Exactly. There was a stoppage for a corner and a free kick in that time so he would have added a bit of time on for that.80's Seagull said:"Warnock fumed, claiming the first came well into a second minute when a minimum of one had been signalled by the fourth official."
That's right it's a minimum of one minute added time, what's your problem?
brighton_b0y said:lovely! only their 3rd defeat in 23
eastlondonseagull said:Just posted this to the editor of Yorkshire Post...
Headline: How Would You Like Your Grapes, Mr Warnock?
Sir,
As a life-long Brighton & Hove Albion supporter, I have witnessed many games in which the Albion have either been 'mugged' as your reporter Robert Gledhill puts it in his report of Saturday's game at Bramall Lane, or have done the mugging.
West Ham Utd were 'mugged' by Brighton earlier this season when we won the game totally against the run of play. That, in essence, is what a 'mugging' is. Neil Warnock, however, is well aware that his team were second-best on Saturday. Unfortunately, he is unable to admit it publicly. He is also aware that the time flagged up by the referee's assistant at the end of each half is the 'minimum' time that should be added on. Richard Carpenter's opening goal, therefore, was perfectly legitimate.
If Warnock had a decent complaint - for example, Tottenham's recent goal that never was - then his anger would be understandable. But to blame the referee when it's his own side's defensive frailties that are to blame smacks of sour grapes. Grow up Warnock.
Yours faithfully,
Shit, had better write them a PS too thenCurious Orange said:In all fairness to Warnock he hasn't actually said Brighton were lucky or anything like that. And he did put it down to sloppy defending on his TV interviews; although we did slice them apart with our passing from what I saw.
Warnock has always spoken up in favour of Falmer too, and been quite complimentary about our supporters.