The Swiss game was mentioned for an offsides review, but not as an example of loose time interpretation.
The Ref allowed the Swiss one last shot to win the game, which they did. Game ended right afterwards.
I actually like that about the game, I rather enjoy that the Refs let just one more play happen before the final whistle
Perhaps. It may well be that soccer is different, but it’s worth pointing out that basketball does just fine without an offside rule – and that’s a sport that has no goalie, where getting a player well behind the defense is basically a guaranteed goal. Making sure that you get back on defense is a major component of disciplined play, and fast breaks (including those that would violate an offside rule) are considered among the most exciting plays in the game.
If I had to guess how eliminating offside penalties in soccer would go – and of course I admit this is just a guess – I’d say that a team on defense would feel it’s to their benefit to keep, say 2-3 players back towards the opponents goal, which would in turn force the attacking team to keep probably 3-4 players back in a position to defend against those players. The primary effect would be to open up attacking space down by the goal and make it harder to profit by the tactic of parking a bus in front of one’s goal.
Or maybe not, of course. I’d just like to see it tried in some regular season games somewhere.
So do I, and I wouldn’t argue for ending that practice. I just don’t see why we can’t know what the actual time of the match is, or when the referee sends us into extra *extra *time in order to let an in-progress attack play out.
Basketball is a completely different sport. Teams are scoring all the time, and that works fine, especially on a small court. But that’s not how football works.
You’re looking at it the opposite way to those who could change the rules. There’s a certain amount of traditionalism in FIFA, so a lot of things are the way they are because that’s how they are. If they’re to be changed, there needs to be a strong argument in favour of it. I doubt “why not” has ever really been relevant when it comes to knowing the exact time. There are some arguments in this thread for keeping it as it is, anyway.
Spoken like true non-Yank. Don’t you know more is always better?
But seriously, American sports like basketball and football have more officials per player and per square meter of playing space. It would work better for soccer, especially at the top level, when so much is at stake with a bad call.
http://www.ask.com/question/how-many-officials-are-on-the-field-during-a-football-game
So seven might be a bit much, but one more couldn’t hurt, and would probably improve things. 2 refs, 2 linesmen. Nice, round numbers.
I’d like to try making the penalty area the permanent offside line. If the attacking team’s players are outside the line when the ball is passed, they’re onside. If they’re not, flag. By the same token, if more than one defending player is within the line, then no one is offside.
Right, but my point was that the lack of an offside rule in basketball doesn’t lead to the thing that everyone claims would happen without one in soccer. Why not?
Basketball is different. Points are cheap and because it’s played in a smaller space you can easily run the length of the floor to an open basket to score or contest the shot. Leaving a cherry picker isn’t a good strategy. I think futsal and other versions of football that aren’t played in full size pitches don’t have offside either.
That said I think basketball also has a similar rule, the offensive 3 second violation. Of course given how easy it is to score points in basketball, it’s not as big an issue as a blown offside call.
I’m not opposed, in principle, to the idea that there could be more officials. Indeed, I think that even people who actually like soccer have, er, kicked the idea about in the past and trialled it in some tournaments. If it can be clearly defined what these guys will be doing and how they’ll do it, sure, let’s give it a go.
Yes, but as I am (perhaps badly) explaining, my views are based around my feeling that defenders have started to take the piss and as such too many attacks just fizzle out due to anti/non-football.
I personally have no problem with more officials, but I’m very skeptical about it being an improvement. In the last few seasons they have added extra refs near the penalty areas (in European games) and they made just as many mistakes (if not more) than without the extra refs.
Most (professionl) football (soccer) matches actually have at least four officials.
Because basketball is different. It works differently. Look at the size of a football pitch. Then imagine a game where the best way to score is to stand by the goal and wait for someone to kick it to you. Consider how much running that would involve for most players, or how little; some players would never move, others would be back and forth constantly. Remember that, in football, the match is a minimum of 90 minutes, with the possibility of another 30 being added on. You get three substitutions. In basketball, the court is comparatively tiny, you’re throwing the ball instead of kicking (meaning more control, less running after balls), you have unlimited subs and an entire basketball game can be over before footballers even begin their second half.
Five-a-side football is more like the basketball form of football. Perhaps that version makes more sense to Americans.
From The Guardian’s Minute by Minute coverage of the England - Sri Lanka cricket (that is now on day five):
I used to dislike the offside rule because it led to so many goals being disallowed just because there was an offside player in the general vicinity of the attack, even if he played no part in it. But since they reinterpreted the law, ten or fifteen years ago, that hasn’t been a problem (all set out, with diagrams, in this PDF - a useful document the next time you get into an argument about offside!)
Also, the standard of linesmanship is higher now. Of course they still make mistakes – we saw that in the Mexico and Switzerland games – but these days I hesitate to query an offside decision until I have seen the replay, because very often I’ll think “surely that was offside”, and then the replay shows the linesman was right. The way I remember it, linesmen were less reliable in the old days. You don’t see nearly as many players wrongly flagged when they were miles onside when the ball was kicked.
They do though.
It’s always 90 min. Then the clock thingy says the stoppage time. And once it gets past that number it’s the “extra extra” time. I mean, what do you want? A megaphone that the ref says “Ok guys! This is the last one!”
Still a better image than, say, Alexi Lalas.
Or (shudder) Clint Dempsey.
No kidding. I think a lot of the visceral American disgust with the diving and flopping is these guys falling down like they’ve been poleaxed and writhing like they just blew out their knee in spectacular fashion.
Then, after they draw the foul, or not, they get up, and walk it off like nothing happened. It comes across as some combination of effete and unsportsmanlike- you get the same griping in American football when losing teams in close games start having injuries in the last few minutes of play to stop the clock. Same basic situation- someone feigning injury in order to manipulate the referees and timekeepers, which strikes a lot of us as unsportsmanlike and wrong, as well as kind of weak- suck it up and lose/draw a foul like a man.
I want transparency, I guess. Is the referee making questionable decisions about when to stop (or not stop) the clock for injury or some other delay? Are these stoppages even more or less standardized in the first place, or are there a bunch of outliers among referees who are unusually stingy or generous with extra time? When we reach the 89:00 mark, are there actually 3 minutes left, or 5? If I’m trailing by 1 goal (or leading by 1, for that matter), I might want to know that.
Granted, as I said in the OP, it doesn’t actually matter, since the current system doesn’t cause any real problems, and no one seems particularly vexed by it. But it’s still kind of silly and pointless for the precise time of the match to be kept a secret.