Time wasting

[theessexfox]

Lots of outcry about the Jamal Lewis red on Twitter, absolutely the right decision imo

[Collymore]

I've noticed that no matter what happens in the first half, you only get a maximum of 2 mins added on time. I saw this in the Burnley and Man City games where there were loads of stoppages for injuries etc... , but only 2 mins added on. If nothing happens in the half, they normally add a minute on for good measure anyway, so you only ever really get a minute no matter what. 

 

I think the Man City game there was only 3 mins added on at the end which was ludicrous, felt like we were short changed about 4 or 5 minutes in total in that game. 

[Super_horns]

On 10/10/2021 at 00:21, theessexfox said:

Lots of outcry about the Jamal Lewis red on Twitter, absolutely the right decision imo

The decision was so rare and unusual which is probably why people were shocked and outraged but yes  in theory more refs should be doing what he did .

 

Usually you get a token yellow card with about 5 minutes to go for the keeper who then just carries on !

Edited 11 October 2021 by Super_horns

[filbertway]

34 minutes ago, Super_horns said:

The decision was so rare and unusual which is probably why people were shocked and outraged but yes  in theory more refs should be doing what he did .

 

Usually you get a token yellow card with about 5 minutes to go for the keeper who then just carries on !

Was refreshing to see it, I wish more refs would book players for time wasting as they're supposed to, it'd quickly stop.

[KrefelderFox666]

5 minutes ago, filbertway said:

Was refreshing to see it, I wish more refs would book players for time wasting as they're supposed to, it'd quickly stop.

The rule change that was discussed about having 30 min halfs with clock stopping would be ideal to stop this. Or at least in absence of that, the ref (or 4th official) has a watch that they stop every time the ball is out of play. When the clock hits 45 they check the stopwatch to see how much actual time has been played. Then add on stoppage time equivalent to how far off 30 mins ball in play there has been.

 

That way players can't "cheat" and there is no need to book/send players off.

Edited 11 October 2021 by KrefelderFox666

[filbertway]

7 minutes ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

The rule change that was discussed about having 30 min halfs with clock stopping would be ideal to stop this. Or at least in absence of that, the ref (or 4th official) has a watch that they stop every time the ball is out of play. When the clock hits 45 they check the stopwatch to see how much actual time has been played. Then add on stoppage time equivalent to how far off 30 mins ball in play there has been.

 

That way players can't "cheat" and there is no need to book/send players off.

You'd still need rules to stop players purposefully slowing the game down to kill any momentum the opposition have or to allow themselves a quick breather.

[Captain...]

The rules have been there for ages but ref's either don't know the rules, don't have the bottle or are arrogant enough to think they know better and any rule or initiative just falls by the wayside such as 6 seconds, the respect initiative, players having to go off the pitch for injuries, subs going off the quickest route, kicking the ball away. Setting up some rules isn't difficult it's having the officials to actually enforce them and punish players.

 

The constant little flicks of the ball at a stoppage does my head in the most, we have the rule about kicking the ball away, it doesn't matter if the ball goes 2 or 200 yards just book them for doing it and they'll stop, but now even blatant kicking the ball away isn't punished. 

[MalletFox]

The inconsistency in referees approaches to this is ultimately what is probably driving this issue to be resolved through other means.

 

Burnley (& Pope) specifically wasted time on every goal kick, free kick. Chris Kavanagh didn’t appear to have the brain cells / care to bother to hurry them up and then the added on time seemed insignificant to the “real”

time wasted.

 

There is no doubt that adopting the Rugby Union “time off / time on” approach should improve this significantly and will help to eradicate any sub-conscious bias. I.e, if Burnley were wasting time like that at Anfield, I have no doubt Pope would have been booked after about an hour…

 

 

[Spudulike]

3 minutes ago, MalletFox said:

The inconsistency in referees approaches to this is ultimately what is probably driving this issue to be resolved through other means.

 

Burnley (& Pope) specifically wasted time on every goal kick, free kick. Chris Kavanagh didn’t appear to have the brain cells / care to bother to hurry them up and then the added on time seemed insignificant to the “real”

time wasted.

 

There is no doubt that adopting the Rugby Union “time off / time on” approach should improve this significantly and will help to eradicate any sub-conscious bias. I.e, if Burnley were wasting time like that at Anfield, I have no doubt Pope would have been booked after about an hour…

 

 

At least he booked Cornett for coming back onto the pitch to get the game stopped. Personally, I'd have waved play on, he couldnt have be injured that badly and if he needed treatment he could've gone back off. 

[sacreblueits442]

1 hour ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

The rule change that was discussed about having 30 min halfs with clock stopping would be ideal to stop this. Or at least in absence of that, the ref (or 4th official) has a watch that they stop every time the ball is out of play. When the clock hits 45 they check the stopwatch to see how much actual time has been played. Then add on stoppage time equivalent to how far off 30 mins ball in play there has been.

 

That way players can't "cheat" and there is no need to book/send players off.

...can you imagine games lasting 4 hours, like NFL games!!!

  Certainly book a player for time wasting, I would have assumed in this scenario the player would have expected a hurry up from the referee and then would immediately get the ball into play. The absence of any kind of warning encouraged him to continue what he was going as there was no dissent from the referee or it seems opposing team.

  No need for us to start adding more rules to define situations, if you are warned by the referee that you are doing something wrong, cease doing it, otherwise there will and should be consequences. 

 

[Super_horns]

I suspect some might feel they will be accused of being fussy or making the game about themselves if they booked everyone for time wasting right from when it starts but certainly needs to be stamped out.

 

Bit like dissent which players are freely able to get away with. 

[KrefelderFox666]

16 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...can you imagine games lasting 4 hours, like NFL games!!!

  Certainly book a player for time wasting, I would have assumed in this scenario the player would have expected a hurry up from the referee and then would immediately get the ball into play. The absence of any kind of warning encouraged him to continue what he was going as there was no dissent from the referee or it seems opposing team.

  No need for us to start adding more rules to define situations, if you are warned by the referee that you are doing something wrong, cease doing it, otherwise there will and should be consequences. 

 

But games won't last 4 hours...

 

Either you accept the time wasting, or you do something about it. Adding on time to reflect 30 mins of action per half would not make games much longer but it would extend those were lots of time has been wasted/lost.

[Long Eaton Fox]

What annoys me the most is after a free kick is given, the offender, which also includes our players, picks the ball up, runs 30 yards, then throws the ball into touch.  

[cruzFOX]

How about once a whistle is blown NO ONE touches the ball? Only the ref goes and picks it up and places it in the correct spot. Any interference prior to that or during it leads to an immediate yellow card! Yes this requires the ref to do a bit more graft but he'll have total control of the situation now. Same with any whistle blown for a foul - all players on both sides except the injured moves away 25 yards. Ref assesses the situation and calls back the offender and the captian only he can warn or present a card. If anyone else outside of those two approach the ref they get an immediate yellow. It sounds draconian but we have these zero tolerance rules for kids so why not adults too? It's too soft right now which means players will test the refs all the time. Our players are among the better behaved in the league but there are some awful repeat offenders on other teams.

[KrefelderFox666]

3 minutes ago, cruzFOX said:

How about once a whistle is blown NO ONE touches the ball? Only the ref goes and picks it up and places it in the correct spot. Any interference prior to that or during it leads to an immediate yellow card! Yes this requires the ref to do a bit more graft but he'll have total control of the situation now. Same with any whistle blown for a foul - all players on both sides except the injured moves away 25 yards. Ref assesses the situation and calls back the offender and the captian only he can warn or present a card. If anyone else outside of those two approach the ref they get an immediate yellow. It sounds draconian but we have these zero tolerance rules for kids so why not adults too? It's too soft right now which means players will test the refs all the time. Our players are among the better behaved in the league but there are some awful repeat offenders on other teams.

No one touching the ball is too strict as it would stop the flow of the game. Maybe the offending team is not allowed to touch the ball but the others can take a quick freekick (if ref is OK with it).

[jammie82uk]

26 minutes ago, cruzFOX said:

Ref assesses the situation and calls back the offender and the captian only he can warn or present a card. If anyone else outside of those two approach the ref they get an immediate yellow.

I might be wrong but I thought there was already a rule for surrounding the referee that resulted in a yellow card 

[moore_94]

2 minutes ago, jammie82uk said:

I might be wrong but I thought there was already a rule for surrounding the referee that resulted in a yellow card 

Don't think I actually see that really happen either, if anything I think it is one thing we need to do more because everyone else does it

[RGFox]

Think we may need to deploy popism against yanited on sat. Really fearful about this without Evans.

[sacreblueits442]

3 hours ago, cruzFOX said:

How about once a whistle is blown NO ONE touches the ball? Only the ref goes and picks it up and places it in the correct spot. Any interference prior to that or during it leads to an immediate yellow card! Yes this requires the ref to do a bit more graft but he'll have total control of the situation now. Same with any whistle blown for a foul - all players on both sides except the injured moves away 25 yards. Ref assesses the situation and calls back the offender and the captian only he can warn or present a card. If anyone else outside of those two approach the ref they get an immediate yellow. It sounds draconian but we have these zero tolerance rules for kids so why not adults too? It's too soft right now which means players will test the refs all the time. Our players are among the better behaved in the league but there are some awful repeat offenders on other teams.

....just to be sure, if the ref blows his whistle and the ball breaks to any player on the pitch, if it is a late whistle the player will undoubtedly play the ball!!!

   The game is too fast paced for it not to happen, and a player running away from the ball where it is something like 40 yards away from the incident, will effectively slow the game down, because the referee will have to go and fetch the ball and bring it to where the offence occurred. 

 I cannot see that lasting too long as the referee will inevitably ask a player to pass the ball back to him.

[Spudulike]

Referees need more guidance on players going down 'injured' to waste time and prevent opposition attacking momentum as highlighted by the Smith Rowe incident yesterday.

 

There was no consistancy in decisions as mentioned by Rodgers when the exact same incident occurred in the first half when Soumare was on the floor. 

 

Players need to be warned that refs will allow play to proceed if no foul has been committed unless its an obvious or head injury. Perhaps that might go some way in making players think twice before crying wolf. It seemed to me that Smith Rowe would've been back on his feet pretty sharpish if the ref waved play on. No trainer required. 

[jmono84]

5 minutes ago, Spudulike said:

Referees need more guidance on players going down 'injured' to waste time and prevent opposition attacking momentum as highlighted by the Smith Rowe incident yesterday.

 

There was no consistancy in decisions as mentioned by Rodgers when the exact same incident occurred in the first half when Soumare was on the floor. 

 

Players need to be warned that refs will allow play to proceed if no foul has been committed unless its an obvious or head injury. Perhaps that might go some way in making players think twice before crying wolf. It seemed to me that Smith Rowe would've been back on his feet pretty sharpish if the ref waved play on. No trainer required. 

Yet another bottling refereeing performance. He indicated straight away it wasn’t a foul and the ball was won but moments later stopped play for him. Stick to your decisions or go do something else.

[lazlofox]

Arsenal did it a few times yesterday, one of them went down in thier own box in the 2nd half and thier keeper went over to talk to him and you just knew he was telling him to stay down.

 

You need more Red Cards to stop cheating, Evans as the last man should have been off as well.

[Matt]

No-one had a problem with us doing it last week though?

 

 

Thought not.

 

Edited 31 October 2021 by Matt

[whetstonefox]

Think it’s amazing how many players get tackled but immediately go down holding their heads, guess that’s to con the ref that it’s a head injury so play will be stopped. 
 

Burnley are the worst but imagine most teams when they are winning just want to either slow the game down or stop and start so their opponents lose any momentum. 

[Spudulike]

19 minutes ago, Matt said:

No-one had a problem with us doing it last week though?

 

 

Thought not.

 

Which incidents are you referring to? 

 

I hate time wasting by anyone.