Rotherham United - RUFC - To Multi-ball or not
UK time is: 01:53:09
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

RUFC - To Multi-ball or not

Rotherham United, along with all the other league teams this season, have had to do without the multi-ball system, after the league changed the rules at the start of this season.

I suppose as rule changes go this isn't one that will affect that many clubs - not as much as the new 'only five subs' rule or the 'Financial Fair Play' rule - but it's one that makes the 'Don Valley Experience' just that bit slower.

The system was introduced to quicken the game up where a number of match balls are held by ball boys around the edge of the pitch. When one ball leaves the field of play, the nearest ball boy will release another ball to a player, allowing the game to resume immediately.

It seemed to work and I can't see why anyone would object to it, although Gary Megson, when he was at Nottingham Forest and Ian Holloway have had a bit of a moan about it in the past - Megson was once reported by a referee after his team won and the 'supply of balls around the pitch tended to dry up.'

OK, if there's a big crowd at a football ground then they tend to throw the ball back (even if it is passed around a bit first!) and at smaller grounds it might not be needed, but I certainly think its something that's needed at Don Valley.

I liked the multi-ball because it keeps the game flowing and makes it worthless for players to hoof the ball into the stands when they are a goal up in the last few minutes. Maybe the FL should have let each club make it's own mind up about his subject as long as it was agreed between both teams and officials before the game then surely that would be the answer? Or, is that much too simple...

Join in the poll on Vital Rotherham too - right hand side of this page and down a bit!

But what are your thoughts?
Did you like the multi-ball, hate it, or don't care
Whatever your view, come and tell us here on Vital Rotherham
Click the link below and join in the discussion.....
Join The Vital Debate

You can also catch Vital Rotherham on facebook and twitter...

Vital Rotherham on: facebook

Vital Rotherham on: twitter




Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!



Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

The Journalist

Writer: Herringthorpe  Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Tuesday August 23 2011

Time: 9:31AM

Your Comments (oldest first)

Change to most recent first
Hopefully the link will appear soon!
herringthorpe
Report Abuse
23/08/2011 09:38:00

Hopefully the link will appear soon!
herringthorpe
Report Abuse
23/08/2011 09:38:00

 

Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account

Recent Rotherham United Articles

Archived Rotherham United Articles

List All Vital Rotherham Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll

Vital Members League (view all)

1. rybel_b 180
2. herringthorpe 171
3. sixpence 59
4. mos60 39
5. mvmiller 6
6. zipadeedoodah 2
7. Pukka Pieman 2
8. nogginthenog 1
9. Millie Miller 1
10. miller4life 1

League Results (view all)

Latest Results

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
18. MK Dons 0 0 0 0 0 0
19. Preston 0 0 0 0 0 0
20. Q.P.R. 0 0 0 0 0 0
21. Reading 0 0 0 0 0 0
22. Rotherham 0 0 0 0 0 0
23. Sheff Wed 0 0 0 0 0 0
24. Wolves 0 0 0 0 0 0

Rotherham United  Fixtures (view all)

Breaking League News

Development Squad Head To Austria
Birmingham : 05/07/2015 23:36:01
Royals jet off to Thailand
Reading : 05/07/2015 21:01:01
Season Preview- Blackburn
Reading : 05/07/2015 20:47:00
Late Taylor Swoop?
Forest : 05/07/2015 19:58:00
Latest Snodgrass Update
Hull City : 05/07/2015 19:46:01

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

With three players brought in how many more are you expecting before the start of the new season
Suggested By:  
One 9%
Two 0%
Three 8%
Four 50%
Five 8%
More than five 25%