Time-Wasting

**mypost** · 08/04/2005, 4:31 AM

One of my pet hates in football is how teams waste time in games. Some teams have goalkeepers who take ages to take goal-kicks, and some change the side where they take goal-kicks. Others have players who stay down for longer than necessary after a challenge. Other teams players kick the ball away. Coaches too make injury time subs, to waste time.

But the one I hate most, is teams playing corner-flag football near the end of games, even if one of my teams benefits. They should be punished by conceding a free-kick, and recieve a yellow card. Keeping the ball at the flag is guaranteed to lose you possession, by conceding a free-kick or goal kick. The player also risks getting a bad challenge from a frustrated defender. It would be better to try to score than hold the ball up.

One such example was the Rovers game at Finn Harps. We were attacking with 5 minutes to go, when one of our players decided to hold the ball up in the corner. Then he lost possession, Harps got a throw-in, and scored their equalizer in injury time. We could have scored from that attack to win the game, but we kept the ball in the corner, and it cost us 2 points.

The same happened to us in Israel, how many times did we hold the ball up, instead of attacking the opposition, and we were punished in injury time. If we attacked the Israelis, we would probably have scored a few more goals, and throwing away 2 points could affect our bid to qualify. When will coaches ever learn? If players were booked for it, it would soon stop. It's better to try to score than hold the ball up in the corner, only to lose it and risk losing what you have.

**bluemovie** · 08/04/2005, 1:21 PM

Originally Posted by mypost

But the one I hate most, is teams playing corner-flag football near the end of games, even if one of my teams benefits. They should be punished by conceding a free-kick, and recieve a yellow card. Keeping the ball at the flag is guaranteed to lose you possession, by conceding a free-kick or goal kick. The player also risks getting a bad challenge from a frustrated defender. It would be better to try to score than hold the ball up.

What the Hell are you talking about?

How can a player be booked for legally keeping the ball at his feet or passing to a nearby team-mate?? If keeping the ball is guaranteed to lose you possession, then why would you need to be booked for it? Surely Ronaldinho and Zidane are the worst players in the world in that case.

The worst thing in football is a glory-hunting striker taking a pot-shot in the last minute, then expecting his knackered team-mates to pick up the pieces when the ball comes down the other end again. It's a basic mental skill of the game to know when to hold the ball. If your defence need the pressure relieved in the last minute, then the forward should take the ball to the corner. It's a team game. If he gets clattered by "a frustrated defender", so what.....he wins a free, the other team can't get the ball to score and his team wins the game.

By the way, I'm a centre half in case you didn't guess.

**BobtheDrog** · 08/04/2005, 1:51 PM

Originally Posted by mypost

One of my pet hates in football is how teams waste time in games. Some teams have goalkeepers who take ages to take goal-kicks, and some change the side where they take goal-kicks. Others have players who stay down for longer than necessary after a challenge. Other teams players kick the ball away. Coaches too make injury time subs, to waste time.

But the one I hate most, is teams playing corner-flag football near the end of games, even if one of my teams benefits. They should be punished by conceding a free-kick, and recieve a yellow card. Keeping the ball at the flag is guaranteed to lose you possession, by conceding a free-kick or goal kick. The player also risks getting a bad challenge from a frustrated defender. It would be better to try to score than hold the ball up.

One such example was the Rovers game at Finn Harps. We were attacking with 5 minutes to go, when one of our players decided to hold the ball up in the corner. Then he lost possession, Harps got a throw-in, and scored their equalizer in injury time. We could have scored from that attack to win the game, but we kept the ball in the corner, and it cost us 2 points.

The same happened to us in Israel, how many times did we hold the ball up, instead of attacking the opposition, and we were punished in injury time. If we attacked the Israelis, we would probably have scored a few more goals, and throwing away 2 points could affect our bid to qualify. When will coaches ever learn? If players were booked for it, it would soon stop. It's better to try to score than hold the ball up in the corner, only to lose it and risk losing what you have.

U really wudnt have enjoyed that drogs pats match last week

**BohDiddley** · 08/04/2005, 2:22 PM

Are you any good? What are your terms?

**bluemovie** · 09/04/2005, 3:00 PM

Originally Posted by BohDiddley

Are you any good? What are your terms?

Put it this way, I'm better than Jimmy Aggrey, but a couple of inches shorter.

**BohDiddley** · 09/04/2005, 5:48 PM

In that case, you're hired, once you understand that we're skint and can't pay you. Jimmy Aggrey is our best player. He's scored more than Glen Crowe.

**Coltron** · 10/04/2005, 12:16 PM

I agree completely with you Mypost. It annoys me when I see players running to corner flags with the ball in a pathetic attempt to waste a few seconds. My view on it is that its a sign of desperation and a distinct lack of belief. The amount of cash in the game now, results, not quality of football or any other values for that matter, is paramount. If players believed in themselves and were not afraid of the ball in the dying moments of the game and took some responsibilty them this mightn't be as prominant as it is. Do you think you would see AC Milan, Real Madrid or Brasil running to the corner in desperation? To pick a good example, Roy Keane, when time is running out and he has the ball does he put his head down and try to blast the ball out of the stadium? No, he looks for a team mate and plays a nice short pass. He is a superb player and his true quality shines true in times like these. If only others took a leaf from his book instead from some other insecure, cheat.

**pineapple stu** · 10/04/2005, 9:09 PM

Originally Posted by Coltron

I agree completely with you Mypost. It annoys me when I see players running to corner flags with the ball in a pathetic attempt to waste a few seconds. My view on it is that its a sign of desperation and a distinct lack of belief.

Ask John Barnes if he agrees with you after the end to the 1989/90 season!

Andy Townsend against Italy in 1994 remembered that game when he had the ball in injury time and ran into the corner - no complaints then!

If the ball's in play, there's nothing wrong with it really. What does annoy me (not time-wasting really) is standing in front of an opponent to shield the ball out of play while making no attempt to play the ball - surely obstruction and an indirect free kick in?

**mypost** · 11/04/2005, 4:43 AM

Originally Posted by bluemovie

What the Hell are you talking about?

How can a player be booked for legally keeping the ball at his feet or passing to a nearby team-mate?? If keeping the ball is guaranteed to lose you possession, then why would you need to be booked for it? Surely Ronaldinho and Zidane are the worst players in the world in that case. It's a basic mental skill of the game to know when to hold the ball. If your defence need the pressure relieved in the last minute, then the forward should take the ball to the corner. It's a team game. If he gets clattered by "a frustrated defender", so what.....he wins a free, the other team can't get the ball to score and his team wins the game.

That doesn't mean it's not time-wasting. Refs book goalkeepers for taking too long for goal-kicks, book players for time-wasting at free-kicks, award throw-ins for the opposition when a player wastes time preparing to throw it. So why should playing keepy-uppy in the corner go unpunished? A Shels player was sent off against Cork recently when the ball was down by the corner flag. If a player gets clattered by a defender, he could get a serious injury.

As regards Andy Townsend against Italy, yes agreed, but it didn't happen as much then, as now. When teams play the ball down in the corner, they invariably lose the ball soon afterwards, conceding a free-kick or throw in. Sometimes, the other team then scores, and you end up losing what you have. So, it can be a self-defeating tactic also. If refs cracked down on it, it wouldn't happen anymore.

**pineapple stu** · 11/04/2005, 12:40 PM

Originally Posted by mypost

Refs book goalkeepers for taking too long for goal-kicks, book players for time-wasting at free-kicks, award throw-ins for the opposition when a player wastes time preparing to throw it. So why should playing keepy-uppy in the corner go unpunished?

Technical answer - which it sounds like you know anyway - is that for the others, the ball isn't in play. I don't think the definition of time-wasting covers incidents when the ball is in play. This is probably because when the ball is in play, the opposition are able to win the ball back, whereas they can't when it's out of play.

Never bothered me before, to be honest. Really don't think there's anything you can do about it either, because it's the kind of thing which would be very difficult to define in the rules.

**De Town** · 16/04/2005, 5:35 PM

On the note of time wasting.....

I was at an U-11's match this morning. One of the teams were 3-0 up with 4-5 minutes to play, and the coach was screaming at the players to put the ball in the corner and hold it there

Is it any wonder that players go into the corners to waste time when they are being trained to do it at 11 years old

**mypost** · 18/04/2005, 4:27 AM

At 3-0, that's taking the pis. They were hardly going to lose, were they?

One way of stopping the practice, is for referees to add on the time at the end of the game that is wasted down there, when a team is not actively trying to play the ball. Yes, the ball is is play, but as it is time-wasting, it's no different in my eyes to taking longer than necessary to take throw-ins, free-kicks, goal-kicks, treatment for injuries, and substitutions. All of that time-wasting makes up stoppage time, of which the time of "corner-flag" football should also be included. As it would then be a self-defeating tactic, it would soon stop.

**Hibs4Ever** · 18/04/2005, 7:51 AM

On a slightly different note, something I REALLY hate is players sheilding the ball out of play. It's clearly obstruction and would be a free kick anywhere else on the pitch

**fosterdollar** · 18/04/2005, 7:58 AM

Originally Posted by Saints4Ever

On a slightly different note, something I REALLY hate is players sheilding the ball out of play. It's clearly obstruction and would be a free kick anywhere else on the pitch

A classic example of this was demonstrated by Shearer yesterday. Should have been a free kick at least.

**monkey magic** · 18/04/2005, 3:59 PM

Originally Posted by mypost

At 3-0, that's taking the pis. They were hardly going to lose, were they?

One way of stopping the practice, is for referees to add on the time at the end of the game that is wasted down there, when a team is not actively trying to play the ball. Yes, the ball is is play, but as it is time-wasting, it's no different in my eyes to taking longer than necessary to take throw-ins, free-kicks, goal-kicks, treatment for injuries, and substitutions. All of that time-wasting makes up stoppage time, of which the time of "corner-flag" football should also be included. As it would then be a self-defeating tactic, it would soon stop.

way too hard to define;
1. how long do add on? surely ur not expecting the referee to time how long a player is on the ball

2. how do you define time wasting?? if a team take a short corner, does the referee add on the ten seconds of so it takes to get in the cross

any such rule would be a case of rulemaking gone stupid. the simple fact is you cannot lagislate for every little annoying aspect of the game, and in any case the opposing team has the option of absolutely creaming the player in question

that will make him tink twice bout doing it again...

the fact of the matter is the ball is still in play and so its up to the opposing team to regain possesion.

**monkey magic** · 18/04/2005, 4:19 PM

Originally Posted by Cop on

But when would we ever get to see Eric Lavine doing Samba ??

come to think of, unless my eyes decieved me, eric was up to his old tricks in the corner against bray on sat nite...

**mypost** · 21/04/2005, 3:47 AM

Originally Posted by monkey magic

way too hard to define;
1. how long do add on? surely ur not expecting the referee to time how long a player is on the ball

2. how do you define time wasting?? if a team take a short corner, does the referee add on the ten seconds of so it takes to get in the cross

Refs time how long it takes to take goal-kicks, free-kicks, subs etc, stop the watch, and add on the time at the end. They should also add it on, for the ball been kept in the corner-flag, as a) the ball is not been actively played, and b) is wasting time. You can't have rules for one act of time-wasting, and different rules for others. So time should be added on should happen when players waste time at the corner.

If your team is losing, it's frustrating, because it's time-wasting. If you're winning, it's frustrating, because 1) you want to get another goal to be certain of victory, it's 2) boring, and 3) you're guaranteed to lose possession at the end of it.

**bluemovie** · 21/04/2005, 10:42 AM

In that case the ref should have stopped his watch every time Jose Quitongo got the ball for us at the end of last season! Or when Nunez does for Liverpool.....games would go on all night.

**Stevo Da Gull** · 21/04/2005, 11:16 PM

Lads when the ball is in play, for example a team holding the ball by the corner flag, this is simply smart play. It frustrates the opposition who often end up giving away free-kicks by challenging too rashly to get the ball back because times running out. And if the tackle is a clean one then the ball will usually go out for a corner or throw-in to the leading side, it is simply smart tactics and fair tactics at that (even though it does'nt look pretty). If you were to make a rule in football where you always had to be attacking it would ruin the game.

Stalling on free-kicks and the like is a different matter and a booking is appropriate when such incidences occur.

**crc** · 21/04/2005, 11:38 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

What does annoy me (not time-wasting really) is standing in front of an opponent to shield the ball out of play while making no attempt to play the ball - surely obstruction and an indirect free kick in?

I get annoyed at this too. The reason why its technically not obstruction when a player shields the ball out, is because he is deemed to be in possession of the ball (even though he hasn't touched it).

I think it would be better if a player wasn't allowed to shepard the ball out in this way unless he has actually touched the ball (of course he wouldn't let it go out then, would he?). This rule would work on the same principle as the back-pass law - the idea being that it is better for the game to keep the ball in play.