if it’s the same “actual playing time” then why change it?, it’s better with time wasting and all that other stuff, makes it more exciting. they always try and change football and it just gets annoying
Adopting two halves of 30 minutes with the clock stopped when the ball goes out of play is one of dozens of ideas put forward by IFAB in a bid to make football more attractive.
IFAB says the Fair Play! document has three aims - to improve player behaviour and increase respect, to increase playing time and to increase fairness and attractiveness.
“Many people are very frustrated that a typical 90-minute match has fewer than 60 minutes of effective (actual) playing time (EPT) i.e. when the ball is in play,” IFAB said in the document.
still think they should just leave it as it is though,
Are you drunk?
drunk on orange squash
I love the idea of cutting out time wasting but reducing 30 minutes of dead ball action seems a lot even in today’s modern game?
Will never happen anyway, quite a lot in modern football needs to be addressed first before completely reshaping the dynamic of play time.
Only thing of these suggestions I can see happening (and welcome) is the goal kick after a missed penalty.
Yeah because football is so unpopular at the moment…
I don’t think the idea is ridiculous per se - if it really is true that there is 30 minutes of dead ball action (this can’t be the case in every match surely?) - but I still don’t support the proposal. I know football has evolved over the years but this seems too big of a step to take. While some changes should be made, football doesn’t need an entire reform.
Also, IFAB sounds like a dating app… run by apple.
Hope they don’t make a Winter break, there’d be no way of entertaining yourself over the festive period. How about 0 points for a 0-0 draw? Mourinho would be finished. It’d encourage more attacking football.
Not sure I agree with that decision. Maybe just officiate a fucking game a little better?
Not that it is a big issue but if this comes into play what will they do for final league day results etc. All matches start at the same time and hope to end pretty much at the same time for a reason, but with this you can have some prat of a team wasting a shit tonne of time or what of a bad injury etc. You will have the matches all ending at different times. I know its not a big deal really but i thought they did the final match at the same time so they could all pretty much end at the same time for suspense etc.
First comes stoppages in the clock. Next comes timeouts for commercials. Then you’ll have 3 hours to get through a football match. One of the reasons I love the sport is because it’s so different from American sports. However every time I read how they are trying to change the game it gets closer and closer to the shit american format. The only good idea was changing the PL into a playoff format because then Arsenal would actually win the PL from time to time as we proven over the lasr several years we can win in knockout tournaments.
no it fucking wasn’t.
Would kill the league. This isn’t the NFL
yeah exactly, whoever finishes top at the end of a long hard season deserves to win the title
Football is the most popular game in the world and has been for more than a century.
Why change it?
It’s just some official at FIFA who has come up with this idea that wants to make a name for himself.
But a team who finishes 4th in the same league can then win the even bigger prize of the champions league.
Most sports do play off situations now. 20 years ago id hate the idea but now im more open to it.
Both Rugby codes went down that road and its improved them sports after years of league title championships.
I agree it suits those sports but I think there’s a significant difference between a 22 game season and a 38 game one.
Im not totally sold either tbh but think theres a bit of a contradiction in peoples outlook when they are happy to embrace the champions League format without any qualms.
Its a competition with qualification conditions, if you meet them, you’re in. I see no contradiction whatsoever.
Thats would be my reasoning like the rugby codes use for the play off system and why I think I can come round to the proposal.
Also im using the CL argument as this was an established comp that had its qualification format watered down if you like.
I see where you’re coming from, just don’t quite go along with the reasoning. If you look at the equivalent European Rugby tournament (union anyway, have no idea about league) its still league position that determines qualification there. In effect the final league table qualifies teams for the playoffs and for Europe. I don’t feel that would ever be compatible with a 38 game PL season. And that’s what we’re stuck with because as I understand it it would take 16 out of 20 teams to vote for a reduction in the amount of PL teams.
I certainly agree that the CL has been watered down over the years but it strikes me as odd then to use that as a justification for potentially reducing the significance of the PL season.
I suspect the FA would love to take 4 games off the PL calendar and replace them with an 8 team knock out tournament with all the games taking place in Wembley. But I hope it doesnt happen personally.