I expect those stats are the average TOTAL time taken per game. So, on average per game: All FKs added up = 9 mins All throws added up = 7 mins All VAR added up = 55 secs
Maybe its something to do with the idea that wasted time in the same continuum (or flow) is largely unnoticeable to the conscious mind. But wasted time, when waiting on tenterhooks for an important decision to be reversed/non-reversed, probably galls the psyche a lot more.... (I know it galls mine!) You know, human psychology is a curiously wonky thing - a funny thing about this idea of technology being able to fix something and so therefore at that point in time it becomes a more pressing issue to people than it was before the fix was technologically available, even though the hurt/anxiety/annoyance caused by the unfixed issue was exactly the same at both times.
simple rule should be that you can sway side to side and slow down your run but you can't stutter stop-start your run. If running motion isn't detected you take it again. Referees (and most people can state when run is no longer a continuous run but a broken run (IMO). Stutter-start-stop running is a highly visible motion to detect for an observer. I think..... It's hard to define on paper in a rule book, of course.... so that would need to be left somewhat nebulous, as in - it's for the referee to decide if it was a fair run-up or not It would have to be left up to the referees to define it for themselves (so it would be down on the players taking the risk with any kind of imbecilic run-up)
the thing about free-kicks is that it does take a lot of set-up time, which isn't time wasted at all.... So, that one i sprobably definitively less than 9mins all told....
There is no chance on earth that Carly Lloyd was not affecting play on the 2nd US goal against Sweden. She was offside - and like the Brazil game - and there is no way for the Swede to know this. Instead another poor clearance - goal. On replay the announce says VAR is definitely overturning it - but it stands as a goal.
"VAR was intended to overrule clear and obvious mistakes, not to penalise goalkeepers for being an inch off the line." Hear, hear.
That's a lack of courage though, right? The VAR officials coul dhave overturned it from what I'm hearing?
Deffo in an offside position. Deffo Interfering with the play. Even Aly Wagner called that. Even after the replay. From the first debatable goal to the restart was 3 minutes. Ft from the second debatable goal to the restart was 3:31 minutes. Pretty close to 55 seconds. Edit: the comms and some players are stunned with 7 minutes of stoppage time. VAR really does count as used time.
Do you know what AVERAGE means? You know there has been no, as in zero, VAR stoppages in some of these WWC matches, right? So what happens when you AVERAGE a 3 with three zeros? Dust off your abacus and try it with me! Jesus...
USA 2nd goal, defender played the ball. Attacker, who was offside, was many feet behind defender playing the ball, and nowhere near her line of sight unless Swedes have eyes in the backs of their heads. Doesn’t seem a difficult decision at all. You guys talking about a different play? You seem to not be understanding the point/principle behind these rules at all. The offside has been changed in order to allow more attackers to be threatening the goal and asking more of defenders. It’s an offshoot of the other recent change regarding bad touches and plays by defenders getting punished... just like the OG header in the other match, and this shit clearance today. These are textbook examples of what the new rule means, which is why VAR is upholding these decisions — defenders are no longer bailed out by someone offside 5 yards to the side of them (being closely marked by someone else!) when they make a shitty play on the ball. That’s the whole point.
But the only reason she (the defender) played the header in a panicked style was because the offside attacker was there. Therefore, the attacker (who is offside) was influencing play. So it should've been called back.
No. They clearly don’t care about that. They aren’t interpreting influencing play the same way you guys are, and the breakdown in the rules speaks to that — if they’re not in defenders vision and/or physically impeding the defenders ability to play the ball, they’re not influencing play. To me it’s pretty clear that’s what they’re going for, not penalizing an aggressive attacker for a shitty play by a defender, since we’ve already seen a number of good examples of this and the VAR response has been the same every time. And these aren’t people looking at these rules for the first or third time and coming up with their own explanation on the fly. They’ve discussed this stuff, the intent of the rule, the ways in which it might apply, they’ve looked at cases and examples of it... but this is what they mean by the rule IMO. So if this same exact call happens again, don’t be surprised.
Yeah I know what average means you pedantic, sarcastic arsehole. Just just because there wasn't a var stoppage in a game or two doesn't make it any less f'kin annoying when you do get long stoppages and to see that their reasoning was bullshit. Just like the stuff between your ears.
Well then it should really piss you off that goal kicks take 6 minutes too? I love how you get to mouth off after completely misreading something, and if I come back at you in the slightest I’m some big sarcastic asshole! What a joke. All that said... yes, I too hope they cut down on the time spent on this stuff. It should be quicker.
in this case yes but if it was an inch - or even a mere 2.5 cm - VAR will call it back, won't it? same as the offside calls.
why should it piss anyone off? as long as nobody is time-wasting (which refs address currently) ... why does it need to be changed? football has never been timed to the split second like hockey or basketball for example. and that's fine with me. what's the bloody rush? all sports don't have to be played the same. footie always has been different that way.
With all that's going on I think that will be the next thing to change. They'll take the stoppage time out of the refs hands and give a stopwatch to someone in the var room to total all stoppages that occur throughout the match.
Rush with what? I don't understand what this has to do with anything, but I agree. I'm not asking that football be more like basketball. I'm asking they do something to not allow shitty badly-allowed goals to stand and alter match outcomes, and they did. Not all sports are the same but they ALL evolve.
That's the obvious part in all this. When you are out there playing you have to react, not analyze whether or not you should react given recent changes in th erules..... The fgreat Arsenal defence of the mid -late 90's would have been a shambles trying to endure this nonsense that the decreers have effin' decreed ..... annoys th episs out of me .... I actually don't think you should be allowed to interfere behind the play at all if inside the box. Whether or not you subsequently become involved. But htta would be too damn simple for the idiot-boffins who collude to make these things less sensible....