Stoppage Time

[Trina]

Was having a chat to my other half earlier about this. We all know in some games (like when man u are loosing ) the stoppage time is questionable.

So why not do it like they do it rugby? Not exactly like it as they stop for other things football doesnt, but instead of having the timer throughout the game and the stoppage time at the end, why not just stop the clock as it happens? Then when 90 mins is up thats your lot.

Thoughts?

[GunnGunn]

Get back in the kitchen

In all seriousness though, i like stoppage time but only when its implemented properly.

[Trina]

oi! I was being serious! If it was done this way, then it would be done properly and also everyone could see that. Don't see what the difference would be except it being done actually right. Wouldn't make a difference to the game either.

And the kitchen is clean

[Massa]

Could always be cleaner

& Stoppage time is amazingly high tempo, keep it imo

[Forest]

In our league it can be but in others its a waste and pointless.

[Trina]

Could always be cleaner

& Stoppage time is amazingly high tempo, keep it imo

Cheeky get.

It is high tempo, but it still would be at the end.

Guess its just me then that thinks its good lol.

[Fabrestuta]

Sorry Trina I think it's a horrible idea. Come to America and watch a one hour game and see how long it takes due to stoppages. I just watched a one hour college football game and it literally took 4 hours.

[Leody]

Honestly, while it would be logical... I'm also against it. It is different for one, which adds to the appeal of the game in general. And most importantly like Massa says, it is so high tempo! The little bit of not really knowing adds to the hysteria of the moment when the game is still up for grabs.

I don't really see too many times where there is really that big a question about the amount added, and it rarely really changes the game. Man U v Man City last year was the exception, not the rule.

[Fabrestuta]

Well to be fair United have had the benefit of many dubious stoppage time calls Leody. Not just last year, over many years. That aside I don't want the clock stopped. If we can't come up with a good good way to even figure out if a flippin ball crosses the goal line Fifa and Uefa would surely eff up a time management issue.

Keep it as it is. Sometimes it goes in your favour, sometimes it doesn't.

[Goose]

Honestly, while it would be logical... I'm also against it. It is different for one, which adds to the appeal of the game in general. And most importantly like Massa says, it is so high tempo! The little bit of not really knowing adds to the hysteria of the moment when the game is still up for grabs.

I don't really see too many times where there is really that big a question about the amount added, and it rarely really changes the game. Man U v Man City last year was the exception, not the rule.

Sunderland vs Arsenal, immediately springs to mind

Trina, dont worry, I have always wondered the same thing, I think some people just like keeping football in the dark ages, no goal line technology, no video replays, oranges at half time etc

[Fabrestuta]

I don't think its the dark ages Goose. Why stop the clock all the time? It just seems overly picky.

[Leody]

Well to be fair United have had the benefit of many dubious stoppage time calls Leody.

I'm very well aware of that Fab's, but honestly how often does it really change the game. Sure sometimes they may get 4 or 5min added and score in stoppage, but was the game changing goal in that final min, or the first or second?

End of the day, it is a flawed system... but one that I prefer for certain.

Besides, what happens when we change it to a system like Trina brings up and the clock runs out as a player takes a shot that goes in just after the time runs out? Does that not count now? I'd rather have the current system then something like that.

[Fabrestuta]

Well to be fair United have had the benefit of many dubious stoppage time calls Leody.

I'm very well aware of that Fab's, but honestly how often does it really change the game. Sure sometimes they may get 4 or 5min added and score in stoppage, but was the game changing goal in that final min, or the first or second?

End of the day, it is a flawed system... but one that I prefer for certain.

Besides, what happens when we change it to a system like Trina brings up and the clock runs out as a player takes a shot that goes in just after the time runs out? Does that not count now? I'd rather have the current system then something like that.

I was just being facetious about the manc thing as everyone knows it by now. In regard to actually implementing clock stoppages, it will start to be abused, players faking "serious" injuries etc, they do it now but it will just go the other way.
In regard to the shot thing, I totally agree it opens up Pandoras box. In ice hockey if it doesn't go in before the horn thing sounds its not a goal, but in basketball and American football as long as you shoot/pass etc before time runs out it counts. Its by NO means a perfect system, but there is other glaring issues that need to be resolved before we start stopping the clock at every opportunity.

[Leody]

I hadn't even thought about the silliness of the NBA... that's a good point. At the end of every quarter they go to the video to review if the shot left the player's hand before the buzzer. Give me a break. Half the time the ball is CLEARLY out of his hands, but ZOMG WE HAVE TO REVIEW!

It has gotten a bit OTT here in the States with instant replays in every sport. Sometimes it is welcomed though, like in American football where the refs on the field clearly got the call wrong. Having a video official in the booth like most college games is probably the best way to handle that. But with the thousands of stoppages in American football they have time for a system like that. Not so in real football.

Got a little off topic there... sorry...

[Yorkyblue]

Just to add, in Rugby League, when the clock is up, the ball stays 'alive' until the next tackle,score, or ball goes out of play.