+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 66

Thread: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

  1. #1

    The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    BBC reporting that during a recent Premiership game, football was played for less than 48 minutes of the ninety.

    This shouldn't come as a surprise. Some seasons ago, this statistic was always reported for all the top matches, and I remember then being appalled at how much time is being wasted.

    Everyone knows where the time goes: a corner is awarded, how long before the ball is launched (especially if the ref has to lumber about sorting out the shenanigans in the penalty area); free kicks are given, how long before the ball is kicked (the ref has to talk to the offender, a Wolves player most likely, mark the spot from where the kick should be taken, mark where the wall should stand, get into position to carefully miss all the grappling and holding and then signal the 'go ahead'. Then there's goalies wasting time with goal kicks, throw-ins, refs remonstrating with players etc etc. The list is long.

    Perhaps it's more surprising that we see any football being played.

    It has long been an argument that video refereeing would slow the game down and make it stop/start. I've got news for theses pundits: the game has already been slowed down and is fundamentally stop/start.

    Perhaps fans at the match mentioned above should be refunded 48/90 of their admission price.

  2. #2

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Is being boring an infraction?

  3. #3

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    BBC reporting that during a recent Premiership game, football was played for less than 48 minutes of the ninety.

    This shouldn't come as a surprise. Some seasons ago, this statistic was always reported for all the top matches, and I remember then being appalled at how much time is being wasted.

    Everyone knows where the time goes: a corner is awarded, how long before the ball is launched (especially if the ref has to lumber about sorting out the shenanigans in the penalty area); free kicks are given, how long before the ball is kicked (the ref has to talk to the offender, a Wolves player most likely, mark the spot from where the kick should be taken, mark where the wall should stand, get into position to carefully miss all the grappling and holding and then signal the 'go ahead'. Then there's goalies wasting time with goal kicks, throw-ins, refs remonstrating with players etc etc. The list is long.

    Perhaps it's more surprising that we see any football being played.

    It has long been an argument that video refereeing would slow the game down and make it stop/start. I've got news for theses pundits: the game has already been slowed down and is fundamentally stop/start.

    Perhaps fans at the match mentioned above should be refunded 48/90 of their admission price.
    As you say, hardly surprising from those figures.
    Much of the time you describe when there is a corner, throw in or free kick, the players are taking a breather.
    Obviously you have your exceptions to this rule, there are many players around that hardly "bust a gut". I would say though that in the majority of cases, mainly because rhe fans expect it, players have given their all.

    I think I read somewhere that in rugby union (now there's a game where perhaps money should be rufunded), the ball is in play for something not much more than 5 minutes (could be wrong here) but similarly, fairly significant and regular stoppages need to happen for recovery.

    I really don't think that the introduction of video refs for the process time it would take is the reason it hasn't been passed through, I have a more cynical view why.

  4. #4

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Maybe the pitch should be surrounded with a large box. Ball can't go out of play so you get your 90 minutes worth. No subs, no injuries will be treated either...

  5. #5
    International
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Baku, Azerbaijan
    Posts
    11,617

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    They should reduce the game to 30 minutes each half but stop the clock every time the ball is out of play, like for throw-ins corners etc. That way you are guaranteed at least 30 minutes actual football each half.
    The time is out anyway so why not take it off the clock? If the had to actually play for an hour it might sort out the idlers too.

  6. #6

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    I have no problem with it. It's part of the game and it works both ways.

  7. #7

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    The alternative being like American football where they stop the clock all the time and games take hours

  8. #8

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by xsnaggle View Post
    They should reduce the game to 30 minutes each half but stop the clock every time the ball is out of play, like for throw-ins corners etc. That way you are guaranteed at least 30 minutes actual football each half.
    The time is out anyway so why not take it off the clock? If the had to actually play for an hour it might sort out the idlers too.
    And then games last hours. That'll confuse those who leave ten minutes before the end of the game...

  9. #9

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    BBC reporting that during a recent Premiership game, football was played for less than 48 minutes of the ninety.

    This shouldn't come as a surprise. Some seasons ago, this statistic was always reported for all the top matches, and I remember then being appalled at how much time is being wasted.

    Everyone knows where the time goes: a corner is awarded, how long before the ball is launched (especially if the ref has to lumber about sorting out the shenanigans in the penalty area); free kicks are given, how long before the ball is kicked (the ref has to talk to the offender, a Wolves player most likely, mark the spot from where the kick should be taken, mark where the wall should stand, get into position to carefully miss all the grappling and holding and then signal the 'go ahead'. Then there's goalies wasting time with goal kicks, throw-ins, refs remonstrating with players etc etc. The list is long.

    Perhaps it's more surprising that we see any football being played.

    It has long been an argument that video refereeing would slow the game down and make it stop/start. I've got news for theses pundits: the game has already been slowed down and is fundamentally stop/start.

    Perhaps fans at the match mentioned above should be refunded 48/90 of their admission price.
    that's surprised me if I'm being honest mate
    id thought it be more say around the 60 min area

  10. #10

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by TH63 View Post
    The alternative being like American football where they stop the clock all the time and games take hours
    we would of been down there last night till about 1am lol

  11. #11

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by I.8.POLITICAL.CORRECTNESS View Post
    that's surprised me if I'm being honest mate
    id thought it be more say around the 60 min area
    That was the claim for a single game, not an average. Almost certainly an outlier.

  12. #12

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Part of the appeal of football is that it is a 90 minute game split into two equal halves. There are times at a match where nothing much is happening and this gives time for players to recover and for the fans to react and discuss what is going on. One of the best parts is also the added time at the end, when most of the major talking points of a match usually occur. If we start fiddling with the main rules of the sport like this, the game will start to lose its heart. One of FIFA's current consultative ideas is exactly what was suggested by the original poster i.e. two 30 min halves with the clock stopped when the ball is out of play, there is an injury etc. Once we start agreeing with what FIFA says/does, we might as well all pack it in and stay at home. Another one of their recent brilliant ideas was altering the penalty shoot our format because they thought the previous system was putting too much pressure on the first taker !. Now no one knows what the hell is going on half the time. Leave the game as it is - why fix something that isn't broken.

  13. #13

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Part of the appeal of football is that it is a 90 minute game split into two equal halves. There are times at a match where nothing much is happening and this gives time for players to recover and for the fans to react and discuss what is going on. One of the best parts is also the added time at the end, when most of the major talking points of a match usually occur. If we start fiddling with the main rules of the sport like this, the game will start to lose its heart. One of FIFA's current consultative ideas is exactly what was suggested by the original poster i.e. two 30 min halves with the clock stopped when the ball is out of play, there is an injury etc. Once we start agreeing with what FIFA says/does, we might as well all pack it in and stay at home. Another one of their recent brilliant ideas was altering the penalty shoot our format because they thought the previous system was putting too much pressure on the first taker !. Now no one knows what the hell is going on half the time. Leave the game as it is - why fix something that isn't broken.
    More down-to-earth wisdom - as we've come to expect

  14. #14

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by Tall Midget View Post
    More down-to-earth wisdom - as we've come to expect
    Thanks very much for the compliment on my post. Wish I could say the same about one of yours but I dont remember actually seeing one that made a useful contribution to a thread.

  15. #15

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Thanks very much for the compliment on my post. Wish I could say the same about one of yours but I dont remember actually seeing one that made a useful contribution to a thread.
    I know my place

  16. #16

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    -
    To be fair, most people will put up with just about anything ...



  17. #17

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by Wales-Bales View Post
    -
    To be fair, most people will put up with just about anything ...


    That pitch though.

  18. #18

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Part of the appeal of football is that it is a 90 minute game split into two equal halves. There are times at a match where nothing much is happening and this gives time for players to recover and for the fans to react and discuss what is going on. One of the best parts is also the added time at the end, when most of the major talking points of a match usually occur. If we start fiddling with the main rules of the sport like this, the game will start to lose its heart. One of FIFA's current consultative ideas is exactly what was suggested by the original poster i.e. two 30 min halves with the clock stopped when the ball is out of play, there is an injury etc. Once we start agreeing with what FIFA says/does, we might as well all pack it in and stay at home. Another one of their recent brilliant ideas was altering the penalty shoot our format because they thought the previous system was putting too much pressure on the first taker !. Now no one knows what the hell is going on half the time. Leave the game as it is - why fix something that isn't broken.
    agree whole heartedly mate

  19. #19
    Reserve Dude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Pantygasseg, Pontypool
    Posts
    159

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Part of the appeal of football is that it is a 90 minute game split into two equal halves. There are times at a match where nothing much is happening and this gives time for players to recover and for the fans to react and discuss what is going on. One of the best parts is also the added time at the end, when most of the major talking points of a match usually occur. If we start fiddling with the main rules of the sport like this, the game will start to lose its heart. One of FIFA's current consultative ideas is exactly what was suggested by the original poster i.e. two 30 min halves with the clock stopped when the ball is out of play, there is an injury etc. Once we start agreeing with what FIFA says/does, we might as well all pack it in and stay at home. Another one of their recent brilliant ideas was altering the penalty shoot our format because they thought the previous system was putting too much pressure on the first taker !. Now no one knows what the hell is going on half the time. Leave the game as it is - why fix something that isn't broken.
    Once again, a Wiki cut 'n pasted comment from an elderly gent dressed up as original thought (the comment, not the gent).

    Now let's apply some common sense and accuracy. A ninety-minute match duration was arbitrarily agreed by two teams in 1866 and has stuck ever since. If we 'left the game as it is' as the old codger suggests, the game would still be played with a pigs bladder and the kit would look like this:

    1873.jpg

    But I can see why the venerable dml would be comfortable with this outfit, as he probably religiously wears a wee willie winkie bobble hat to bed every night like some of the guys in the photo.

    Do I really have to list the changes and obvious improvements in Football Rules since 1866? There are so many - which seem to have passed by the 'remember the good old days' brigade - but I'll raise just the one. Take the use of substitutes. Do you recall when subs were not allowed and crocked players with hammies and career-ending cruciate knee injuries were forced to play on the left wing for their nuisance value? Due you remember showpiece Cup Finals which were ruined when a team was reduced to ten men early on because no substitutes were allowed? "If it was good enough for 1866, it is good enough today", I hear you cry!

    By the way, stoppage time was not introduced in Britain until 1897 - a full thirty-one years after football matches were decreed to last ninety minutes.

    So we have breaks in play 'for the fans to react and discuss what is going on'. Thinly veiled, dml needs a few minutes to gently but slowly lever himself back into his seat after an ill-advised but delayed foray onto his feet during an exciting moment which he missed due to being very, very slow. The discuss 'what is going on' bit is code for 'when I make a nuisance of myself asking everyone (yet again) what happened'. Most normal fans (with mates) wait until they get to the pub for these discussions.

    Dml once again has clutched the wrong end of the stick in his gnarled arthritic hand when he says that the penalty shoot out format has been changed in 2017 'because they thought the previous system was putting too much pressure on the first taker'. The real facts are that research has proved that the team taking the first penalty have a 60 percent chance of winning, giving them an unfair advantage and also the player taking the second kick in the pair is under greater mental pressure. I totally understand that ageing fans will get confused and disorientated when the new ABBA system is used, but why not visualize the sequence instead of counting sheep after a nice mug of Horlicks when trying to get some shut-eye.

    Is it really so that 'most of the major talking points of a match usually occur' during the added time at the end? Have Cardiff scored in added -time this season, for example? So, no major talking points yet on this forum?

    "Why fix something that isn't broken?". But that's the point, isn't it? Some parts of the game are broken. Do you object to the introduction of goal-line technology - only introduced to the Championship in the current season? How many games have been ruined because officials have made the wrong call. Just ask Frank Lampard (that's Frank jnr, to the oxygen thief).

  20. #20

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by MacAdder View Post
    As you say, hardly surprising from those figures.
    Much of the time you describe when there is a corner, throw in or free kick, the players are taking a breather.
    Obviously you have your exceptions to this rule, there are many players around that hardly "bust a gut". I would say though that in the majority of cases, mainly because rhe fans expect it, players have given their all.

    I think I read somewhere that in rugby union (now there's a game where perhaps money should be rufunded), the ball is in play for something not much more than 5 minutes (could be wrong here) but similarly, fairly significant and regular stoppages need to happen for recovery.

    I really don't think that the introduction of video refs for the process time it would take is the reason it hasn't been passed through, I have a more cynical view why.
    In the 2011 rugby world cup (and i doubt the game has changed dramatically from then) the ball was in play for 44% of the game (about 35 mins).

    Watching football it doesnt feel like a large section of the game is stagnant. However i would image throw-ins, corners, goal kicks, and substitutions add up

  21. #21

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by Dude View Post
    Once again, a Wiki cut 'n pasted comment from an elderly gent dressed up as original thought (the comment, not the gent).

    Now let's apply some common sense and accuracy. A ninety-minute match duration was arbitrarily agreed by two teams in 1866 and has stuck ever since. If we 'left the game as it is' as the old codger suggests, the game would still be played with a pigs bladder and the kit would look like this:

    1873.jpg

    But I can see why the venerable dml would be comfortable with this outfit, as he probably religiously wears a wee willie winkie bobble hat to bed every night like some of the guys in the photo.

    Do I really have to list the changes and obvious improvements in Football Rules since 1866? There are so many - which seem to have passed by the 'remember the good old days' brigade - but I'll raise just the one. Take the use of substitutes. Do you recall when subs were not allowed and crocked players with hammies and career-ending cruciate knee injuries were forced to play on the left wing for their nuisance value? Due you remember showpiece Cup Finals which were ruined when a team was reduced to ten men early on because no substitutes were allowed? "If it was good enough for 1866, it is good enough today", I hear you cry!

    By the way, stoppage time was not introduced in Britain until 1897 - a full thirty-one years after football matches were decreed to last ninety minutes.

    So we have breaks in play 'for the fans to react and discuss what is going on'. Thinly veiled, dml needs a few minutes to gently but slowly lever himself back into his seat after an ill-advised but delayed foray onto his feet during an exciting moment which he missed due to being very, very slow. The discuss 'what is going on' bit is code for 'when I make a nuisance of myself asking everyone (yet again) what happened'. Most normal fans (with mates) wait until they get to the pub for these discussions.

    Dml once again has clutched the wrong end of the stick in his gnarled arthritic hand when he says that the penalty shoot out format has been changed in 2017 'because they thought the previous system was putting too much pressure on the first taker'. The real facts are that research has proved that the team taking the first penalty have a 60 percent chance of winning, giving them an unfair advantage and also the player taking the second kick in the pair is under greater mental pressure. I totally understand that ageing fans will get confused and disorientated when the new ABBA system is used, but why not visualize the sequence instead of counting sheep after a nice mug of Horlicks when trying to get some shut-eye.

    Is it really so that 'most of the major talking points of a match usually occur' during the added time at the end? Have Cardiff scored in added -time this season, for example? So, no major talking points yet on this forum?

    "Why fix something that isn't broken?". But that's the point, isn't it? Some parts of the game are broken. Do you object to the introduction of goal-line technology - only introduced to the Championship in the current season? How many games have been ruined because officials have made the wrong call. Just ask Frank Lampard (that's Frank jnr, to the oxygen thief).
    Wow - what have I done to upset you, I dont know you and you know absolutely nothing about me. There are so many inaccuracies about what you say about me and the contents of my post. There was absolutely no need for the personal insults contained in your post. Why didnt you just restrict yourself to the facts and let everyone make up their own minds. I would throw some insults back but dont see the point as you are obviously of such limilted intelligence that you might not take the required offence. I await your comments on the post from I.8. Political.Correctness above, who agreed with me, with interest to see if you do a similar hatchet job on him. And by the way, I am considerably younger than most of the posters on here and made up the contents of my post all by myself, unlike you who obviously had it ghost written by a five year old child.

  22. #22

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Oh and by the way Dude - reported.

  23. #23

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Amount of football played in a match?

    I imagine under a team managed by Warnock it may top 5 mins?

    Does toweling up the ball for a launched throw into the box count as "playing football"?
    😂

  24. #24

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by Jursset_BrisCity View Post
    Amount of football played in a match?

    I imagine under a team managed by Warnock it may top 5 mins?

    Does toweling up the ball for a launched throw into the box count as "playing football"?
    ��
    We're top of the table and "it" still tries to point score. Which is a bit more than the side he supports does, to be fair.

  25. #25

    Re: The actual amount of football being played in a match.....and we put up with it....mostly

    Quote Originally Posted by Jursset_BrisCity View Post
    Amount of football played in a match?

    I imagine under a team managed by Warnock it may top 5 mins?

    Does toweling up the ball for a launched throw into the box count as "playing football"?
    😂
    For your information we have been using towels to assist with long throws since we signed Aron Gunnersson in 2011, so it has absolutely nothing to do with Neil Warnock. If you are going to stick your nose into our board, at least get your facts right.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •