Northern Ireland 1, England nil

Why couldn’t it work just like hockey? The ball has to preceed the players into the offensive zone. You could pass to a player over the line as long as the ball crossed the line first.

Why couldn’t it work just like hockey?

You assume I understand how it works in Hockey ;)

The ball has to preceed the players into the offensive zone. You could pass to a player over the line as long as the ball crossed the line first.

Gotcha. Theoretically I guess it could work but it does seem to me that it risks really dulling the game down by severly limiting both defensive and attacking options. On a small “pitch” like you have in Hockey (compared to a football pitch) it’s probably not a bad idea but it would seem to have the potential to kill off a lot of moves current in football.

It seems to make sense in hockey as it seems to be both a faster paced game and that much more difficult for a player to quickly reverse direction than it is for Football.

Not too many people here care too much either, we’re all too excited about the possibility of beating Australia in a cricket Test series for the first time in 18 years :) .

Edit: I should add I’m originally from Yorkshire, where football is something you do while waiting for the cricket season to start.

Stoppage time is indeed televised - the clock simply keeps counting past 90 min, and usually the broadcast will display the announced amount of extra time added next to the clock.

[quote]The ball has to preceed the players into the offensive zone. You could pass to a player over the line as long as the ball crossed the line first.

Gotcha. Theoretically I guess it could work but it does seem to me that it risks really dulling the game down by severly limiting both defensive and attacking options. On a small “pitch” like you have in Hockey (compared to a football pitch) it’s probably not a bad idea but it would seem to have the potential to kill off a lot of moves current in football.[/quote]
Actually, this has already been tried, thirty years ago. This is exactly how it worked in the NASL. The offside line was the 35-yard line rather than midfield.

Dr Fear- You have to know that’s not what he was asking for. Unlike, say, basketball, where after one second a television viewer can grasp the situation, a soccer viewer sees 94:34 and learns absolutely nothing.

If you simply must use stoppage time, after the 90 minutes are over the clock should start counting down from the announced stoppage time.

How does he learn nothing? I’m not trying to be obtuse, but it’s hard to argue with someone who is hearing stuff secondhand, like you and Levine. It doesn’t just say “94:34” - on the TV screen it usually stops at 90, and then a second timer comes up next to it, and starts counting from 0:00. So you’d see something like 90:00 (in red) and then next to it, 4:34, probably with a “5” in the lower corner showing stoppage time announced (if it was 5 minutes for example). And I’d see that and think uh oh, thirty seconds left and check the score.

And anyway, even if it did just say 94:34, how can you say a soccer fan learns nothing? If I saw a clock that read 94:34 and I was watching a soccer game, I’d say wow, this game is in extra time (not stoppage time). Just like you usually have a 1 or 2 next to the time on the TV clock (picture 54:12 [2]) you see “ET” next to extra time. As a soccer fan, I’d be able to assimilate all this information in a second or two.

How is this any different from a baseball game where you see 7th [down arrow] to show that it’s the bottom of the seventh inning? What the heck does that mean? What does 2-2 2 out mean? Oh wait, I know the rules of baseball.

If you simply must use stoppage time, after the 90 minutes are over the clock should start counting down from the announced stoppage time.

problem with that is you can get extra time within extra time. If, for example, a player is injured within stoppage time and needs treatment and possibly has to be stretchered off, that can stop the game for a couple of minutes, Referee can add that time onto the game despite having already called 4 minutes (or whatever) of extra time.

A lot of it is discrentionary such as adding on time when a team is blatantly timewasting. Some timewasting is tolerated, but deliberately not putting the ball into play from a throw in, goal kick or freekick for example might be penalised not only with a freekick to the opposing team, but by the referee just adding that wasted time onto the game.

Dr Fear- I have watched soccer telecasts were there was no display of the stoppage time remaining. I’m not making it up. It was on ESPN.

Nellie- Well, my first suggestion was to stop the clock when the ball is out of play. Somehow you guys manage that during halftime.

Why is it so important that matches end at the exact second? I honestly don’t get it.

Kalle- Why bother to have a clock at all then? Play till people feel like going home.

Maybe ESPN back in the 80s. I’m pretty sure they show stoppage clocks now - it’s fairly easy to do.

As for ending on a particular second, it’s always a subjective thing when it comes to soccer, given the variable times that gameplay stops for injuries, throw-ins, set-piece plays, etc.

— Alan

Nellie- Well, my first suggestion was to stop the clock when the ball is out of play. Somehow you guys manage that during halftime.

No reason why it couldn’t work.

FIFA, let alone UEFA or the FA (world, European and UK governing bodies respectively) are notoriously slow to introduce technology that would enable something like this as the referee would need to control the clock viewed on the TV screen rather than the TV director as it’s at the referee’s discretion how much extra time is added. FIFA especially isn’t slow to introduce daft caveats to the standard game rules, but the suggestion that cameras on the goal-line or chips in the ball to decide once and for all whether the ball has crossed the line has been dragging on for years.

They just this year started using goal-line cameras - I forget the venue, the Premiership or Champion’s League.

— Alan

Not knowing when the referee might blow his whistle just adds to the excitement. If you knew that the game was going to end in 5 seconds and the ball was in your keeper’s hands, you could relax. When it could be 5 seconds or 60, then it means you have to stay gripping the edge of your seat until you hear that final peep.

To be honest, changing the rules of a sport that is played, watched and understood by billions, so that a few million who don’t really care about it anyway can understand it better doesn’t really make any sense.