World Cup 2018 LIVE thread (151 Viewers)

s4tch

s4tch

Senior Member
#12,161
Mar 23, 2015
33,502
#12,161
Seven said:
I honestly don't understand what you are talking about. It would still be 2x30 minutes. If anything it would be more predictable how long a game would take. If advertising revenue was negatively impacted by any of this, then how do you explain the existence of the NBA?
Click to expand...
you mean 2x30 minutes of clean playing time would make the match length more predictable than 2x45 minutes (+ usually 3-5 minutes of overtime)? now i don't understand you at all. first of all, you said that you hated france's time wasting. when would you stop the clock? at every foul when it takes the player more than 3 seconds to get up? that rule would become a tactical weapon in no time, and france players would get down every minute, just to stop the clock, break the flow of the game and get some rest. i wonder how long it would take to witness the first 70-minute 2nd half.

nba is an american sport, and its popularity outside the us tv market is nowhere near football. you can't see nba or nfl on any european non-sport channel on a regular base. also, us major sports are a different spectacle than european football. i read a while ago that an average nfl match has like 11 minutes of pure game time, and the whole game lasts about 3 hours. 11 minutes ffs :D replays and commercials take way more time during an nfl game than the actual game itself. you can't have it in football. also, nba is pretty predictable about commercials: you have a certain number of time outs, you have the breaks between quarters, and there you have it. in football, there's no time out, just two halfs and one single break in between. the number of potential commercial breaks during matches would be influenced by the style of the two teams, and that's some uncertainty you can't afford in tv advertising. and that would completely screw your schedule, so cable channels would be out of the bidding for champions league matches.

you can say a lot of things about fifa and uefa, but you can't say that they don't know how to sell football. if all they'd need is some pure game time to make football better and more profitable, how do you explain the longevity of the current format? nobody would ever touch that. why is stopping the clock during matches an other 'only on tuz' kind of idea? why the smart and corrupt, money-driven leaders of the sport have never ever thought of introducing it?

i'm still saying that consistent refreeing is the key to stop play acting and time wasting.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com
Seven

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
#12,162
Jun 25, 2003
39,307
#12,162
s4tch said:
you mean 2x30 minutes of clean playing time would make the match length more predictable than 2x45 minutes (+ usually 3-5 minutes of overtime)? now i don't understand you at all. first of all, you said that you hated france's time wasting. when would you stop the clock? at every foul when it takes the player more than 3 seconds to get up? that rule would become a tactical weapon in no time, and france players would get down every minute, just to stop the clock, break the flow of the game and get some rest. i wonder how long it would take to witness the first 70-minute 2nd half.

nba is an american sport, and its popularity outside the us tv market is nowhere near football. you can't see nba or nfl on any european non-sport channel on a regular base. also, us major sports are a different spectacle than european football. i read a while ago that an average nfl match has like 11 minutes of pure game time, and the whole game lasts about 3 hours. 11 minutes ffs :D replays and commercials take way more time during an nfl game than the actual game itself. you can't have it in football. also, nba is pretty predictable about commercials: you have a certain number of time outs, you have the breaks between quarters, and there you have it. in football, there's no time out, just two halfs and one single break in between. the number of potential commercial breaks during matches would be influenced by the style of the two teams, and that's some uncertainty you can't afford in tv advertising. and that would completely screw your schedule, so cable channels would be out of the bidding for champions league matches.

you can say a lot of things about fifa and uefa, but you can't say that they don't know how to sell football. if all they'd need is some pure game time to make football better and more profitable, how do you explain the longevity of the current format? nobody would ever touch that. why is stopping the clock during matches an other 'only on tuz' kind of idea? why the smart and corrupt, money-driven leaders of the sport have never ever thought of introducing it?

i'm still saying that consistent refreeing is the key to stop play acting and time wasting.
Click to expand...

You don't know what stopping the clock means, so clearly all debate is kind of useless now.
 
s4tch

s4tch

Senior Member
#12,163
Mar 23, 2015
33,502
#12,163
Seven said:
You don't know what stopping the clock means, so clearly all debate is kind of useless now.
Click to expand...
you might not be aware that there are different rules for it in different sports. it doesn't work the same way in handball, in basketball and in american football, and since you never cared to explain how would you introduce your sports saving rule, i can't but make assumptions.
 
Dantes

Dantes

Senior Member
#12,164
Dec 15, 2017
1,042
#12,164
I can certainly guarantee this would not be approved by IFAB, as all rule changes need approval by at least one of the four British FA’s. There is 0% interest here in the further Americanisation of football and more adverts.

Also, I’m not sure anyone cares enough about ‘time-wasting’ to make this happen. And if they did, more likely that refs will be directed to issue cards than a restructuring of the match experience, of which the consequences are unknown.
 
Seven

Seven

In bocca al lupo, Fabio.
#12,166
Jun 25, 2003
39,307
#12,166
s4tch said:
you might not be aware that there are different rules for it in different sports. it doesn't work the same way in handball, in basketball and in american football, and since you never cared to explain how would you introduce your sports saving rule, i can't but make assumptions.
Click to expand...
None of those games stop the clock just arbitrarily though.

- - - Updated - - -

Dantes said:
I can certainly guarantee this would not be approved by IFAB, as all rule changes need approval by at least one of the four British FA’s. There is 0% interest here in the further Americanisation of football and more adverts.

Also, I’m not sure anyone cares enough about 'time-wasting’ to make this happen. And if they did, more likely that refs will be directed to issue cards than a restructuring of the match experience, of which the consequences are unknown.
Click to expand...
This isn't an Americanisation. It happens in plenty of sports.

Another possibility is a straight red card for timewasting. Yellow cards don't work, because they don't deter enough and furthermore they cause even more time to be wasted. It has to be said though that timewasting is much less of a problem in the CL, precisely because refs take quicker action. But that brings us to the most obvious of problems: only European refs are equipped to be at the World Cup in the first place.
 
Dantes

Dantes

Senior Member
#12,167
Dec 15, 2017
1,042
#12,167
It’s certainly true that only European refs have enough top-level match experience to officiate in the WC. It would, however, be a very bold move from FIFA to implement.

Perhaps the continental associations could be working together to identify and give opportunity to the best around the globe, e.g. UEFA could offer a development path for quality non-European refs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 150)