• teems@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Players will waste time like crazy until their teammate is out of the bin.

    • lagerjohn@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The ten minute sin bin rule works great in rugby for yellows. I’ve thought for a long time it should be brought into football. Provided they mic up the refs and allow us to hear their deliberations.

    • FrameworkisDigimon@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Also imagine VAR taking 5 minutes on each sin bin decision on top of what we have already

      If they had a sin bin and somehow decided the way to implement it was “we will review every sin bin decision and then put the player in the bin” rather than “we will put players in the bin and then review the decision, inviting them to rejoin the game before their time in the bin is up if the binning was unjust” that would be insane.

    • owiseone23@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Tactical fouls have had a huge negative effect on the product on the field. This rule makes them worse to commit so hopefully it limits them.

    • KonigSteve@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Let’s try and ruin football even more

      God you all are so stuck on tradition. Change is ok. The sport isn’t perfect.

    • AmusingHippo@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      My problem is how easier than other sports it is to waste time in football.
      Rugby? If you’re down one man you need to bust your ass to pass time.

      Football? Foul someone, get in front of the ball; spend a minute for a throw-in or a goal kick. Fake an injury.

      Before introducing sin bins, I need these anti-football behaviours addressed.

    • jamesbeil@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      People think that removing a player for ten minutes is so mind-bogglingly complicated that we can’t possibly make it work, despite grassroots officials doing it across england for the last three years.

    • Mathyoujames@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      People live in this dream world where the rules of football never change.

      From 1950-1990 the fundamental make up of the game changed absolutely loads. 2 points for a win, no penalty shootouts, pass backs, no red card for tackles from behind, offside if you’re level.

      Football isn’t some holy doctrine that has always been like this so I have no idea why people are opposed to further positive change.

    • YouIINeverWaIkAIone@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      They can’t enforce the rules already in place, are we to believe they could handle this whole new system? Call me a cynic but I don’t have much faith.

  • Wintersponge669@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Don’t copy Ruby , Ruby is rubbish

    rather ice hockey , let the guys fight it out. Winner gets the free kick

  • JoltyFVG@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Fuckin what? Bin VAR and stop all this nonsense. Let’s just go back to playing the game…

    • Constant__18@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      VAR isn’t the problem.

      Poor use and badly constructed rules around its use is the problem

  • cuentanueva@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Without changing the rules to net play time (e.g. two 30 min halves) this is gonna be a MESS.

    The idea is fine, but when one team has a sin bin and they start wasting time and in the end the player is out for like 2 minutes of actual game play… while in other case a player is out for 10+ (or whatever it ends up being) people are gonna be mad.

  • Muisyn@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    You should never be incentivised to break the rules in a game. Cynical fouls have been a plague for a long time.

  • Oohitsagoodpaper@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Pre-VAR I would have been all for this, but I can only see this lengthening the game even more and introducing another source of uncertainty and disagreement.

  • smallTimeCharly@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Sin bins were piloted in 2018-19 and led to the Football Association reporting a 38% total reduction in dissent across 31 leagues.

    They were then introduced across all levels of grassroots football from the 2019-20 season in an attempt to to improve levels of respect and fair play.

    The rule change was then implemented up to step five of the National League system and tier three and below in women’s football.

    This echoes my experience of them in grassroots 11 a side and sanctioned small sided football (in 5-7 a side they are two minutes).

    I don’t see why they wouldn’t also work in professional football.

    At grassroots level they have the big advantage of not having to deal with all the paperwork and admin of fining players.

    One example I’ve seen them used quite well in is where you have a handbags at dawn type scenario with a bit of a melee and some pushing and shoving. A sin bin each for the two main antagonists tends to calm the game down without needing such drastic action as a red card.

  • Ludenz-@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s not a bad idea in principle, but it’s just another way for officials to make inconsistent decisions.

    • ThereWillBeGoals@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s not really another way though is it? Or rather, or it’s not adding more decisions to be made. Previously it was “Do I give this person a a yellow or nothing for saying that to me” and now it’s “Do I give this person an orange or nothing for saying that to me”.

      • FrameworkisDigimon@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        In that specific situation you almost feel like the hypothetical orange card for a sin bin could work like so:

        • orange, yellow = off
        • yellow, orange = sin bin
        • orange, orange = sin bin
        • and a third orange is always a red

        This way referees who worry about being blamed for “ruining the game” with an early double yellow might punish players/teams where they’d otherwise find any excuse to avoid the second yellow.

        This really would allow for more inconsistent decisions but it would facilitate punishing behaviours that ought to be punished but which routinely go unpunished.

        The rules (“Laws” I know) keep getting written to be more objective, but the pursuit of objectivity is foolish when a lot of the decisions are always going to be subjective. Increasing the level of subjective discretion could actually make refs feel empowered to make calls they’re otherwise hesitant to make because everything is so binary and clashes with the human element. Or it might not, but the situation now definitely needs fixing somehow… all that can go wrong is a different wrong.

    • cuentanueva@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      And without “net play time” it’s gonna be even MORE inconsistent. Some players will lose like 2 minutes of actual game play, while other may lose 8/9…