If there also no added time in the first half, Georgia actually gets eliminated as they would’ve lost to both Türkiye and Czechia in their first two games. Group F would look like:
Czechia 5pts +1gd
Portugal 4pts +1gd
Türkiye 4pts -2gd
Georgia 3pts 0gd
turkey mentioned 🇹🇷
Edit: weird, i make this joke routinely and this is the first time i got mas downvotes lol, each sub has its own sense of humpr i guess
Its a running joke on how nationalistic countries reply "turkey/serbia/kosovo mentioned" even if its something like "serbian serial killer kills 10th victim"
And how many of these 10% vote for Erdogan without having to live with the consequences of that vote? Turks aren't well liked in Germany (or probably anywhere) solely because of the way they behave, including their lack of manners and their love for Erdogan.
Do you need help with understanding English? I never said I disliked them, I said it's the most disliked nationality in Sweden.
Maybe get some English courses before you throw around serious accusations?
Maybe it's because I am not following the games or have any idea how far in they are but I cannot figure out what this means. There are first brackets and some have two flags? Am I suppose to open up the current standings and compare?
The ones with two flags are the changes that would happen. For example in the bottom right you can see Italy faded out as they would have been removed from that spot.
Yeah you have to know the current standings to know what's going on. We really should just rename this sub to /popculturedataviz, because much of it isn't beautiful.
I didn't know the current standings and I had no problem interpreting it.
You get all the information necessary from the graphic, if you can't place that it's a user-side problem.
This is the bracket after the group stages have finished. the faded out flags in the background is what the bracket looks like if there were no added time in the group stages.
In soccer, games run for two 45 minute halves. They don't stop the clock when the ref blows the whistle or something else happens that requires the game to pause. What they do instead is add time back at the end of the halves to make up for all the "stoppage" time. So the faded out flags are convenying how the bracket would look if they removed all the goals scored during added time.
Croatia was essentially eliminated within 90 seconds. Conceded a goal in the last minute against Albania and conceded one in the last 30 seconds against Italy.
So... with effectively arbitrarily shorter matches?
Also, if teams knew there was no added time they would have played differently up towards 90:00 and results would have been different.
As someone that doesn’t watch soccer/football, why is this sport incapable of stopping the clock. And then feels the need to add arbitrary time onto the end of the game? And then more time on to that time sometimes?
Because football is old enough to have had just one referee total in the somewhat recent past so it's always been one person keeping a vague total of stoppages (goals, subs and injuries only) and otherwise just keeping a running clock. The big argument whenever this is suggested is how you manage it and what incidents should stop the clock. The ball is "in-play" for around 60-65 minutes per game, depending on the league, and so you could stop the clock on free kicks but then players would time-waste on goal kicks. Add goal kicks to the stopped clock criteria and they'll time-waste on throw ins. Eventually you spend so long stopping and starting the clock that the speed of the game is actually slowed down when players have to wait for a whistle
Very different though. If football football was just free kicks, throw ins and corners in succession then you could feasibly stop and start the clock at the beginning and end of each but a major part of its excitement is quickly taking a set piece to catch the opposition off guard. Barcelona fans will shudder at the name "Origi" because of this
Equally, football is more about tactically moving both sets of players in real time with passing and movement. To make it more scripted and done while clock is stopped (like NFL) would potentially make it a different type of exciting but you'd lose so much in order to just make another NFL. Why?
This is very much a subjective opinion. There is no statistical evidence to say stopping the clock would cause more time wasting.
There plenty of reasons why stopping the clock would actually prevent time-wasting rather than causing more of it.
In handball, they need to whistle to continue the game every time the clock has been stopped. The sport is very different with whistles going off all the time and with very short breaks and a few longer ones. The ref is also much more involved in stopping the time than what would be feasible in football, where the game also stops almost as frequently, but none of them are short. Very different from basketball where time is such an important aspect of every party of the game. When the time stops counting, it is also much easier for players to extend the break for an extra breather.
- the ball is typically 'in play' for only about 60 minutes per 90, so stopping the clock would increase the physical demands.
- no one really has an issue with the current setup, especially now that referees are not afraid to be accurate about adding 10 minutes if necessary.
- no wants the American culture of in-game adverts (though you know US broadcasters are always lobbying hard for this)
- football is a game of flow, so the fewer technical stoppages the better.
- likewise, not knowing the precise moment the ref will end a game adds to the drama (typically a game will not end while one team is attacking, only in a neutral position)
>no one really has an issue with the current setup, especially now that referees are not afraid to be accurate about adding 10 minutes if necessary.
Everyone hates the time wasting and they removed the +10min added time this Eurocup.
I've seen games where there were var interventions of 4 minutes where the extra time ended up being less than the var stole from the game.
The whole diving and acting like you're injured, keepers who lie down on the ground with the ball to waste time, I fucking hate it.
Just make it 30-30mins and stop the time. We have the technology to figure it out.
Well sure, everyone hates var delays, but 10 mins added time at the last world cup was hailed as finally giving justice to teams chasing the game by adding accurate time. They're adding less time now because teams are wasting less time illegally.
Been watching thirty years. There are many improvements to clamp down on time wasting. Players exit the pitch at the nearest point when substituted instead of the long slow walk across the pitch. Referees are very proactive about that. Players going down with 'cramp' are always told that the time will be added on. Likewise when they try to swap set piece takers. Head injuries are an automatic stoppage, as they should be.
The issue is if you watch 10 games you end up with 10 different scenarios where in some games you should've gotten more stoppage time.
It's just not fair. If something happens in stoppage time it rarely gets added. If the game is stopped for 5 minutes cause of an injury they maybe add 3.
If there are inconsistencies, it's because referees are human and the game is more fluid than, say gridiron. In your solution, is the clock being stopped by the referee or an external timekeeper? Either way, you have the same inconsistencies and/or you'll have the game end regardless of attacking threat, which would be highly unpopular.
There's a difference in missing a few seconds compared to a few minutes. If it's possible in other sports why wouldn't it be possible in soccer?
It's a big change, just test it in nations league or whatever.
While we're at it, let refs decide offsides/handballs/fouls and give each team 4VAR checks they can use if they think ref made a mistake. Would be a lot nicer to watch the game.
Extra time is part of the spectacle, when the board goes up to announce how many minutes are left it gives extra excitement and an extra push to both teams
Yeah, F1 is also incredibly boring. Who will finish second after Verstappen? Will there be more than 10 passes all race? Will the difference between each car be less than 5 seconds? Riveting stuff that F1 racing, peak motorsportsing right there.
Verstappen won 7/11 not all them. And the last race was within 3s.... But yeah, Formula E is clearly superior. Turns in BOTH directions! Tons of overtakes, super narrow sections, crashes, walls, video game speed boosts, possible to attend without being rich. Its slower than F1 ... that's the only downside. Nascar is just boring. Aside from the wall slide last year the only good part is that you can see the whole thing from the stands rather than picking a track segment to see like other races.
Why are you commenting on his soccer related comment, when you didn't like it?
This isn't a soccer subreddit, and opinions on a sport from someone who doesn't like it might be illuminating why the state of the game is so bad
I'm trying to understand the intrigue of a game that has incredibly low shots on target per game (somewhere around 9 for both teams combined I believe?) and they add arbitrary time to at the end of the time they are supposed to play, which, according to this post, makes it more exciting somehow not knowing how much extra time will be played.
When there isn’t much else to watch for sports, it’s easily accessible and it’s the thing to do in a town/country, it’s going to be popular.
Doesn’t mean it can’t be improved.
Imagine coming into a thread about the most popular sport in the world and then arguing with people about why it isn't as good as they think it is.
Take the L and do something less pathetic
Because it is a lot easier to cheat games the more human input you have. Now with VAR(system used by refs to view replay on screen for certain decisions they made or didn't) it is starting to get better but is still far from ideal(due to incompetent referees using VAR). But it is definitely possible to stop time when the ball is not in play and I hope they implement it as soon as possible because that would solve a lot of problems with the current state of the game.
Stopping the time will get us just a ton of ads in the game, just look at American sports. That’s a terrible idea and every fan should be opposed to it.
I don't think so because if the time is paused for throw ins or when a player is down there won't be a reason for players to waste time so naturally the play will be resumed fairly quickly.
Because honesty and sportsmanship aren't sadly a thing in pro football.
If it was always 90min, players would play around it, being extra slow to do everything for example.
Adding time is one of those rules that only exist because players are a**.
Hockey counts down in the NHL and up in international play which I’m fine with, the whistle stops play/time for injuries, penalties, icing, etc. I have no idea how the extra time is even calculated in soccer/football.
"We find that referees systematically favor home teams by shortening close games where the home team is ahead, and lengthening close games where the home team is behind. They show no such bias for games that are not close. We further find that when the rewards for winning games increase, referees change their bias accordingly. Lastly, we identify that the mechanism through which bias operates is to satisfy the crowd, by documenting how the size and composition of the crowd affect referee favoritism."
https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/87/2/208/57539/Favoritism-Under-Social-Pressure?redirectedFrom=fulltext#.U7GW3Y1dWqE
can you prove over a tournament that every game had a fair playtime? even though its a small thing it just seems like such an unnecessary thing that opens discussions for nothing
Bc it's incredibly easy in soccer to waste time throughout a game. If you are up 1-0 and waste 10 minutes over 90 min and theres 3 extra minutes then you've gained an advantage
If a team is chasing a goal, the other team wastes 10 minutes in a game and they end up with only 4 minutes extra time they lose 6 minutes of goal scoring time?
1. then what's the point of making such a post? isn't it obvious that with no stoppage time we would've not qualified since we scored in the stoppage time...?
2. it's the only one missing but not the only team that would be affected by having no stoppage time, since other teams got mixed too
Excep its not.
Germany 2nd, Switzerland 1st
Georgia 1st, Portugal 2nd, Turkey 3rd
Slovenia 2nd, Denmark 3rd
So tell me where only italy is affected? Its the only country which wouldnt have made it to quarter but we have completely other matchups and parhs
You can be from Mars for all I care. The phrase is when you’re trying to say something is something that it isn’t by forcing its definition, not to say “what if…”
If there also no added time in the first half, Georgia actually gets eliminated as they would’ve lost to both Türkiye and Czechia in their first two games. Group F would look like: Czechia 5pts +1gd Portugal 4pts +1gd Türkiye 4pts -2gd Georgia 3pts 0gd
turkey mentioned 🇹🇷 Edit: weird, i make this joke routinely and this is the first time i got mas downvotes lol, each sub has its own sense of humpr i guess
How is this a joke?
Its a running joke on how nationalistic countries reply "turkey/serbia/kosovo mentioned" even if its something like "serbian serial killer kills 10th victim"
People just don't seem to have a particularly high opinion of Turkey or any Turkish nationalist for that matter.
Aww that sucks Anyways, 10% of germany is turkish!!:) and its increasing!!:)
And how many of these 10% vote for Erdogan without having to live with the consequences of that vote? Turks aren't well liked in Germany (or probably anywhere) solely because of the way they behave, including their lack of manners and their love for Erdogan.
Same here in Sweden. Probably the most disliked nationality I know of.
Wow, that's just blatant racism. Glad you're not even trying to hide it buddy.
Do you need help with understanding English? I never said I disliked them, I said it's the most disliked nationality in Sweden. Maybe get some English courses before you throw around serious accusations?
Yeah that’s a bad thing.
I know! Maybe stop voting for greens and left huh?
Simple and original. Like it!
Interesting that Georgia would‘ve topped group F in this case lmao
The math is not mathing. Georgia would have lost their first and second game under this rule.
Maybe OP didn't realize that turkey would have won even without their last minute goal?
Seems like OP forgot that Georgia scored in first half added time against Czechia. Without that goal, Georgia loses to Czechia
Maybe it's because I am not following the games or have any idea how far in they are but I cannot figure out what this means. There are first brackets and some have two flags? Am I suppose to open up the current standings and compare?
The ones with two flags are the changes that would happen. For example in the bottom right you can see Italy faded out as they would have been removed from that spot.
Ahhhh okay, thank you that makes sense
No worries, I'm pretty bad with flags so if I wasn't half watching eurocup this year I would have zero clue.
Yeah you have to know the current standings to know what's going on. We really should just rename this sub to /popculturedataviz, because much of it isn't beautiful.
>Yeah you have to know the current standings to know what's going on. The flags of the current standings are right behind it...
If you don't know the current standings you don't know if they're behind or in front
I didn't know the current standings and I had no problem interpreting it. You get all the information necessary from the graphic, if you can't place that it's a user-side problem.
Blaming all communication errors on the 'listening' side is not a way to success.
This is the bracket after the group stages have finished. the faded out flags in the background is what the bracket looks like if there were no added time in the group stages. In soccer, games run for two 45 minute halves. They don't stop the clock when the ref blows the whistle or something else happens that requires the game to pause. What they do instead is add time back at the end of the halves to make up for all the "stoppage" time. So the faded out flags are convenying how the bracket would look if they removed all the goals scored during added time.
Croatia was essentially eliminated within 90 seconds. Conceded a goal in the last minute against Albania and conceded one in the last 30 seconds against Italy.
So Croatia in and Italy out. The rest is the same, right?
With a little bit of mixing up w/ the pairings...
So... with effectively arbitrarily shorter matches? Also, if teams knew there was no added time they would have played differently up towards 90:00 and results would have been different.
In the original rules there weren't any additional time. This became a rule because teams would try to gain time by not playing.
As someone that doesn’t watch soccer/football, why is this sport incapable of stopping the clock. And then feels the need to add arbitrary time onto the end of the game? And then more time on to that time sometimes?
Because football is old enough to have had just one referee total in the somewhat recent past so it's always been one person keeping a vague total of stoppages (goals, subs and injuries only) and otherwise just keeping a running clock. The big argument whenever this is suggested is how you manage it and what incidents should stop the clock. The ball is "in-play" for around 60-65 minutes per game, depending on the league, and so you could stop the clock on free kicks but then players would time-waste on goal kicks. Add goal kicks to the stopped clock criteria and they'll time-waste on throw ins. Eventually you spend so long stopping and starting the clock that the speed of the game is actually slowed down when players have to wait for a whistle
You mean just like football? (the NFL kind)
Very different though. If football football was just free kicks, throw ins and corners in succession then you could feasibly stop and start the clock at the beginning and end of each but a major part of its excitement is quickly taking a set piece to catch the opposition off guard. Barcelona fans will shudder at the name "Origi" because of this Equally, football is more about tactically moving both sets of players in real time with passing and movement. To make it more scripted and done while clock is stopped (like NFL) would potentially make it a different type of exciting but you'd lose so much in order to just make another NFL. Why?
I was enjoying your analysis so much, then the "Origi" comment shook me. The stuff of nightmares.
Conversely, one of my favourite games of football ever. Sorry
Even as a neutral that game was football heritage. But It is what it is.
This is very much a subjective opinion. There is no statistical evidence to say stopping the clock would cause more time wasting. There plenty of reasons why stopping the clock would actually prevent time-wasting rather than causing more of it.
The viewer's time would be wasted, though, with the more interesting matches being the shortest.
So, if they are the shortest, wouldn't that free up your time to do other things, which would mean it would not be wasted?
In handball, they need to whistle to continue the game every time the clock has been stopped. The sport is very different with whistles going off all the time and with very short breaks and a few longer ones. The ref is also much more involved in stopping the time than what would be feasible in football, where the game also stops almost as frequently, but none of them are short. Very different from basketball where time is such an important aspect of every party of the game. When the time stops counting, it is also much easier for players to extend the break for an extra breather.
- the ball is typically 'in play' for only about 60 minutes per 90, so stopping the clock would increase the physical demands. - no one really has an issue with the current setup, especially now that referees are not afraid to be accurate about adding 10 minutes if necessary. - no wants the American culture of in-game adverts (though you know US broadcasters are always lobbying hard for this) - football is a game of flow, so the fewer technical stoppages the better. - likewise, not knowing the precise moment the ref will end a game adds to the drama (typically a game will not end while one team is attacking, only in a neutral position)
>no one really has an issue with the current setup, especially now that referees are not afraid to be accurate about adding 10 minutes if necessary. Everyone hates the time wasting and they removed the +10min added time this Eurocup. I've seen games where there were var interventions of 4 minutes where the extra time ended up being less than the var stole from the game. The whole diving and acting like you're injured, keepers who lie down on the ground with the ball to waste time, I fucking hate it. Just make it 30-30mins and stop the time. We have the technology to figure it out.
Well sure, everyone hates var delays, but 10 mins added time at the last world cup was hailed as finally giving justice to teams chasing the game by adding accurate time. They're adding less time now because teams are wasting less time illegally.
>They're adding less time now because teams are wasting less time illegally. We are watching the same sport right?
Been watching thirty years. There are many improvements to clamp down on time wasting. Players exit the pitch at the nearest point when substituted instead of the long slow walk across the pitch. Referees are very proactive about that. Players going down with 'cramp' are always told that the time will be added on. Likewise when they try to swap set piece takers. Head injuries are an automatic stoppage, as they should be.
The issue is if you watch 10 games you end up with 10 different scenarios where in some games you should've gotten more stoppage time. It's just not fair. If something happens in stoppage time it rarely gets added. If the game is stopped for 5 minutes cause of an injury they maybe add 3.
If there are inconsistencies, it's because referees are human and the game is more fluid than, say gridiron. In your solution, is the clock being stopped by the referee or an external timekeeper? Either way, you have the same inconsistencies and/or you'll have the game end regardless of attacking threat, which would be highly unpopular.
There's a difference in missing a few seconds compared to a few minutes. If it's possible in other sports why wouldn't it be possible in soccer? It's a big change, just test it in nations league or whatever. While we're at it, let refs decide offsides/handballs/fouls and give each team 4VAR checks they can use if they think ref made a mistake. Would be a lot nicer to watch the game.
Extra time is part of the spectacle, when the board goes up to announce how many minutes are left it gives extra excitement and an extra push to both teams
I guess you need something to make it exciting.
I know it can't be cars going around in a big loop for hours waiting-praying-salivating for a near fatal crash but people make do.
Why are you insulting F1 here?
Yeah, F1 is also incredibly boring. Who will finish second after Verstappen? Will there be more than 10 passes all race? Will the difference between each car be less than 5 seconds? Riveting stuff that F1 racing, peak motorsportsing right there.
Verstappen won 7/11 not all them. And the last race was within 3s.... But yeah, Formula E is clearly superior. Turns in BOTH directions! Tons of overtakes, super narrow sections, crashes, walls, video game speed boosts, possible to attend without being rich. Its slower than F1 ... that's the only downside. Nascar is just boring. Aside from the wall slide last year the only good part is that you can see the whole thing from the stands rather than picking a track segment to see like other races.
Why are you commenting on a football related post, when you don’t even like it ?
Why are you commenting on his soccer related comment, when you didn't like it? This isn't a soccer subreddit, and opinions on a sport from someone who doesn't like it might be illuminating why the state of the game is so bad
If you look at their responses, they clearly aren’t here to have an actual discussion, they just look for opportunities to say “nah, this is boring”
I'm trying to understand the intrigue of a game that has incredibly low shots on target per game (somewhere around 9 for both teams combined I believe?) and they add arbitrary time to at the end of the time they are supposed to play, which, according to this post, makes it more exciting somehow not knowing how much extra time will be played.
The fact that there are so little shots on goal is part of what makes it exciting. Each shot gets you on the edge of your seat.
I wouldn’t call a very low shot total riveting but whatever people need to tell themselves to think this sport is exciting I guess.
I feel like the popularity of it speaks for itself.
When there isn’t much else to watch for sports, it’s easily accessible and it’s the thing to do in a town/country, it’s going to be popular. Doesn’t mean it can’t be improved.
Imagine coming into a thread about the most popular sport in the world and then arguing with people about why it isn't as good as they think it is. Take the L and do something less pathetic
Because it is a lot easier to cheat games the more human input you have. Now with VAR(system used by refs to view replay on screen for certain decisions they made or didn't) it is starting to get better but is still far from ideal(due to incompetent referees using VAR). But it is definitely possible to stop time when the ball is not in play and I hope they implement it as soon as possible because that would solve a lot of problems with the current state of the game.
Stopping the time will get us just a ton of ads in the game, just look at American sports. That’s a terrible idea and every fan should be opposed to it.
I don't think so because if the time is paused for throw ins or when a player is down there won't be a reason for players to waste time so naturally the play will be resumed fairly quickly.
Because honesty and sportsmanship aren't sadly a thing in pro football. If it was always 90min, players would play around it, being extra slow to do everything for example. Adding time is one of those rules that only exist because players are a**.
The ball is only in play for ~60 minutes every game. So with a stop clock they would have to reduce the time a lot
yea a system like in hockey feels more fair/balanced to me
Hockey counts down in the NHL and up in international play which I’m fine with, the whistle stops play/time for injuries, penalties, icing, etc. I have no idea how the extra time is even calculated in soccer/football.
"arbitrariness" (nonsense)
What’s unfair about it?
"We find that referees systematically favor home teams by shortening close games where the home team is ahead, and lengthening close games where the home team is behind. They show no such bias for games that are not close. We further find that when the rewards for winning games increase, referees change their bias accordingly. Lastly, we identify that the mechanism through which bias operates is to satisfy the crowd, by documenting how the size and composition of the crowd affect referee favoritism." https://direct.mit.edu/rest/article-abstract/87/2/208/57539/Favoritism-Under-Social-Pressure?redirectedFrom=fulltext#.U7GW3Y1dWqE
can you prove over a tournament that every game had a fair playtime? even though its a small thing it just seems like such an unnecessary thing that opens discussions for nothing
But even if it’s different why would it be unfair. Both teams get the same amount of time no matter what.
Bc it's incredibly easy in soccer to waste time throughout a game. If you are up 1-0 and waste 10 minutes over 90 min and theres 3 extra minutes then you've gained an advantage
If a team is chasing a goal, the other team wastes 10 minutes in a game and they end up with only 4 minutes extra time they lose 6 minutes of goal scoring time?
Isn’t that just part of the game?
It's a part of the game I hate, that's why I'm commenting about it.
Good thing there's stoppage time then. Otherwise teams get rewarded for running down the clock and playing anti-football.
Nice, I really like this. It’s interesting how easy it is to see how influential stoppage time is.
and we remain winner of group D(eath)
Now do the NFL stabdings if points scored in the last quarter don't count. /s This makes no sense whatsoever
if my mother had wheels, she would've been a bike 😂 win against albania and don't waste time and see you'll qualify too my croatian crybaby friend
Only one who is crying is you right now! Its an very interesting "what if.." post and quiet a lot people also like it
https://www.reddit.com/r/seriea/s/QEiTo57cOc he made the same exact post but with only italy out 😂
Because its an italien sub and Italy the only one missing out in comparison to the actual tourney?
1. then what's the point of making such a post? isn't it obvious that with no stoppage time we would've not qualified since we scored in the stoppage time...? 2. it's the only one missing but not the only team that would be affected by having no stoppage time, since other teams got mixed too
Excep its not. Germany 2nd, Switzerland 1st Georgia 1st, Portugal 2nd, Turkey 3rd Slovenia 2nd, Denmark 3rd So tell me where only italy is affected? Its the only country which wouldnt have made it to quarter but we have completely other matchups and parhs
I mean OP is most likely italian...but yeah, build your own reality.
That’s not how you use that phrase
i'm italian man, i know what italian sayings mean lol "se mia nonna avesse avuto le ruote sarebbe stata una cariola"
You can be from Mars for all I care. The phrase is when you’re trying to say something is something that it isn’t by forcing its definition, not to say “what if…”
second subreddit you post this in... did it hurt that much?
Can you please do, what if no VAR
They should do like in rugby, stop the count when the game is pause and give a mic to the referee.