Sport and perfectly acceptable. It rarely lasts longer than half a minute before the inevitable free kick or winning of possession. If a player like Lallana has it in the corner it can result in some decent skills.
I am old enough to remember when watching football was a lot less exciting than today. If the defender was put under pressure, he would pass back to the goalie who would pick it up, hang on to it for a few seconds and then pass it out- only for the same thing to happen again. It made for a very frustrating match and eventually the rule was changed so that the goalie couldn't pick it up. It transformed the game. Those who haven't seem footy played the old way will have to trust me about just how poor a game could get when someone was defending a slender lead. The change was made to improve the spectacle, nothing to do with sportsmanship I believe. Notwithstanding the opinions of the interested parties on any match day, I think that there is no doubt that heading for the corner (as most of us wished that Crouch had done vs Everton in 2005) with the sole intention of running the clock down does not make for good viewing for the neutral. I would be in favour of changing the rules and I am not convinced that it would be that difficult to do. The thing about this type of time-wasting is that we all recognise it when we see it. It's almost always in the opponents half. There is never any attempt to escape the position. I think if the Refs had the latitiude to award the inevertable throw-ins to the other side if there was no attempt to play the ball or escape, it would stop the problem without needing to issue bookings or give free kicks. The throw in would restart play in the least adventageous way to the other team, but make the corner a less attractive place. WRT the substitutions, why not have a rule stating that an extra minute is automatically added to the time added on if the substitution is not completed within a certain time? I feel that there are plenty of ways of making the game a better spectacle. It just requires those in charge of the rules to develop some imagination and a backbone.
It seems that because it only happens for a minute or two it is acceptable. But what if a team began doing it with fifteen or twenty minutes to go? Worse still, what if a team - who were, say, leading 1-0 from a first leg - began taking the ball into the corner in the first half, and throughout the whole game?! You might think this is highly unlikely, and of course you'd be right, but it is still possible. If they are deliberately blocking the opposing player then it is deliberate obstruction, and should be stopped.
I just think it's a **** tactic. Isn't it easier to keep possession for a couple of minutes by passing it around?
You do it when you have to...you are on your own and close to the final whistle. Happy for Saints to do it and preserve a win, so can't complain if others do it. It's a tactic which is right in some situations.
I'd be happy for them to take 2 minutes over goal kicks if it helped us preserve a lead, but that doesn't make it right.
I have been known to shout take your time at a Saints' goalie...even with 20 minutes to go Keeping the ball (up to the point where the ref starts noticing) is again a valid tactic if it gives your players a breather or the chance to move into position. This is an adult game of sport with far reaching financial consequences...they are not a bunch of five year olds yelling 'It's not fair' in the playground.
Well said, Fran. Maybe I'm still a kid at heart, but I don't see the games I watch played in a way that I would describe as unsporting. My last two games were the United and Wigan away games. If you have ever played a lot of competitive sport, and I was a handy club cricketer and Sunday morning footballer in my youth, you recognise the body language at the end of a game and it tells you whether the teams respect each other after a fair(ish) game. The two games I mentioned ended with lots of genuine respect. You don't get this if one team has been pushing the rules, in my experience. As for the specific issue, it is the defender's job to get the ball back. Simple. And using it as a tactic? As others have said (and it was my first thought when I read the OP), we would have been two points better off in '05 if Crouchie hadn't had that run and shot that led to Bent's equaliser. It's legitimate, and it's up to the opposition to counter. We might as well say they have to play two strikers.
Yes, I know it's legitimate, but what if it wasn't? If the law changed and everyone stopped doing it I doubt you'd be calling for it to be brought back. If taking two minutes for goal kicks was legitimate we'd be encouraging our keeper to do that, but the game would descend into farce.
Actually, the rules were changed a few years back so that goalies could only take a couple of steps with the ball...was intended to speed to game up. That was soon changed and we are now back to goalies wandering about with the ball.
Actually they didn't change it back, they made it so the goalkeeper can only have the ball in his hands for 6 seconds instead. And it worked, you don't see goalkeepers hanging on to the ball for ages anymore.
It was the steps rule that GKs didn't like because suddenly pulling up to avoid taking an extra step could result in an injury. Don't know if that ever happened though.
Yeah that was a really silly implementation for a lot of reasons. Didn't stop them hanging onto the ball as long as they liked if they didn't move, meant it was easier for strikers to close them down without them being able to escape, and prevented them being able to get the ball to a teammate effectively. 6 seconds rule much better all-round.
Anything that a team does in open play within the rules of the game is not timewasting. This is a simple fact. You can only outlaw it if you can come up with an umambiguous rule that prevents the practice e.g. the pass back rule in the early 90s that others have mentioned. It's hard to see how you could come up with a rule that avoids keeping possession in the corners. But my personal view is that there is no need to try, as I think it is as a perfectly legitimate strategy.
If you read my previous posts, I've answered all these points already. Admittedly I can understand why you might not want to! But if you're interested in the issue, it might be an idea.
