Rival watch

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Spurf said:
Timekeeping should be done off field with precise timing for all stoppages so that we end with a real 90 minutes. Referees are completely inconsistent with what they add on. Often time wasting is rife in extra time and extra extra time seldom makes up for it. It pays to cheat in the modern game. A player is brought down as he is about to run through on goal with just one player in front of him. He gets a free kick and the entire team are now in front of him. Obviously it's a better option to bring a player down and suffer the free kick. That's just one example another is the onset of cramp in the final stages of a leading team. It could all be sorted if there was a will but it makes good tele so it wont be.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. So much so that I'm going to say it again.
Couldn't agree more.

I think the timekeeping should be out of the refs hands. I take on board the points that PNP made, but I think that these are more important, and perhaps more importantly, more practical and fair as it takes the subjectivity out of it. At the moment you have no idea how much time is being added (or not), and there has to be a suspicion that certain teams get more time when they need it (even if that isn't happening). So for the sake of it showing it to be fair, it must be controlled off field, and the time available has to be shown. We need to see when time is added on (or isn't). Because if it was visible then there would be far less incentive to time waste, because it simply isn't wasted. At the moment we don't know how much time is added for subs, some seem to some don't, and it's very unusual for time to be added on for time lost in extra time (which is why our match against Leicester was so refreshing - the time seemed to be right for a change). There's also (IMHO) less time added on in the first half than the second, even taking out subs etc. Also stops the fake injuries and the other ****housery that goes on. Basically it's such an obvious thing to do that you can be sure it won't happen.
 
vimhawk said:
Couldn't agree more. So much so that I'm going to say it again.
Couldn't agree more.

I think the timekeeping should be out of the refs hands. I take on board the points that PNP made, but I think that these are more important, and perhaps more importantly, more practical and fair as it takes the subjectivity out of it. At the moment you have no idea how much time is being added (or not), and there has to be a suspicion that certain teams get more time when they need it (even if that isn't happening). So for the sake of it showing it to be fair, it must be controlled off field, and the time available has to be shown. We need to see when time is added on (or isn't). Because if it was visible then there would be far less incentive to time waste, because it simply isn't wasted. At the moment we don't know how much time is added for subs, some seem to some don't, and it's very unusual for time to be added on for time lost in extra time (which is why our match against Leicester was so refreshing - the time seemed to be right for a change). There's also (IMHO) less time added on in the first half than the second, even taking out subs etc. Also stops the fake injuries and the other ****housery that goes on. Basically it's such an obvious thing to do that you can be sure it won't happen.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Substitutions should add 30s per stoppage required, a goal a minute, and any injury or fracas you just add on the time from the incident to when play can be resumed. This is easy to calculate both in regulation and added time and extra time, and easy to display in stadia, and even easier to broadcast audiences. There is zero excuse not to.

I know the timings above are not what is in the rules but I can’t remember what’s there off the top of my head and would be happy with what is currently specified as long as they implement it consistently.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
...There was an article yesterday by the athletic about Southampton.

Not sure if they did this in our game, but it's interesting timing.
Click to expand...

That rings alarm bells.
Certainly enough to do stattery on all games for all teams to
see what the time/injury histograms look like for each club.


"They seemed to get a 2nd wind late on after appearing to run out of steam."

If you think their players are consuming "marching powder"
in their drinks, you could make it punishable for players to
consume drinks during stoppages, outside of sanctioned periods ***
( "drinks breaks" when the game is being played in a hot clime etc) .


*** akin to the "feed zone" rules in professional cycling
 
  • Like
Reactions: PleaseNotPoll
The RDBD said:
That rings alarm bells.
Certainly enough to do stattery on all games for all teams to
see what the time/injury histograms look like for each club.


"They seemed to get a 2nd wind late on after appearing to run out of steam."

If you think their players are consuming "marching powder"
in their drinks, you could make it punishable for players to
consume drinks during stoppages, outside of sanctioned periods ***
( "drinks breaks" when the game is being played in a hot clime etc) .


*** akin to the "feed zone" rules in professional cycling
Click to expand...
I'm not suggesting that they're doing anything illegal.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
I'm not suggesting that they're doing anything illegal.
Click to expand...

Not in the letter of the law.
Regarding sportsmen "hitting the wall" ...

If you burn your body immediate energy reserves :

1. then taking immediate energy food obviously helps

2. at a particular rate that would take you down to zero,
then a pause in time would help.


I suspect that if any advantage is achieved, it would
only be via #1, and without #1 you could nullify #2
by simply having correct cumulative timekeeping.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PleaseNotPoll
City2 Spurs3.I would dedicate this to our travelling fans. If I was younger I doubt if I would have been among them after the previous two performances.If you want to be put in the local nuthouse,become a Spurs fan!
We beat City and Ajax in the CL then don't turn up in the final one year.Then get kicked out of another European competition without playing! Start this season with 3 wins out of 3 and go top....then go 3 losses out of 3......then a win here,calamity there......go figure!!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Changing Man
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back