier than anticipated, whereas this year they are serious contenders to win multiple trophies - perhaps even the lot of them.
Agree with everything up to this point, there is always likely to be more time added in the second half because that is the half where most subs are made and most time "wasted" at throw ins, goal kicks etc. Always wanted a stop clock for any stoppages, you pay for 90 mins football you should get 90 mins.
First half stoppage time has always been inconsistent. For example, the ref is supposed to add 30 seconds stoppage time per goal, but there's countless examples where team is 4-0 up at half time, but the ref only adds a minute Add to that how televised matches always seem to have 5-6 minutes at the end of the second half, while non-televised have 3-4 barring somebody leaving the pitch in serious disrepair, always makes it look like refs make up what stoppage time should be
Mee and Tarkowski will have plenty of interest, too. The former's got a year left on his contract and the latter's free. Rodriguez is also free, so I expect he'll get a decent move as backup.
He sounds so defeated by Spurs. Does make some good points especially about fellow fans hyping up dross players but even I find him too negative Im glad he repeated the Winks stats though, 200 games, 5 goals and 6 assists
