Depends on the individual game. Sometimes the last few minutes just comes down to the trailing team intentionally fouling like crazy to stop the clock.
How to fix handegg.
Replace it with ultimate frisbee.
How to fix overwatch
Have to teams actually live close to the town they are representing.
The solution to this is to allow unlimited substitutions in soccer, just like in football, hockey, and basketball.
It seems ridiculous that there can only be three substitutions in an entire soccer match. Now, whether you handle substitutions like football, hockey, and basketball, where the same player can be subbed in and out multiple times, or baseball, where there are still unlimited substitutions, but once a player leaves, they can’t come back, is something I’m less clear about.
Yeah, that’s what I said.
I was actually listening to a podcast this morning about a proposed change to basketball where if a player is fouled in the process of shooting a 2 point shot, have that player take one free-throw worth 2 points, instead of two shots worth 1 point each. If a player is fouled in the process of shooting a 3 point shot, have that player take one free-throw worth 3 points. This would cut about 50% of free-throws out of basketball and save about 10-15 minutes per game.
I actually really liked this idea until one of the guests pointed out that free-throws give players an opportunity to rest a bit, which would be lessened if they went to the one free-throw approach. Now, a person can argue that basketball players can rest just as easily on the bench as during an additional free-throw, which is true, but at the same time, fans want to see the star players on the court for as much time as possible, instead of bench players.
I can see the merits to both sides, but thought it was an interesting idea.
While that is true, who needs to let players rest? You are pro athletes getting paid a zillion dollars. This is your job. Get out there and play.
Also, resting supports the idea of playing in sets. Plenty of time to reset between them.
No professional athlete, no matter how fit and in shape, can play at an elite level indefinitely without some type of rest. To expect otherwise, without either a degradation in quality of play and/or injuries is unrealistic.
I have a proposed fix for this too.
A foul is worth two possible points, to be countered with a possible three point play by the trailing team. There is a limit to how many fouls can happen, of course, but it’s rarely reached if this strategy is employed:
“A player who commits five personal fouls over the course of a 40-minute game, or six in a 48-minute game, fouls out and is disqualified for the remainder of the game.”
A. For each foul by a player beyond two for the entire match, the penalty shot worth is increased.
B. For each foul by the team in the last five minutes of the game, the penalty shot worth is increased.
First the two penalties are worth 1 point each. Total possible: 2 points.
Then the second shot is worth 2 points. Total possible: 3 points.
Then both are worth 2 points. Total possible: 4 points.
Then the second is worth 3 points. Total possible: 5 points.
Then both are worth 3 points. Total possible: 6 points.
At this point, with a foul, you are hoping that the fouled player is going to miss BOTH penalty shots, just to give your team a chance to catch up. If either goes in, you’re just playing to keep level. If both go in, you’re fucked.
Maybe the increasing worth of penalty shots can increase in a more elegant fashion, but the idea remains the same.
That is a big part of hockey. They constantly swap players on and off the ice to manage it. Do you put a good player out longer, tiring them out, or put a less able player out to let your star rest?
It’s like pit stops in racing. The game doesn’t stop. You have to manage your team’s ice time.
Exactly. To expect professional athletes to play without rest is just unrealistic.
Here’s a transcript of the podcast I was referring to when I wrote about changing free-throws in the NBA:
And at the end, the counterargument as to why this might not be the best idea:
“Fatsis: Could players argue, though, that foul shots actually give them a rest to make them better players down the road, for the rest of the game?”
“Arnovitz: To me, that’s the best case against it. These guys should be at peak performance in the fourth quarter of important games, and these moments serve as the rest in their interval workout.”
Sprinklers for F1
It seems to me this should be uncontroversial:
Most wins = top of standings
Why is that not the case in hockey?
When I was a kid I’d get frustrated with watching long distance running. There’d be one racer that would be keeping pace for some other runner and rival runners that would using the pace makers to keep up and it all seemed so complicated and unfair that certain runners would effectively be responsible for the mental work of the whole collection and then tend to lose later. In my mind it was the mental work and the physical running that should be tested together.
The fairest way I always thought was to put a partition up between the racers so they’d have to figure out their own pace rather than copy someone else.
Long distance runners using pacers is not something that needs to be fixed.
Make robots that play football well, go all F1 on it. No concussions and I’d watch the fuck out of it. Also make it like half the length. e_e
American football is really an abstraction and a “safe” substitute for war. If we’re going to have robots do the playing, might as well just have robot war. Everyone sends X of their best robot warriors into the arena and they fight until one team has no more survivors.
Oh damn, I just realized, if it was robots, you could go full-on bloodbowl with it. No holds barred, like AFL combined with robot wars. It’d be ACE.
Robot Wars is a thing. You’re just talking team robot wars.
No, those are fucking pieces of trash. I want to see at least T-800 level of evil fighting robots.