Too Many Stoppages In Football ?
As a watcher of football in general, I feel the game as a whole has lost some of it flowingness (Is that a word:D)
Everytime someone touches a rival player, they just fall to the ground getting a foul. It's one of the reasons I don't watch Rugby, too many stoppages.
Niggly fouls every few minutes upsets the flow completely. It never used to be like that though.
Whether it be Spain, Italy or Germany, the niggly fouls seem to stop the game.
Anyone else feel the game has become to picky in what's a foul and what isn't?
Everytime someone touches a rival player, they just fall to the ground getting a foul. It's one of the reasons I don't watch Rugby, too many stoppages.
Niggly fouls every few minutes upsets the flow completely. It never used to be like that though.
Whether it be Spain, Italy or Germany, the niggly fouls seem to stop the game.
Anyone else feel the game has become to picky in what's a foul and what isn't?
0
Comments
It does seem that the physical side of the game has gone away. Would Greame Souness or Roy Keane last long in todays game, playing the way they did?
I think advantage could be played more with some referrees better than others. Give it a few seconds if the team looks like it may have an advantage and if it doesn't materialise pull it back. Some refs whistle too quickly.
I've seen Phil Dowd do this even with a penalty ( he gets some things right ! ) and then give the penalty when a possible goal didn't result. He was, in my view correctly, widely praised for that.
As to when a foul is or isn't really a foul that is in the eye of the beholder ( and for what counts, the referree ) and perhaps some players' acting abilities.
The ref could leave many of them and carry on with the game letting the player waste their and their teams own time. The fouth official can always step in if they think there needs to be a stoppage.
I played women's rugby at university and even though I considered myself to be above average in fitness and stamina, I still found myself puffing during long periods of continuous play. The constant short sprints, with rapid turns followed by more short sprints, sometimes backwards and then having to put in physically punishing tackles took their toll.
Footballers don't have that sort of intense physical contact to contend with, but their sprints tend to be over longer distances which can cause their body to go into anaerobic respiration with the concomitant build up of lactic acid which is not good news for any athlete in any sport.
Long spells of continuous play may be exciting to watch, but spare a thought for the players. They're only human. They need to breathe like everybody else.
However, there is a far greater emphasis upon closing opponents down nowadays and that certainly requires stamina. You don't see any John Robertsons playing nowadays, that's for sure
I assume you played rugby union rather than rugby league Cornishpickle?
I'd s that rugby union requires far less stamina than rugby league or football, as there are far more stoppages.
Spot on regarding video technology.
Video technology should stop with GLT. I don't want to end up watching a game where you have so many challenges per game, and it's stop-start-stop-start every few minutes.
Where would it end? How long would you have to make a call? If it's wrong where would it go back too?
I also like the fact that referees and their assistants make mistakes. It's human error and it makes the game interesting with all the talking points.
- Don't stop play for offside when the ball has already been cleared by the defending side and they are on the counter attack, play the advantage.
- If a player (other than the keeper) ends up injured off the pitch, as long as the injury isn't evidently life or career threatening, then re-commence play straight away, the player can be treated equally well off the pitch.
- If the attacking team has a free kick well in their own half and it is evident the keeper or other player is going to thump the ball 70 or 80 yards up-field, does it really matter if the kick is taken 4 or 5 yards forward of where it should be?
If the ref says 4 minutes to be added, they actually play 4 minutes - the clock stops for every stoppage of every nature.
At present, by the time there's been a couple of slow throw in's, a goal kick and a painfully slow substitution the ref's blow up with little or no actual live action played.
I know it has more stoppages than football but maybe they could try it. If a player is injured then the physio can run on and see to the player (or tell them to get the **** up)
This.
Players who "play act" would soon get up or stop it all together.
This would cut out all the play acting to get play stopped, and if a player is genuinely injured then they will get medical attention soonest, rather than having to wait for someone to boot the ball out or allow the ref to stop the match. What would have happened if the ref thought Patrice Muamba was not seriously ill?
Of course, if a player is clearly badly injured, has a head injury or is right in the middle of the goal then play could be stopped as it is already.
I totally agree. Games these days don't finish until t least 4:50/55 some weekends when it used to be around 4:45 ish