Time wasting

  • 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!
I seem to think Burnleys goaie was taking his time quite early in the match,way before they scored.
There are many instances of time wasting which do not seem to be as provocative as goal kicks.
Moving the ball after we placed it for a free kick.
Wall only back 8 yards on two occasions resulting in referee having to mark it out.
Marney falling over in his own penalty area in delayed shock at hitting the target.
All part of the game.
 
The FRENCH TICKLER said:
If the ref. gave a warning the first time and then booked the offending GK the next time it would stop it. Simples.
Click to expand...

Spot on. This needs to happen instead of breiefing the refs all this crap about booking people for taking shirts off and banning the wearing of snoods, not really the big issues them are they?

Tommytiger said:
As for time wasting, it is frustrating but players don't seem to realize that while the ball is dead, the ref adds the time on at the end. I think it's 30 seconds for every substitution, whatever is appropriate for injury and so on. That's why I never understand why players feign injury. If they go down like they've had an axe in the back, then roll around, cause the physio needlessly to jog on and waste everybody's time (including those of us who paid money to watch the game), then get up completely fine and carry on playing; should be booked there and then (and have the time added on).

Finally, why can't we have a multi-ball system at the KC? Why do we have to wait for the same ball to be fished out of the crowd or from behind the dugout? If this was brought in, then as soon as a ball went out of play we could carry on without losing the momentum of the attack. It would also cut down on time wasting.
Click to expand...

The time doesn't get added on properly at all. It's all very approximate, and if you cheat during injury time by having a head injury like Maarney decided to have, nothing ever gets added on, they say it does but it doesn't. You see a lot of games on telly where it's a minimum of 4 minutes but they stop it dead on 94:00 as if the ball never went out of play. Sounds petty but it basically means you can just kill injury time whenever you want by having a head injury. That's exactly what Marney did the other day and I'm sure that didn't get added on.

Bannign multi-ball is yet more stupidity. The issue was teams that abused, which I think must have included Sheff Utd because every tiem we played there they would have their ballboys throwing two balls on whenever we wanted to take a quick throw-in. The correct resoponse would have been to come down on them hard but of course the good old football authorities decided it'd be better to ban the system completely, so now it's even easier to abuse.
 
Tommytiger said:
See, I completely agree about the throw ins, why on earth are we so poor at them. None of the players move well enough to try and win the ball. Dudgeon (obviously not now) is supposed to have a long throw, but I've never seen him take one ever, it's always short.

As for time wasting, it is frustrating but players don't seem to realize that while the ball is dead, the ref adds the time on at the end. I think it's 30 seconds for every substitution, whatever is appropriate for injury and so on. That's why I never understand why players feign injury. If they go down like they've had an axe in the back, then roll around, cause the physio needlessly to jog on and waste everybody's time (including those of us who paid money to watch the game), then get up completely fine and carry on playing; should be booked there and then (and have the time added on).

Finally, why can't we have a multi-ball system at the KC? Why do we have to wait for the same ball to be fished out of the crowd or from behind the dugout? If this was brought in, then as soon as a ball went out of play we could carry on without losing the momentum of the attack. It would also cut down on time wasting.
Click to expand...

Players keep time wasting because the referee doesn't add on the same amount of time that has been wasted. We had 2 minutes stoppages on the first half on Saturday, the ball had been out of play for goal kicks and after the goal for much longer than that. Some media outlet a few years ago used to have the "in play" time as a statistic on their online match reports. The usual time, stopping the clock for throw-ins and freekicks as well was only 60-70 minutes. Try timing it tomorrow night, or if you can't be bothered with that play a game of FIFA with the clock on continuous, and then play another with the same half length but an in play clock and see how much longer it actually takes you to play the second game.

We can't have a multiball system because any team that comes to time waste will just say no, and you need both teams to agree in order to use it.
 
westhulltiger said:
Personally, I dont think the Burnley keeper took the piss any more than other keepers have. Clearly the ref didn't either
Click to expand...

The FRENCH TICKLER said:
Right or wrong the Burnley keeper was not the reason Hull City the game.
Click to expand...

He was taking the piss before the goal. About 10 minutes in they had a GK that took almost a minute to be back in play when it had stopped behind the goal. Don't think anybody said he was Tickler, and the result is immaterial to the complaints. We had the same ref when we beat Watford last season and we were calling **** out of Watford for being time wasting ****s and the clown in the middle for letting them do it.
 
Our ballboys were awful on Saturday. We was losing the game and I think that there are about 3 around the whole pitch, sat 5 miles away asleep. I'm not saying we would have won the game, but over the course of a season, if our ballboys were a little more involved then it would probably be worth a couple of points.

At Barca, the youth kids are all ballboys aren't they? They understand and follow the game. If you are losing by a goal, you get the ball in play as quickly as possible, if you are winning by a goal, you sit on your hands. As I say, not going to win you the league in itself, but you might as well use home advantage to your... advantage.
 
Ricardo said:
We can't have a multiball system because any team that comes to time waste will just say no, and you need both teams to agree in order to use it.
Click to expand...

But that's an equally ridiculous rule that should also be overturned.

Gawge said:
At Barca, the youth kids are all ballboys aren't they? They understand and follow the game. If you are losing by a goal, you get the ball in play as quickly as possible, if you are winning by a goal, you sit on your hands. As I say, not going to win you the league in itself, but you might as well use home advantage to your... advantage.
Click to expand...

Our ballboys are also youth kids.

Cheshireben said:
The rules say the ref should add time on for time wasting

The rules say that the keeper shouldn't control the ball with his hands for longer than 6 seconds, if he releases the ball he then cannot use his hands further until it has touched another player.

The rules are in place, the refs are just not adhering to them.

Maybe if there is excessive piss taking our captain should be more savvy and have a quiet word with the ref.
Click to expand...

They wouldn't ever enforce it though, they'd just ignore him. I remember once a few years ago a striker was stood in front of the keeper holding onto the ball with his hands in the air counting on his fingers the seconds to make it blatantly obvious but the ref wasn't interested at all. That 6 seconds rule, just like anything else that would prevent time-wasting might as well not exist because it never, ever gets enforced.
 
ISTPLT said:
Ricardo said:
We can't have a multiball system because any team that comes to time waste will just say no, and you need both teams to agree in order to use it.
Click to expand...

But that's an equally ridiculous rule that should also be overturned.

Gawge said:
At Barca, the youth kids are all ballboys aren't they? They understand and follow the game. If you are losing by a goal, you get the ball in play as quickly as possible, if you are winning by a goal, you sit on your hands. As I say, not going to win you the league in itself, but you might as well use home advantage to your... advantage.
Click to expand...

Our ballboys are also youth kids.

Cheshireben said:
The rules say the ref should add time on for time wasting

The rules say that the keeper shouldn't control the ball with his hands for longer than 6 seconds, if he releases the ball he then cannot use his hands further until it has touched another player.

The rules are in place, the refs are just not adhering to them.

Maybe if there is excessive piss taking our captain should be more savvy and have a quiet word with the ref.
Click to expand...

They wouldn't ever enforce it though, they'd just ignore him. I remember once a few years ago a striker was stood in front of the keeper holding onto the ball with his hands in the air counting on his fingers the seconds to make it blatantly obvious but the ref wasn't interested at all. That 6 seconds rule, just like anything else that would prevent time-wasting might as well not exist because it never, ever gets enforced.
Click to expand...

I think Ben Burgess used to do this when playing for us. Does that rule still exist? I thought they got rid of it alongside moving a free kick forward 10 yards if there was any dissent after it had been given.
 
ISTPLT said:
They wouldn't ever enforce it though, they'd just ignore him. I remember once a few years ago a striker was stood in front of the keeper holding onto the ball with his hands in the air counting on his fingers the seconds to make it blatantly obvious but the ref wasn't interested at all. That 6 seconds rule, just like anything else that would prevent time-wasting might as well not exist because it never, ever gets enforced.
Click to expand...

It was scrapped, because strikers kept preventing the keeper from being able to kick from hands and then either being given a free kick or whinging like hell about it, when really they should have been the ones penalised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back