Started By
Message

IFAB to propose scrapping two 45-minute halves for two 30-minute halves with stoppages

Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:52 pm
Posted by Bench McElroy
Member since Nov 2009
33943 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 9:52 pm
quote:

A proposal to scrap 45-minute halves is to be looked at by football's lawmakers to deter time-wasting.

Instead, there could be two periods of 30 minutes with the clock stopped whenever the ball goes out of play.

Lawmaking body the International Football Association Board (Ifab) says matches only see about 60 minutes of "effective playing time" out of 90.

The idea is one of several put forward in a new strategy document designed to address football's "negativities".


LINK
Posted by Broski
Member since Jun 2011
70943 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:05 pm to
No, frick that.
Posted by WarSlamEagle
Manchester United Fan
Member since Sep 2011
24611 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:23 pm to
Nah, son.
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
36311 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:24 pm to
This would negate the effects of time-wasting wouldn't it?

I don't see why we should be happy with 60 minutes of effective playing time when we could have 90 minutes of playing time.
Posted by Col Reb is my mascot
Member since Feb 2012
4165 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:26 pm to
To IFAB:

Posted by Freauxzen
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
37295 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:27 pm to
quote:

to deter time-wasting.


How about, you know, just getting tougher on time wasting. Toss out a yellow if someone doesn't make an effort to get the ball. Count out loud every time a keeper gets a ball. 10 seconds should become a strict measurement for keepers.

Saw an MLS game last year where every time there was a goal kick, he would walk to his water bottle, take a slow drink, walk over to the ball that the ballboy rolled, then set it up, then walk backwards slowly, then kick it. Fans counted to 45 seconds the third time.

Absolutely infuriating, and the ref did nothing the first 5 times. He finally gave a card on the sixth kick. Guess what? The goalie did exactly what he wanted to do and the game was over soon after. Complete lack of control on the ref's part.
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 10:28 pm
Posted by Broski
Member since Jun 2011
70943 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:58 pm to
quote:

This would negate the effects of time-wasting wouldn't it?



Diving is more of a problem than time-wasting.
Posted by Vicks Kennel Club
29-24 #BlewDat
Member since Dec 2010
31081 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 11:18 pm to
This is worse than when someone who does not watch soccer suggests to make the goals bigger or to eliminate offside (which they call offsides).
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 11:19 pm
Posted by GoldenGuy
Member since Oct 2015
10880 posts
Posted on 6/19/17 at 11:48 pm to
Nope. Not in this fashion anyway. Sure it kills time-wasting but it also kills the last chance for a desperate team.
Posted by lionward2014
New Orleans
Member since Jul 2015
11719 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 8:51 am to
One of the biggest draws when I started watching soccer was no commercials, and I knew that a normal game was going to be no more than 115 minutes (<2 hours). Why would they ruin that?
Posted by Wazza
Red Stick
Member since Apr 2017
43 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 9:34 am to
quote:

Diving is more of a problem than time-wasting.

AND the subsequent calling on the health staff, stretcher, magical spray...I'll be so pissed if this passes...leave it alone and enforce stricter enforcement for the love of Gawd!!
Posted by thenry712
Zasullia, Ukraine
Member since Nov 2008
15795 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 10:42 am to
This concept is interesting, if not flawed. In the book The Numbers Game, the author talks about how Tony Pulis' Stoke teams would intentionally shorten the actual "play time" with certain tactics like making the dimensions of the field smaller; Rory Delap's absurdly long winded throw-in routines; taking their sweet-arse time on free kicks, and of course trying to murder players. It worked too. Stoke's tactics led to games where the ball was in play less than 45 minutes.

I've seen it proposed before, but the general audience of any game should see the amount of stoppage time accrued throughout the game. That way, there isn't an arbitrary determination of stoppage time by the ref.
Posted by RuLSU
Chicago, IL
Member since Nov 2007
8073 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 11:10 am to
quote:

IFAB to propose scrapping two 45-minute halves for two 30-minute halves with stoppages

I would be interested in seeing this, actually, just to see how different the game would be.
Posted by dgnx6
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2006
68689 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 11:16 am to
quote:

don't see why we should be happy with 60 minutes of effective playing time when we could have 90 minutes of playing time.


The argument is there is less than 60 minutes of actual playing time now.

It needs to be tested. But this is how our hs games were. Clock stops, no extra time.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
422585 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 12:30 pm to
quote:

I've seen it proposed before, but the general audience of any game should see the amount of stoppage time accrued throughout the game. That way, there isn't an arbitrary determination of stoppage time by the ref.

i have no fricking clue how this isn't a rule already
Posted by TheWalrus
Member since Dec 2012
40555 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 12:52 pm to
Would be interesting to see it experimented with in meaningless games.
Posted by BlueWaffleHouse
LA
Member since Jul 2012
1850 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 3:26 pm to
Holding it in the corner when you have a lead late is fine, referees just need to grow a pair and start carding players wasting time and being more vocal about getting the ball back in play.

IF they really want a new rule, how about: if players need a stretcher in the last 10 mins, they can't reenter. If they are really hurt, they won't re enter anyway, and if they're just being typical Mexicans/Italians/Argentinians/etc...then they'll eventually stop the BS
This post was edited on 6/20/17 at 3:27 pm
Posted by Lordofwrath88
Tuscaloosa
Member since Oct 2012
6857 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 3:57 pm to
quote:

Would be interesting to see it experimented with in meaningless games.


Sounds like job for the MLS All-Star Game!
Posted by Broski
Member since Jun 2011
70943 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 4:02 pm to
I would like to see this study that produced the 60 minutes figure.

No team implements time-wasting tactics in the first half and then in the second half the team that is ahead doesn't really start to be not-so-subtle about it until the 70th-75th minute.
Posted by Hester Carries
Member since Sep 2012
22436 posts
Posted on 6/20/17 at 4:12 pm to
quote:

to eliminate offside (which they call offsides).


Ive played soccer since i was 5 and have watched every USMNT game for the last decade and I say offsides every time. It sounds nice.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram