@Weststander is really angry for some reason
Last edited:
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Time Keeping
- Thread starter nickjhs
- Start date
Is it mandatory 30 seconds per set of subs, regardless of a Fulham or Villa player walking off ever so slowly.
Correct, but we played two of the three in the first half, plus the small VAR stoppage for JPvH, so it’s pretty churlish for anyone to question 25 secs.
Perhaps the ref felt guilty for under playing the first half, not that I care.
As aside, I thought Fulham were much better than they normally are, just mild time wasting rather than the usual nonsense.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 16,363
I’ll add though that the Laws of the Game and PGMOL guidelines are very different things. Each season, PGMOL/The FA give instructions to referees about specific ways they want to implement the Laws.
So the 30 second thing isn’t a Law per-se, but is the current working instruction for referees across the football pyramid.
The average time the ball is in play is around 58 minutes, so an extra 32 minutes to play.
Not sure that too many will be happy with that for a midweek night game
Not sure that too many will be happy with that for a midweek night game
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
What goes around comes around….Fulham have wasted so much time with their antics on the last couple of visits to the Amex …so tough!
7dialssouthpaw
Well-known member
- Sep 10, 2022
- 337
Your method is actually perfect and scaleable to premier league. They just have to display the stopwatch on the scoreboard.No, there is nothing in the Laws of association football regarding stopping the watch for substitutions. The decision on how long is added is at the discretion of the referee.
I used to ref at County League level and always stopped my stop watch for substitutions, not that we had 10 in those days. I would also stop the watch when the ball disappeared into the Hollingbury allotments or other external hazzards
Occasionally I would forget to restart my stop watch, but had a second watch for the actual time, so could do an arbitrary calculation in such an event
Not sure if you're just joking, but obviously it wouldn't be changed to have 90 minutes of ball in play, it would be more like 60 minutes.
I would quite like the rugby union rule where once the final whistle goes, the game continues until the ball goes out of play.
If you check the EPL link i posted you’ll see that “Exact time (play stopped to restart)” is implemented. No idea about the EFL and the pyramid but this 30 second thing isn’t used in the Premier league…and i guess they should know.
Last edited:
I like the 'there will be 60 minutes of game play' suggested ages ago by someone who analysed the game play. It was a few years ago. It would mean a Man City game would last 85 minutes, and a Bumley game would last 110 minutes.
As far as time wasting is concerned, the main issue is interruption of 'flow'.
Well, teams need to know how to maintain their 'flow' FFS.
They are adult footballers, not 14 year old apprentice romantic poets.
- Thread starter
- #54
This is why I think the idea of timekeepers has benefits. It takes the subjective nature of added on time out and makes it objective. In the AFL, like other sports, the time left is displayed, everyone knows exactly how long they have left and there is no room for the ref to let the game continue so the attacking team can score. Essentially there is no need for added on time. THIS is the article that got me thinking about it. As they point out under this system reducing the playing time to 60mins would actually increase the minutes that the ball is in play.
BrightonCottager
Well-known member
I do appreciate a fair few posters on this thread pointing out that more than 5 minutes of extra time was played. I recall gazing at the 95 minute counter on the scoreboard for what seemed like 25 minutes, not seconds, with a sickening sense of the inevitable.
And I can see no reason why a ref shouldn't blow the final whistle during an attack. Where does it say in the laws of association football that you have to wait until the end of an attack or the ball goes out of play?
And I can see no reason why a ref shouldn't blow the final whistle during an attack. Where does it say in the laws of association football that you have to wait until the end of an attack or the ball goes out of play?
- Thread starter
- #56
Exactly. Imagine the furore if there was no added time and the ref allowed the attack to continue after full time and a goal was scored. This is essentially what people are suggesting is ok, that the ref can and should arbitrarily add seconds onto added time so a particular passage of play can come to an end.
That’s exactly what typically happens and has for years though. There’s nothing in the laws, it’s down to the ref’s discretion and they almost always allow an attack to play out.
Green Cross Code Man
Wunt be druv
I think the ref had warned the goalie for time-wasting and added extra time into the extra time accordingly.
I think the last Premier League stats said that the ball is in play an average of 58 minutes which is actually up on previous seasons. It's actually ripping fans off if you ask me but it's hardly surprising. How much time is wasted telling players to stop hugging each other at corners and how long does it take for a free-kick within shooting distance of goal to be taken? Usually at least a minute. It's irritating.