Stop The Clock

[Timmah]

I'm actually happy for the clock to keep going. To be perfectly honest, if teams want to maximise their time in a match, it should be up to them to ensure quick turnaround between dead balls, scrums packing, conversions, kickoffs etc.

 

[madunit]

lol, dumb idea.

like the 37 extra seconds will make a lick of difference to 99.99% of games.

 

[thorson1987]

Spot on Timmah.

 

[Packy]

This isn't about the players ffs. It's about me and what I want.

 

[LineBall]

lol, dumb idea.

like the 37 extra seconds will make a lick of difference to 99.99% of games.

It will be a bit more than 37 seconds

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...s-at-commercial-potential-20120314-1v3oc.html

The article says that last year on average there were:

8.7 kicks per match that found touch and that it took an average of 35-37 seconds from the time the touch judge raised his flag until the ball came out of the scrum. This would give an average of 4.5 minutes per game lost

There were an average of 3 dropouts per NRL game in 2011, each taking an average of 30 seconds. This would add an extra 1.5 minutes of time lost

In 2011 there were an average of 6.6 tries per game. If you allowed a conservative amount of 30 seconds from the time the try was awarded until the next kick off - that is another 3.5 minutes of time lost.

Fans would get more value for their money watching the games, and advertisers would be able to put in adverts into what are already existing break in play - its just that these breaks in play are no longer allowed to eat up actual playing time.

So overall you could have on average an extra 9.5 minutes of game time by having the clock stopped for line dropouts, kicks finding touch and after trys.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

I find the responses to this surprising to be honest.

Personally, I think the clock should stop immediately after a try is scored and doesn't restart until kick off.

Pretty much, everytime the ball is dead, the clock should stop. Not necessarily to put more adds in, but to increase the actual playing time.

 

[trudge]

Great breakdown LineBall.

9.5 minutes of extra game time would diversify body shapes with a greater value on the little man late in the game.

It would also mean 9.5 minutes less of Laurie Daley pre-match cliches.

 

[Fire]

Time don't stop for no-one *deep sigh*

 

[dangerousdave]

Maybe something like the current scrum rule would be the way to go. When the team receiving the ball has to be set for the clock to stop. The problem then would be how to officiate what constitutes being set. Fullback beyond halfway and all other players onside?

As for kickoffs after tries stop the clock soon as the converting player is onside inside his own 40

 

[Tom Shines]

The whole milling around for 39.5 seconds before taking a line drop out has reached epidemic, even in the early parts of the game.

And the clock should be stopped from the point the ref blows a whistle for try to the next kick off. In the Wests/Raiders game earlier in the year, a Canberra player scored with like 37:40 on the clock, and that was the last play of the half.

 

[Billythekid]

I find the responses to this surprising to be honest.

Personally, I think the clock should stop immediately after a try is scored and doesn't restart until kick off.

Pretty much, everytime the ball is dead, the clock should stop. Not necessarily to put more adds in, but to increase the actual playing time.

I agree with this and i too am surprised more people don't feel this way. Whether or not it brings extra money into the game is irrelevant. I just don't like the clock being whittled away when there is nothing happening. The main offender is the time spent between a try being scored and the kickoff.

 

[Fire]

Maybe something like the current scrum rule would be the way to go. When the team receiving the ball has to be set for the clock to stop. The problem then would be how to officiate what constitutes being set. Fullback beyond halfway and all other players onside?

As for kickoffs after tries stop the clock soon as the converting player is onside inside his own 40

Sharp post and ideas.

 

[Warrior@Heart]

Sharp post and ideas.

+1

 

[snogard6]

I find the responses to this surprising to be honest.

Personally, I think the clock should stop immediately after a try is scored and doesn't restart until kick off.

Pretty much, everytime the ball is dead, the clock should stop. Not necessarily to put more adds in, but to increase the actual playing time.

+1

And for all those people saying don't stop the clock, you like to see teams waste 30-40 secs for kick offs and line drop outs?

 

[Loudstrat]

The most annoying time water to me occurrs in the final 90 secs when the team up by 1-6 has the ball, and suddenly they get up like they are 80 year olds who have been looking for their specs. But to me that's gamesmanship.

I would be far more annoyed if the clock was stopped everytime the ball was "dead" - especially if the referee had to blow time off and time on all the time. I think players need a breather, and a chance to quickly organise their next set of 6. Teams taking a goal line drop generally concede a try in the next set anyway.

Leave it as is. The scrum rule is ridiculous anyway - much prefer they have a time limit like they do for goal line drops.

 

[Billythekid]

The most annoying time water to me occurrs in the final 90 secs when the team up by 1-6 has the ball, and suddenly they get up like they are 80 year olds who have been looking for their specs. But to me that's gamesmanship.

To me gamesmanship is usually subtle or requires some level of skill. I hate when players do what you describe whether it's my team doing it or not. I don't really think it needs to or ever will be changed though.

I would be far more annoyed if the clock was stopped everytime the ball was "dead" - especially if the referee had to blow time off and time on all the time. I think players need a breather, and a chance to quickly organise their next set of 6. Teams taking a goal line drop generally concede a try in the next set anyway.

I want them to stop the clock not reduce the time for the drop out. Players would still get a breather and a chance to organise their next set if this was the case.

I'm not talking about all stoppages either. It's only really the long ones i.e.line drop outs and tries. Stopping the clock everytime the ball goes into touch or dead would probably be excessive.

 

[mxlegend99]

I'm all for stopping the clock anytime the ball isn't in play. It would make the games longer and allow teams making a potential comeback a better chance at doing so. While I'm sure my team could suffer from the change before they could benefit from it, at the end of the day in a neutral game I would love to see a team down by 8-12 points with 2 minutes to go, scoring and then getting another shot at winning the game or sending it into golden point... rather then having the opposition waste that time.

I'm another who doesn't see why anyone would be opposed to it... it means we're getting to see more football actually being played. If that means we have extra ads on tv then it's a small price to pay, especially if those ads also mean we get more money from the tv deal.Personally I just care about more game time, regardless of how the ads/tv deal plays out.

 

[simmo1]

Should definitely stop after tries until the ball is kicked off.

 

[Jono1987]

+1 for the stopping time party.

Time should be stopped when;

* A try is scored and not restarted until the next kick off
* Ball is no longer in the field of play
* A scrum needs to be packed. Time restarts once the ball has left the scrum

Video ref should be charged with the operation of the time clock.

 

[Trentosaurus]

I'm in favour of stopping the clock after a try. There doesn't seem to be any consistency with how long it can take between a try and the restart.

At least with line drop-outs, the kicking team is given a set amount of time or they can be penalised.

And when the ball goes into touch, there is always rushing to pack the scrum to save time.