Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Time-wasting

  1. #1

    Time-wasting

    After the game Saturday I was thinking about time-wasting in a game. I can’t really criticise the Weston keeper for it as if it was the other way round then we wouldn’t be bothered.

    The BBC website has an article which says after analysing 19 top flight games the ball was only in play for an average of 61 minutes.

    Just thought I’d start the debate on this. Do you feel short changed by time-wasting?

    I also find it pointless to book a player in the 90th minute for wasting time. Has a player ever been booked twice in a game for time-wasting?

  2. #2
    I remember at Corby the other season every time it went for a throw in or GK for City the Corby ball boys wouldn’t get it and on one occasion threw the ball behind them into the terrace...
    Last edited by Easty; 08-01-18 at 04:51 PM.

  3. #3
    I read that th FA are planning a trial soon that the clock is only running when the ball is in play,Would cut out time wasting completely I’d imagine.

  4. #4
    A big criticism I have of Gloucester City is we are too naive on the field. It's been the same for probably 20 years, apart from the odd player like Lee Smith, Matt Coupe or Jack Pitcher, it doesn't matter who the players are who or who's the manager.

    We don't do the dark arts well at all. It's always fun to complain about the time wasting but that's more to try and alert the referee to book the keeper and try and get us an advantage.

    Things we rarely do:
    1) time waste
    2) stand over balls
    3) influence referee
    4) go down in the area with contact
    5) leave balls that go off that are not ours when we are winning
    6) stay down and make a meal when you've been crunched to get the player booked
    7) see out the game
    8) test the referee after he's given penalties to the opposition
    9) kick balls away.

    There's probably many more and most teams we play do it.

    I know people will complain that it's not honest, but winning teams stretch the rules, that's just a fact.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by MrMatt View Post
    After the game Saturday I was thinking about time-wasting in a game. I can’t really criticise the Weston keeper for it as if it was the other way round then we wouldn’t be bothered.

    The BBC website has an article which says after analysing 19 top flight games the ball was only in play for an average of 61 minutes.

    Just thought I’d start the debate on this. Do you feel short changed by time-wasting?

    I also find it pointless to book a player in the 90th minute for wasting time. Has a player ever been booked twice in a game for time-wasting?
    If it’s 61 minutes then I’d say something has improved as I am sure 20+ years ago it was nearer 50 minutes. If the FA enforced 90 minutes of ball rolling time plus VAR then we could be looking at 3 hours being needed to play a game of football. If it’s a really good game then the crowd might be very happy but for a dour 0-0 or embarrassing thumping you’re just going to want the game to end.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by MeadowClark View Post
    A big criticism I have of Gloucester City is we are too naive on the field. It's been the same for probably 20 years, apart from the odd player like Lee Smith, Matt Coupe or Jack Pitcher, it doesn't matter who the players are who or who's the manager.

    We don't do the dark arts well at all. It's always fun to complain about the time wasting but that's more to try and alert the referee to book the keeper and try and get us an advantage.

    Things we rarely do:
    1) time waste
    2) stand over balls
    3) influence referee
    4) go down in the area with contact
    5) leave balls that go off that are not ours when we are winning
    6) stay down and make a meal when you've been crunched to get the player booked
    7) see out the game
    8) test the referee after he's given penalties to the opposition
    9) kick balls away.

    There's probably many more and most teams we play do it.

    I know people will complain that it's not honest, but winning teams stretch the rules, that's just a fact.
    Agreed. Costs us at least 5 points a season I reckon. On Saturday Karnell stayed on his feet when he could have won a penalty.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Longlevens
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe View Post
    Agreed. Costs us at least 5 points a season I reckon. On Saturday Karnell stayed on his feet when he could have won a penalty.
    Knowing our luck, he'd have probably been booked for diving!

  8. #8
    How about a rule, when its not your free kick or throw in, you cannot touch the ball unless in the opinion of the referee you are trying to speed up the game. If teams are not good enough to legitimately hang on to a win or a draw, so be it. People watching are essentially being cheated out of match time by the wasters

Posting Permissions

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