Goalkeepers

[andrew p long]

All very good points. The ref has it within his (or her) powers to book players for deliberate time wasting and its frustrating when they seldom do. At the ned of the day, football is entertainment and us poor punters are not being entertained when sides deliberately time waste.

The other thing I never understand is why defenders are allowed to use their bodies to shield the ball out for a goal kick. Surely that's obstruction.....

it certainly used to be the case that it wasn’t obstruction if the ball was within playing distance. Another law more honoured in the breach than the observance...

 

[John William]

The ref has it within his (or her) powers to book players for deliberate time wasting and its frustrating when they seldom do. At the ned of the day, football is entertainment and us poor punters are not being entertained when sides deliberately time waste.

Lincoln and Wycombe would never finish a game with more than 9 players.

 

[Legohead]

Or Huddersfield. The Cowley's are masters of this particular dark art.

 

[tonykellowfan]

I really got annoyed at Northampton with their player who was subbed. He basically wanted to sit down where he was as if his legs had stopped working. The ref should have booked him there and then as that was the most pathetic time wasting I have ever seen.

 

[grecian-near-hell]

I really got annoyed at Northampton with their player who was subbed. He basically wanted to sit down where he was as if his legs had stopped working. The ref should have booked him there and then as that was the most pathetic time wasting I have ever seen.

To be fair the ref should have done a lot of things which he didn't on Saturday

 

[Legohead]

I also don't understand why refs give players warnings. Like on Saturday one of the Northampton players was taking an absolute age with a throw in and we all began to get frustrated. The ref just waved the player to hurry up and get on with it. Why? Presumably the ref did this because the player was timewasting and therefore no warning is required. It's an instant yellow for clear timewasting. Not giving the player a chance to clearly cheat free of charge. This is one of the reasons why refs are sh*t.

 

[John William]

I also don't understand why refs give players warnings. Like on Saturday one of the Northampton players was taking an absolute age with a throw in and we all began to get frustrated. The ref just waved the player to hurry up and get on with it. Why? Presumably the ref did this because the player was timewasting and therefore no warning is required. It's an instant yellow for clear timewasting. Not giving the player a chance to clearly cheat free of charge. This is one of the reasons why refs are sh*t.

The argument from refs (I have discussed this with a good mate who is a retired ref who reffed and ran the line at SJP several times) is that rigid adherence to the letter of the Rules would destroy the game.

I disagree. If all the refs and the football authorities got together, publicly stated that they were going to be less lenient to routine cheating like this, and acted on it, things would change after the first couple of games where there were 12 bookings and 4 red cards for second bookings for simulation, not retreating, feigning injury and time wasting. Self interest would require it. Managers would whine but all the FA etc. need do is point out what the Rules say.

 

[Legohead]

The thing is though, they would publicy state that they would be less lenient but when it came to the crunch they would still be lenient because the refs aren't brave enough to enforce the laws of the game. For example a player timewasting should be booked. Not warned once or often numerous times before being shown a yellow as is the case now. It would take many players being sent off I admit but that's the rule and it's up to the players to learn that it's against the rules of the game and will not be tolerated. Refs aren't brave enough or consistent enough to stamp out cheating from the game so it will continue.

 

[Jason H]

Keith Stroud the other week got a lot of stick for an off day in a West Brom match, but he's someone I'm always happy to see in the middle as he's one ref that doesn't fall for this nonsense generally. I'll never forget Dagenham away on a Friday night a few seasons back when they took an early lead then tried to go the full Wycombe. Stroud was having none of it, and once a couple of Daggers players had been booked for timewasting they got the message. Having to actually try to play, they had no idea and we ended up winning 2-1 in about the 95th minute.

 

[PeteUSA]

it certainly used to be the case that it wasn’t obstruction if the ball was within playing distance. Another law more honoured in the breach than the observance...

There was a time when a player could literally shove an opponent in the back if he was being obstucted from getting at the ball. Pretty hard to enforce for a referee though. I haven't seen it happen in a very long time. Invariably the referee would award a free kick to the defender for receiving a shove in the back! There might still be a rule that referees could use, but its so seldom used that nobody knows about it?