Time clock

[Daniel]

How many more seasons will the farcical situation of players not knowing how much time is remaining in a quarter continue? I have always believed that it is ridiculous that players and public do not know how much time is left in a game and the draw tonight between Port and Geelong only reinforces my view. In all other serious sports which use a time clock, the players are fully aware of just how much time is remaining. Yet in the quasi-professional AFL, we still persist with the antiquated system of showing time elapsed, rather than remaining, in each quarter. Why should this knowledge remain hidden? It does not enhance the excitement of the game for players and people attending the game to be uninformed. If they knew how much time was left they would play accordingly and the sport would be a lot better off. If TV is able to show time remaining (albeit they are apparently reticent about doing this, which is utterly bemusing) then there is no reason why the players should not be allowed to see a clock depicting time remaining to end the confusion that regularly reigns at the end of close matches. Apart from being illogical, the present antiquated system is also quite unprofessional. Are there any others who put aside thoughts of "but that's the way it's always been" and also think this way?

Frustrated,
Daniel

 

[gocatsgo]

Originally posted by Daniel:
It does not enhance the excitement of the game for players and people attending the game to be uninformed. If they knew how much time was left they would play accordingly and the sport would be a lot better off.

I'm sorry Daniel, I have to disagree with you on this quote. If players knew how much time was left then we would see continual out of bounds and ugly packs develop.

Not knowing how much time there is to go is one of the most exciting aspects about a football match, their is elation when your team has won a close one, there is heart felt disappointment when you lose a close one.

I can think of two classic games last year when knowing how long to go may have cost a team a game.

The first is in round one when Geelong came back from 40 points behind the Kangaroos to snatch a memorable 6 point win, the other was when Hawthorn snatched a two point win over Geelong at Waverley in round 21.

On both occasions the losing side could have bottled up the game and turned what were classic finishes into flops.

The spontaneous elation and heartbreak of the supporters in both cases was a sight to see. I know myself, I was nearly in tears after the Hawthorn game, because that cost Geelong a place in the finals.

Personally, I wouldn't introduce a time clock so everyone knew how long to go, the emotional part of the game is part of why we go to it every week. lets keep it the way it is.

 

[Daniel]

Ignorance is bliss, eh? I do understand what you're saying, though. And considering you are a Geelong supporter and the Cats would surely have won tonight had the young player whose name escapes me attempted to register any score with approximately 90 seconds remaining, your views are admirable. However, I still disagree.

Most of the time, the players would have a reasonable idea of the amount of time remaining because I'm sure the trainers would relay the message from the coaches box where the 'real' time can be seen anyway. So it's not as if changing the type of time clock is a really radical step; it will simply make things easier for everyone.

I have never seen a situation like the one at the end of the Port-Geelong match when players lingered in their positions believing an error had been made! That was quite staggering and offered great support to my view, which is why I brought it up.

Addressing what you said, perhaps I was not entirely correct...the unknown factor can add to the excitement and tension. However, that would be traded off by the number of games made more exciting by fans knowing the exact number of seconds remaining when a player surges forward to win the game for his team. And, thinking about it now, I reckon this would happen a bit more often since players would know exactly what they had to do. No more silly and unfortunate situations of players needlessly playing on when the siren is about to sound and they should be taking a set shot instead.

I do not believe we would see any more out of bounds and packs than is already the case when one team is stalling for time. On the contrary, players might realise how little they achieve by thumping the ball straight back over the boundary. And just watch those umpires if a player tries to sit on the ball to preserve his team's lead.

How could those games you mentioned really have been any different? In nearly all cases, we're just talking about the last couple of minutes. We know that players start chipping the ball around when they think they've got it won anyway. If they knew how much time was left they may not start doing it too early...

In my opinion, emotion won't be lost by introducing a clock that shows time remaining. Tension could even run higher knowing the exact number of seconds left.

I hate unnecessary changes to football as much as the next person, but I really do think this issue is a simple case of the game evolving.

Cheers,
Daniel

 

[ytry4]

Well...they're still going to introduce the time remaining system next year!

 

[George Grizzlitch]

Daniel,

You must be wearing flared shorts pal, I mean, it's an absolute joke what you're suggesting. Fair dinkum, I mean, what about soccer? I mean, soccer is the "World Game", I mean, in Soccer they have one bloke with a watch and he alone decides when he blows the final whistle - AND, is it ever blown just when a team is mounting an attack on goal? I mean, fair dinkum, it's an absolute bloody joke!

 

[Daniel]

I'm not exactly sure what you're suggesting but yes, I accidentally overlooked soccer. Still, you should note that in soccer, they do not have "time on", when a quarter could theoretically run from 20 minutes to close to 40. Soccer is a free-flowing football code with a clock that does not stop, unlike Australian Rules. Time is measured by the referee and not timekeepers. Halves run for 45 minutes and the amount of stoppage time to be played is depicted on a board at the sidelines towards the end of each half, so everyone pretty much knows, to within 30 seconds or so, exactly how much time is remaining. So, really, it is nothing like Australian Rules and detract from my argument in any way.

Why is it a joke? Heck, I know we don't like change, but I feel pretty strongly about this.

 

[Brian Cauldron]

In the AFL, all teams know exactly how much time is left by monitoring the TV feed and getting the word out onto the field via the runners.

So the players know pretty accurately how much time is left and you can sometimes see it in the tactics employed by teams defending a lead.

For the crowd though, there's more interest in NOT knowing how much time is left. A perception that a game is 'gone' by knowing how little time is left will result in many games finishing with a feeling of anti-climax.

Leaving things as they are is one way the AFL can keep the game exciting WITHOUT resorting to some artificial process, but no, they have to meddle and will only cop yet more abuse from the long suffering football public.

 

[Mr Ripper]

The timekeepers are the ONLY people in our game who should know the time remaining.

Not the umpys, not the spectators, not the coaches, certainly not Channel 7 and DEFINITELY NOT the players.

 

[Arch]

i find it difficult to believe their are actually people out there who DONT agree with daniel.
I sent a letter to the AFL about this same issue about two years ago and got no response.
Do you people think its actually more exciting watching a game thinking " how longs left , how longs left" rather than like: My team has the ball in their defense- they have 40 seconds to score- i can see our time ticking away ???? its obviuos. The emotion of winning a close game isnt gonna be diluted by knowing that you scored with 10 seconds left in the clock !!!!! It makes it better, you know how close you actually came to losing AT THE TIME, rather than in hindsight.
Can you imagine say basketball, where the buzzer suddenly goes off to the surprise of the crowd and players, and deprives a team of an opportunity they didnt know they had ??? This actually happens in footy.Soccer has the same useless system too. why cant we have a big bloody digital clock counting DOWN to the final siren, that all players, coaches and spectators (live & tv) can see.

Mr Cauldron- you dont make sense.
"For the crowd though, there's more interest in NOT knowing how much time is left. A perception that a game is 'gone' by knowing how little time is left will result in many games finishing with a feeling of anti-climax."

You basically imply that having a clock counting down allows people to see the game is over a few minutes beforehand, which in turn creates an anti-climax, which could be avoided if no one knew how long was left. Do you think the ending to Port v Geelong wasnt an anticlimax ????? Isnt it "artificial" to try and create excitment in a game which is really over, by just not letting anyone know how long is left to play ??? puh- lease.
Daniel- I agree with every word.
Its called PROFESSIONALISM- and the AFL ought to have a look at it.

A.

PS George, i assume its the REAL you as youve misspelled your own name, and havent argued your point with any reason or logic.

[This message has been edited by Arch (edited 15 May 2000).]

 

[Bomber]

Your kidding arnt ya?
Ive seen close games on tv and live, and not knowing the time is much more exciting! Anything that promotes that bullcrap chipping (yes, essendon do it) should be outlawed! Its a disapointing feature of the game.
Why is it that everyone wants to copy American friggen sports? Because the yanks know the time, we have to! Who cares about them, their 'sports' are business, there is no real passion.
What a joke of an idea, however the Americanisnm in the powers that be will probably bring in this stupid idea soon.
Aussie Rules is Aussie Rules, it cant be compared to any other sport.

 

[Arch]

PLEASE get yer head out of the sand.
lets keep a stupid system, just for the sake of not copying america. great logic.
I spose you'd want to rid the AFL of night games because thats an american idea too.or the salary cap, the draft etc etc etc.....
If you find footy more exciting having no idea whats going on then ignorance is bliss,youre lucky, and god bless you.
But i just hope a player from YOUR team doesnt cost you a game after playing on when he shouldnt have, because he didnt know EXACTLY how long was left.

A.

 

[Dan26]

I agree totally with Arch and Daniel.

One thing though. What the hell has this got to with American sports ? Nothing. We are not copying American sports. We are just using common-sense. Isn't it just common sense for everyone to know how long is left ?

Everyone knows when the last ball of a cricket match is being bowled. Imagine if we didn't know if it was the last ball. Then the umpirwe says, "OK, thats it. That was the last ball".

We should all know how much time is left.

It doesn't detract from the excitement at all. I was at the Azzac day draw a few years back, and yes it was exciting.

But when I got home and watched the game on TV, I realised that knwojg how long to do, didn't detract at all from the excitement.

I remember watching Buckley kick it into Collingwood's forward line with 20 seconds to go, knowing that if they scored they would win. Essendon cleared, and the Dons had but a few seconds to get the ball down the field. They narrowly missed out.

Now at the ground, we didn't know, but on TV it was still just as exciting.

It makes NO DIFFERENCE to the excitement of the game if everyone knows the time remaining. It will be exciting anyway.

Do you think the end of a close basketball gmae is exciting ? Yes, of course it is !

 

[Bomber]

cant say I watch basketball, puts me to sleep!

You cant compare footy to cricket, thats stupid. With Aussie Rules, you play the game out untill the final siren. Without knowing how much time is left, most close games go down to the wire. However in the past few seasons with teams using tv to find out exactly how long to go, we are faced with one of the worst situations on the footy field, the dredded short chips or thumping the ball back into play.
How many close games go down to the last kick in the dying seconds? not many, usually with 20-30 seconds to go you know who has one, not always, but usually. If you think this doesnt take away from the excitement of the game your kidding yourself!
Generally, from whats written in papers, letters to editors and radio call ins, most people want c7 to get rid of their clock, in favor for the system seen at the ground.
Footy players play to the end, not play according to the clock. Then again its stupid changes like this that have made our game probably the most unpopular its ever been, at least in Victoria.

 

[servo]

OK the ultimate game when looking at how much time is remaining is Grid Iron. That game becomes farcical at times with the losing team just conceding if they are too far behind with 1 min left. Or the leading team just kills the game if they are in possession.

I dont want to see anything even close to that in Aussie Rules.

I agree that the only ones who should know the time remaining are the time keepers. I never did understand the decision to let Ch 7 have a direct feed to the clock especially when the scoreboard doesnt.

 

[Tealmeister]

I prefer not knowing how long there is to go. Sure we speculate, we guess, we estimate, and quite often we're wrong. It's part of the uncertainty of the game.
Definately if the amount of time remaining was known we'd see a lot more time-wasting, slow chip kick football. We get plenty of that now, but there'd be even more if teams knew how long there was to go.

 

[Arch]

if it came in, and like you say, teams always started chipping around to soak clock, how many teams would get burned doing this ???? I bet many would get burned, trying to be conservative when they should continue playing their natural game.
If teams know the time remaining and this is relayed to the players, whats to stop this "time wasting" which youre so afraid of occuring now ?????
A clock wouldnt affect the game bugger all. Alot of you seem to want to resist change, just for sake of it.


to servo- Gridiron is fundamentally different. You dont honestly think our game would resemble theirs if we had a clock ??? sheesh....
also- I assume you didnt see the ending to the superbowl ???? Most exciting final 2 minutes ive seen. And i knew how long was left the entire time !!

 

[Dan26]

No one would be chipping it around in the final couple of minutes. (At least no more than they do now). It wouldn't change a thing.

There is a very easy way to stop chipping the ball around.

MAN UP !!!!

Teams chip the ball around now, when they don't know how long to go. It's not like they don't do it now, anyway.

Here is what a coach would say to his players if we all knew how long there is to go

"OK Fellas. If you're behind with a minute to go, and they chip it around, MAN UP. Then they will be forced to kick it to a contest and we will have a chance at getting the ball back. They can't hold onto the ball because they will be penalised for time wasting."

TRUST ME, if we all knew how long there was to go, we would all be better off

P.S More people watch foty on TV than at the ground, so MORE PEOPLE know how long there is to go than vice versa.

I'll bet everyone who posted here watched the 1989 Grand Final on TV. I'll bet all of us thought it was exciting. 95% of people knew how long there was to go. Only the 5% at the ground didn't know.

Trust me, it doesn't detract from the excitement at all. In some case (for eg, if a team is streaming through the centre with 5 seconds left, and they are behind by a point) it will ENHANCE the excitement.

 

[Drakey]

Leave it the way it is.

At the North V Crows game last week not knowing how much time left, certainly increased the suspense.

The last quarter just kept going & going.

Last year at Footy Park the scoreboard showed the amount of time remaining & it detracted from close games.

 

[Bomber]

this is a stupid post of arguments - of course it detracts from the excitment, it doesn add to the excitement thats for sure!
Its niave to think it doesnt. At best it keeps the excitement the same - which means there is absolutely no reason to change it!

 

[Pessimistic]

There are cetrain places at certain grounds where you can't see a time clock of any description - perhaps we should fix that first !

 

[Arch]

for f*cks sake- You wouldnt even HAVE to look at the damn clock if you didnt want to. If you prefer ignorance then no one will force you to look.

Bomber, The topic isnt stupid, its just a debate and is no one is making you participate.

A.

 

[Daniel]

To Dan24 and especially Arch, thank you. I was concerned for a while that no-one else saw it the way I did when it seems so blatantly logical! For everyone else, it is just a matter of evolution and it makes sense. Now, let me tell you about my idea to eliminate the hit-the-post rule... just kidding, I'll save that one for another time.

Without wanting to go over old ground, remember that what I'm suggesting isn't a change to the rules of the game. We're only changing the way time is displayed, which will help the way football is played: evolution on the road to professionalism. Although I hope this reform is implemented soon, if the current state of affairs is supposed to be the correct way to measure time in a footy game then NO ONE bar the timekeepers should be allowed to know how much time is remaining. That means coaches, players, TV viewers and media. After all, if not knowing when a quarter or a game will finish is preferable, why should anyone want to know how much time is remaining? TV should thus adopt the system of displaying time elapsed, like at the ground, if it is truly better. And I find it hard to believe that TV would have introduced a clock showing time remaining if they thought it detracted from the game.

I believe a lot of people only think the current system is more exciting at the ground because they haven't experienced anything else. Imagine the atmosphere when your team is heading forward in the dying seconds to win the game and you know this really *is* the last roll of the dice!

Like Arch says, it is silly to reject this idea just because it's the way Americans do it. Who cares what the Americans do? While basketball and gridiron do provide good examples of the excitement inherent in a game measured by time remaining, I like this idea because it is better for Aussie Rules and nothing else. I can't understand why we have gone so long without adopting this method, actually. I guess it's because it represents a fundamental change. Perhaps the AFL can provide two clocks at the ground, one displaying time elapsed and the other time remaining, and let people decide which is better?

As to chipping the ball around, it is just another evolutionary stage the game is going through, like so many others. Remember when Sydney were successful when flooding its defence a few seasons back and some suggested rule changes to negate it? Eventually counter-tactics will emerge, which should really be quite simple in this case: man up! I feel confident that there will be the same amount or less chipping the ball around with this time system because teams won't do it until the last minute or so, and you better believe the other team will be desperate to man up knowing the clock is against them! If they wanted to chip the ball around earlier, they would be doing it now anyway. After all, most intelligent fans can work out to within 5 minutes the amount of time left, by calculating the number of goals scored and the frequency of boundary throw-ins.

To Drakey, I heard that a number of people left the Crows-Kangaroos game early because they thought there was not enough time left for the Crows to win. Now jokes about us fickle Crows fans aside, don't you think those people would have felt robbed if they missed a stunning victory because the game went longer than they expected? When they showed time remaining on the big screen last year, I think more people (like me) were straining their eyes to read the clock rather than wishing it wasn't there.

Like I said, I don't like unnecessary rule changes either, so please put aside automatic resistance to another change when considering this. I hope I haven't argued my point too forcefully...

 

[Arch]

er .....yes.....i hope havent argued mine too forcefully either.
lol

 

[Daniel]

Heheheh, maybe some people need it drilled into them. What was that proverb about a debate only being as stupid as its dumbest participant? Er, maybe I got that wrong...

 

[Dan26]

So that pretty much solves it then. The clock at all grounds "SHOULD" count down to zero, so everybody knows how much longer there is to go. Agreed?