Where's the Countdown Clock?

[GrandBlue]

Most here are actually saying that a clock that counts upwards is more entertaining.

You missed the point.

How can it alter the result? The siren goes when the siren goes. If a team can't win it in that time, too bad.

Having a countdown clock alters it more than counting up, because the players are able to react to it. They shouldn't be able to.

So you're happy to see judgmental errors from players for the sake of entertainment?

A countdown clock wouldn't alter the game much at all. Time-wasting gets mentioned, but teams have been doing that for several years already with the clock counting up..

 

[RobDog18]

It takes one quick glance. There are plenty of other sports that have a countdown clock, it doesn't hamper the game.

So much wrong with this post, it's scary. The current AFL game has too many problems to count.

Teams do that all the time even without a countdown clock.

Ok nice try. This conversation is obviously about introducing a countdown clock. By "perfect", it should be obvious that I was referring to the point of this whole discussion, not the AFL in general. You and me both know that the AFL has so many things ****ed at the moment, all i'm saying is that the damn clock should be the last thing on their mind.

 

[dmc333]

How the * was the game completely ruined?

Did Martin Bryant walk on the ground and start popping players?

 

[Igloo]

So you're happy to see judgmental errors from players for the sake of entertainment?

A countdown clock wouldn't alter the game much at all. Time-wasting gets mentioned, but teams have been doing that for several years already with the clock counting up..

It doesn't phase me. If the team isn't good enough to win it, it's just too bad for them. Sport needs to have mistakes by players as well as great plays that win them the game.
It's not really even about the entertainment in the grand scheme of things. For the viewers on TV it is, but for at the game it's not.

 

[BluesMan]

OP is fighting a lonesome battle. As it should be.

Please dont change it. Then you will have less suspense at the game.

 

[scomac]

Ok nice try. This conversation is obviously about introducing a countdown clock. By "perfect", it should be obvious that I was referring to the point of this whole discussion, not the AFL in general. You and me both know that the AFL has so many things fornicated at the moment, all i'm saying is that the damn clock should be the last thing on their mind.

The runners would have told the players exactly how much time was left,the players should have told Dempsey to go back.

 

[romeoh]

No to a countdown clock. Unique game with unique rules-all power to it. Leave it alone.

 

[The Goon]

So GrandBlue, exactly how much did you have on Essendon?

 

[Mr Ripper]

Wait 'til Dan26 finds this thread and tells us all how wrong we are to prefer no countdown clock!

 

[Mitchell Madness]

Countdown clock would lead to extra flooding by the leading team

Sydney was attacking as all hell rather then holding it up

 

[manicmagpie]

Where's the countdown clock?

In lesser sports where it belongs. Keep it the hell away from Aussie Rules.

That was outstanding drama tonight and wouldn't have been improved in the slightest by a countdown clock.

 

[treefingers]

Kneejerk reaction much? Let's be honest, how likely is a situation like that ever to repeat again? Maybe once in a couple of hundred games... is it worth bringing in a new rule just for that? No

 

[Illinois Nazi]

I think the "No"s have it.

 

[RobDog18]

This thread wasn't even a debate. Poor OP got smashed.

 

[STC]

It takes one quick glance. There are plenty of other sports that have a countdown clock, it doesn't hamper the game.

A quick glance away from the play can be all it takes. Most sports don't stop the clock at every stoppage so they don't need a countdown clock. Most of them have a set amount of time and you know the game will end at a particular minute.

But the point is, it's just bad luck. He made a decision and it cost him, oh well.

 

[Dan26]

I've argued for a count-down clock at the ground long before tonight. It's been a bug-bear of mine for years.

We have the countdown on TV. And the TV audience is 90% of the audience (the other 10% is at the ground)

Why is it okay to let 90% of the audience know the time remaining? As well as letting most of the other 10% at the ground who are listening to their radios or asking the person next to them who has a radio? But not the players?

The only reason the "count-up" clock existed for 100 years was because the technology wasn't available to link the timekeepers clock in with the main scoreboard. It has nothing to do with "excitement." It has everything to do with the fact that it simply couldn't be done. It now can.

It is unprofessional to not allow the participants in the game know how long to go in the game. I mean, think about the logic? The team runner is relaying messages to the players letting them know how long (but obviously only roughly)... so why the secrecy? The 90% on TV know and most of the 10% in the ground know. And the players are being fed information about it too.

In fact EVERYONE around me at the ground tonight knew how long to go. Everyone.

Anyone arguing for the status quo is simply not thinking logically. Of course the particpants in a sport should know how long there is to go. Duh!

It's like a 50-over one day cricket match (with 300 balls per innings) not being counted on the scoreboard, so none of the players know. Then after the 300th ball, a siren blows and everyone says "Oh, thats it! Game over, that was the 300th ball.... gee I'm glad the scoreboard wasn't keeping count. That was so exciting"

It's ironic that a bugbear of mine for many many years just happened to involve my team directly.

 

[Dan26]

Keep it the hell away from Aussie Rules.

I'm assuming you were not at the game. You were watching on TV. WITH a countdown clock. Oh the irony. keep it away from Aussie Rules you say? 90% of the people watching the game tonight were watching with a countdown clock and you were one of them.

Ironic statement from you, given that you benefitted as a neutral supporter, with the extra information from the countdown clock, and I'm sure it didn't diminish your excitement on TV one little bit.

 

[GrandBlue]

A quick glance away from the play can be all it takes. Most sports don't stop the clock at every stoppage so they don't need a countdown clock. Most of them have a set amount of time and you know the game will end at a particular minute.

But the point is, it's just bad luck. He made a decision and it cost him, oh well.

So you're happy to have games like this decided on luck? I know if the Bulldogs lost in this fashion, I'd be going absolutely berserk.

But hey, I guess everyone here would be satisfied if their team fell short in this fashion, providing it means the suspense of not knowing how much time there is left remains intact, even if their player makes an error in judgement, potentially costing the team the game because of it. You're all entitled to your own opinions though, as I am to mine.

 

[RobDog18]

Comparing cricket to a high action sport like footy is stupid and irrelevant. It's been fine up until now, no reason to change what ain't broke.

Also, Essendon fans seem to be really upset about this timer issue, but when the siren blew they had a lower score than Sydney, so that means they lose. Sorry.

 

[smoovy]

I'm not fussed either way on a countdown clock, but you've either got to have it in its full capacity or not all.

The half baked situation as we have it now where coaches, runners and therefore some players - know exactly how much time is left because they have access to the timekeepers clock.

To some extent even spectators are aware as I know AAMI stadium has it until the final 2 minutes of each quarter. Not sure about other grounds? Is there an AFL policy? Or as I suspect just something that is an unwritten rule which can lend itself to abuse depending on who it suits.

It is like saying you can't see anything because you have your hand over your eyes, but are still peekingh through your fingers.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I love that there is no countdown clock, but for some reason when ever I'm at a tense game there's someone listening to the radio that wants to tell me how long is left. Hate that.

Agree and I wish that Foxtel could implement a 'red button' setting that let you choose whether you wanted the count-down or count-up clock. Probably wouldn't work, as the commentary would be the same, but I was one that loved this aspect of the Channel Ten coverage.

As for teams playing the chipping game in the dying stages, it's a much different kettle of fish seeing that there is thirty seconds on the clock, to seeing that there's 30:15 on the clock. If players know that kicking the ball to a contest, allowing it to get over the line and the ensuing stoppage will reduce the clock to zero, they will approach the play differently to how they do now.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I'm not fussed either way on a countdown clock, but you've either got to have it in its full capacity or not all.

The half baked situation as we have it now where coaches, runners and therefore some players - know exactly how much time is left because they have access to the timekeepers clock.

To some extent even spectators are aware as I know AAMI stadium has it until the final 2 minutes of each quarter. Not sure about other grounds? Is there an AFL policy? Or as I suspect just something that is an unwritten rule which can lend itself to abuse depending on who it suits.

It is like saying you can't see anything because you have your hand over your eyes, but are still peekingh through your fingers.

Not sure how you can prevent some people from knowing. Clubs would just employ someone to time it, which I assume is how the broadcasters do it currently. As long as one party or the other doesn't stuff up, they'd still know. You could do it yourself, if you wanted to.

 

[smoovy]

Not sure how you can prevent some people from knowing. Clubs would just employ someone to time it, which I assume is how the broadcasters do it currently. As long as one party or the other doesn't stuff up, they'd still know. You could do it yourself, if you wanted to.

Broadcasters have access to the timekeepers clock. If you manually did your own timing I'd be surprised if you would get within in 30 seconds of the timekeepers over the course of a quarter. There is still a fair scope for error.

 

[STC]

So you're happy to have games like this decided on luck? I know if the Bulldogs lost in this fashion, I'd be going absolutely berserk.

But hey, I guess everyone here would be satisfied if their team fell short in this fashion, providing it means the suspense of not knowing how much time there is left remains intact, even if their player makes an error in judgement, potentially costing the team the game because of it. You're all entitled to your own opinions though, as I am to mine.

It's a game, luck is a part of any game. I would be disappointed if it happened to my team but I wouldn't want the rules changed. I'm happy with the current situation and the way it manifests itself.

The fact is he knew there wasn't long left and he tried to move it on quickly because he thought it was a better option than him going back and lining up for goal. That was a decision Dempsey made.

 

[CAS79]

What you talking about. I saw the countdown clock, Miami V Celtics, where it belongs.