To me its not an understanding issue, its just not knowing exactly how much time is left. Could you image not knowing the exact time left in an NBA game. There would be no holding for the final shot etc. As someone explained about with the origins of the 2 min warning, the clock is probably due to lack of technology years ago. Since only the ref knows when he stops and start the time the scoreboard would either have to guess or just keep going and then go to "added time" With today's technology, there's no reason why you couldn't have an accurate remaining time. It's just keeping with tradition for the sake of tradition.
To me its not an understanding issue, its just not knowing exactly how much time is left. Could you image not knowing the exact time left in an NBA game. There would be no holding for the final shot etc. As someone explained about with the origins of the 2 min warning, the clock is probably due to lack of technology years ago. Since only the ref knows when he stops and start the time the scoreboard would either have to guess or just keep going and then go to "added time" With today's technology, there's no reason why you couldn't have an accurate remaining time. It's just keeping with tradition for the sake of tradition.
Personally< I like the idea of not knowing precisely how much time remains. It helps build some suspense. I was watching China v US women last night and there was a one goal difference with China trying to control the attack. (The game wasn't great soccer but no matter). I feel like the mystery of how many seconds were left added to the drama of CHina potentially scoring.
to score every 20 seconds in basketball. You are comparing apples to donuts.
You have what it says is left on the stoppage clock + a bit of overage if you have possession and are attacking. It’s used to also prevent teams from just running down the clock all game after getting a lead. Yes, discretion is used to determine the time but it it’s based on stoppages on play which the referees account for and then announce prior to halftime or the end of the game.
It really isn’t a problem at all unless you are trying to look for one. Anyone that watches the sport knows on average a couple minutes will be added unless there were a ton of injuries or penalties in which case 4 or 5 minutes may be added. It isn’t confusing, the only people who “care” are those that don’t like soccer or want to complain about it.
when the game is going to end. If they say 3 minutes of extra time, shortly after 3 minutes, if there isn't a scoring chance about to happen, the ref will blow the whistle.
I'm sure it is much more exciting to go to replay to determine .1 second remains so a team can have another chance to take a knee.
I get that some people don't like soccer. What amuses me is they think they have valid reasons to not like it when it appears to most other fans to be a crock of shit
did the US, Mexico, and Canada all go in on a bid together? I see that 60 of the 80 games will be in the US, but how did the plan originate? Other than Japan/South Korea in 2002, has there been a World Cup hosted by multiple countries? The one the US hosted in 1994 is still the most well-attended WC in history.
Other than when corrupt countries like Russia and Qatar bribe corrupt FIFA, is the plan going forward to have multiple countries host each World Cup?
Running time is fine. I just wish you knew how much stoppage time there was before the last 30 seconds.
Also, the stoppage time isn't exact as the ref allows a penalty or a corner if there is an attack going. He may allow a chance to score even if time has expired according to stoppage time.
the players play to the final whistle and the spectators watch until the final whistle. What exactly is the problem? Do you miss your flight home if stoppage goes an extra 30 seconds?
The experience is the exact same. What you don’t have is 5 timeouts inside 2 minutes which actually take 20 minutes to finish a game where you are left sitting and waiting for play to start.
Also, the diving complaints with soccer are old and off base Â
No they aren't. Showing a couple dives from other sports won't compare with the several per game in soccer - and I'm a soccer fan. Not all players on the ground are diving, true. But it is a convenient way to attract attention from the ref and far to prevalent in soccer.
is a blight on the game and certain countries are far more guilty than others, handing out reds for calls that are sometimes subjecive judgements could be very tricky.
I watch EPL every wknd and Ive noticed a lot more yellows handed out for diving which is greatly needed. All Im saying is that a red in say a WC elim match for a subjective dive interp when two players feet are closely tangled could be a real can of worms.
but the situation exists because for all of the talk about cracking down on diving, it still has had a minimal impact.
If they had put drastic measures in place previously instead of basically giving a slap on the wrist it would make some of these guys stay on their feet as long as possible.
The last thing the game needs is to be Americanized. If that were to happen we'd be changing the rules every year to favor offense and using endless replays because we couldn't properly define something as simple as a "catch".
Soccer's probably as popular as every other sport in the world combined...it'll do just fine without the people too thick to understand how the clock works.
I think there is a certain elitism from some U.S. soccer fans. They like the foreignness of the sport and don't want it too popular with the American public. They want it very European. Unfortunately that is what also keeps the sport from truly being embraced here. MLS seems like it tries to balance being a North American league with playoffs, no pro/rel, salary cap, etc. But also having European team names, clock counting up, did away with the shoot-outs ect.
It isn't just a European thing. As mentioned above - when you have injury time, how the heck are you going to go negative when the clock hits :00 and you still have time left?
you are suggesting to reverse the clock for what, just games on US soil? Is the entire world supposed to change it? Curious what the end game on that is.
and do DC. Sister and brother in law live right in Clarendon, VA and it would be less than an hour ride if I’m already visiting for the weekend than trying to drive to and from MetLife from CT which I can see being 3-4 hours each way for one of these games.
but just to clarify, in hockey the clock goes down on the broadcast for US and Canada viewers no matter where the game is played in International competition.
and on-ice (on arena scoreboards) it goes down too for US and Canada in the Olympics and other INTL competitions when the game is played in North America.
Whether the clock counts up or down doesn’t matter a whit Â
But I do think that in the 21st century the idea that the ending time of the game should be a secret held by one man on the field is stupid. Stoppage time is perfectly reasonable. But what’s the point of keeping it secret?
Have an official clock operator. And let the ref signal to stop the clock when there are injuries, undue delays, etc. How hard is this?
Once the end of stoppage time is hit, there isn't going to be a debate over if the ball was in the goal before the clock hits :00 or not. The progression of an attack is allowed to continue.
The ref doesn't blow the whistle dead mid shot or as a player is driving to the goal.
you are allowed to continue play when attacking if you are over the stoppage. If you shoot, it goes wide and then is a goal kick, the game is over.
21st century and tech advances have nothing to do with how Soccer manages time. To FMIC’s point they simply don’t want to stop mid-shot or have to start reviewing goals. All the players know that during stoppage time if the trailing team is attacking, they will be allowed to do so until losing possession after time expires. It really isn’t difficult, and placing a hard stop isn’t necessary. I still don’t even understand the need for it to increasing the viewing experience.
you are allowed to continue play when attacking if you are over the stoppage. If you shoot, it goes wide and then is a goal kick, the game is over.
21st century and tech advances have nothing to do with how Soccer manages time. To FMIC’s point they simply don’t want to stop mid-shot or have to start reviewing goals. All the players know that during stoppage time if the trailing team is attacking, they will be allowed to do so until losing possession after time expires. It really isn’t difficult, and placing a hard stop isn’t necessary. I still don’t even understand the need for it to increasing the viewing experience.
And people will still be saying DeOssie should be cut to save cap space.
You have what it says is left on the stoppage clock + a bit of overage if you have possession and are attacking. It’s used to also prevent teams from just running down the clock all game after getting a lead. Yes, discretion is used to determine the time but it it’s based on stoppages on play which the referees account for and then announce prior to halftime or the end of the game.
It really isn’t a problem at all unless you are trying to look for one. Anyone that watches the sport knows on average a couple minutes will be added unless there were a ton of injuries or penalties in which case 4 or 5 minutes may be added. It isn’t confusing, the only people who “care” are those that don’t like soccer or want to complain about it.
I'm sure it is much more exciting to go to replay to determine .1 second remains so a team can have another chance to take a knee.
I get that some people don't like soccer. What amuses me is they think they have valid reasons to not like it when it appears to most other fans to be a crock of shit
Other than when corrupt countries like Russia and Qatar bribe corrupt FIFA, is the plan going forward to have multiple countries host each World Cup?
We had to split the bribe three ways.
Running time is fine. I just wish you knew how much stoppage time there was before the last 30 seconds.
Also, the stoppage time isn't exact as the ref allows a penalty or a corner if there is an attack going. He may allow a chance to score even if time has expired according to stoppage time.
The experience is the exact same. What you don’t have is 5 timeouts inside 2 minutes which actually take 20 minutes to finish a game where you are left sitting and waiting for play to start.
Counting up time is actually more natural, since your normal watch/clock does not run backwards, but forwards!
No they aren't. Showing a couple dives from other sports won't compare with the several per game in soccer - and I'm a soccer fan. Not all players on the ground are diving, true. But it is a convenient way to attract attention from the ref and far to prevalent in soccer.
Counting up time is actually more natural, since your normal watch/clock does not run backwards, but forwards!
I'm pretty sure the clock goes up in international hockey as well
Especially since Netherlands and Robben are at home.
They've never gone far enough in punishing divers. If it happens in the box, it should be a straight red and a suspension.
Make it wholly unworth it to dive and it may stop people from doing it.
Team handball. Hockey. Soccer. Even European basketball leagues have it.
Basically the risk/reward for diving is tilted much more heavily towards the reward side.
If they had put drastic measures in place previously instead of basically giving a slap on the wrist it would make some of these guys stay on their feet as long as possible.
Soccer's probably as popular as every other sport in the world combined...it'll do just fine without the people too thick to understand how the clock works.
I think there is a certain elitism from some U.S. soccer fans. They like the foreignness of the sport and don't want it too popular with the American public. They want it very European. Unfortunately that is what also keeps the sport from truly being embraced here. MLS seems like it tries to balance being a North American league with playoffs, no pro/rel, salary cap, etc. But also having European team names, clock counting up, did away with the shoot-outs ect.
It isn't just a European thing. As mentioned above - when you have injury time, how the heck are you going to go negative when the clock hits :00 and you still have time left?
and on-ice (on arena scoreboards) it goes down too for US and Canada in the Olympics and other INTL competitions when the game is played in North America.
Have an official clock operator. And let the ref signal to stop the clock when there are injuries, undue delays, etc. How hard is this?
Once the end of stoppage time is hit, there isn't going to be a debate over if the ball was in the goal before the clock hits :00 or not. The progression of an attack is allowed to continue.
The ref doesn't blow the whistle dead mid shot or as a player is driving to the goal.
21st century and tech advances have nothing to do with how Soccer manages time. To FMIC’s point they simply don’t want to stop mid-shot or have to start reviewing goals. All the players know that during stoppage time if the trailing team is attacking, they will be allowed to do so until losing possession after time expires. It really isn’t difficult, and placing a hard stop isn’t necessary. I still don’t even understand the need for it to increasing the viewing experience.
21st century and tech advances have nothing to do with how Soccer manages time. To FMIC’s point they simply don’t want to stop mid-shot or have to start reviewing goals. All the players know that during stoppage time if the trailing team is attacking, they will be allowed to do so until losing possession after time expires. It really isn’t difficult, and placing a hard stop isn’t necessary. I still don’t even understand the need for it to increasing the viewing experience.
I love this aspect of the game