[Albion] 5 Mins injury time
- Thread starter Deadly Danson
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Dick Swiveller
Well-known member
- Sep 9, 2011
- 9,539
Thought the ref had a good first half apart from the stoppage and injury time. But seemed to have been swapped at half time for a useless one. I make it we have had newish PL refs in all but the Utd game. I know 3 retired but really?
The referee display yesterday was disgraceful. My take home was that the ref appeared to regard the game as unimportant, with his primary role to stop play for health and safety reasons every time a Forest player rolled over. He stopped the game every time this happened, albeit I recall Dunk kicking the ball out of play when one of theirs decided to sit down. None of this was for head injuries. And he didn't care enough to add on the correct 'added time' by all accounts (I was long gone).
Now, it's time the referees' gentlemen's club got together and declared what the rules are and what they intend to do when a player gets a hurty leggy and sits down. Once they have decided they should stick to their decision. Time lost needs to be added on. Properly. (The 60 minutes of action idea would work here, discussed passim elsewhere).
What that ref did yesterday was, through lack of concern for the sanctity of the game and the opportunity for the better team to prevail, allowed the weaker team to disrupt play with injuries that the rules do not demand a halt to play. He then stood chatting to the prone player instead of either getting the player taken off for treatment or telling him to get on with it. There is no rule that says if a player gets a bit of a twinge or tingle he can sit down and have play stopped till he's "feeling better, now, mum". FFS.
This sort of refereeing shithousery is the main reason why referees are instinctively mistrusted by supporters and get so much stick, stick that they seem oblivious to, or which they even ....relish.
It has to stop. I left early because I could see we would never score and five minutes of missed action saves me an hour when I'm in the car park. Part of the reason we would never score is because the referee had destroyed the game; our fragile mojo cannot survive this sort of disruption. Bravo Forest.
110% correct.
May not be necessary anyway lower down. I went to see Varndenians v Horsham YMCA at the Withdean Stadium last weekend. Two oldish blokes running the line and a young referee . Impeccable.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
I'm warming to the 60 minute in-play with independent (ie not the on-field ref) timing idea. The one issue that won't resolve which was very much in evidence last night is that the time-wasting tactic isn't just to prevent the opposition from playing, it's also to deflate their momentum, which also worked a treat last night.
This was exacerbated by a ref that seemed to be egging Forest on to identify ways to stop the game or slow it down.
This was exacerbated by a ref that seemed to be egging Forest on to identify ways to stop the game or slow it down.
Cowfold Seagull
Fan of the 17 bus
60 minutes? we wouldn't have scored if we had gone on playing all nigh! . . . but as you quite rightly say that isn't the point.
I've never liked cticizing referees, but Darren England, what an incompetent. Made a whole series of baffling decisions all through the game, keeping his cards safely in his pocket as Forest players made a number of cynical fouls, until towards the end when he booked Mac Allister, seemingly for something that he said. Then just stood there looking totally gormless as he let Forest get on with their shameless timewasting right through the game before adding on those massive 5 minutes at the end.
I would struggle to name maybe three or four referres who l do respect, but the others? they are an embarrassment.
Indeed the 60 minute idea is fine but it's the disruptive nature of the time wasting that is causing the problem. A decent ref would have got the game moving on a lot quicker. What is really pissing me off is when a team is under the cosh it just needs a player to go down in their area clutching their head and it stops. Also irrelevant of who has the ball at the time. if it is still in the box the ball is returned to the goalkeeper to restart.
We were impotent last night and could still be out there now passing it about the back but the ref needs to taken to task about his control of the game. If a team is intent on killing the game it needs a ref to take action. He was woeful
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Agree with all that, and would add that I can accept referees making mistakes or falling on the wrong side of a borderline decision (we all make mistakes, and borderline decisions are by definition difficult), but what I can't accept is an overall policy that is detrimental to the game and those teams that embrace the spirit of the game, which is what we were subjected to last night.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Football has elevated time-wasting into a sophisticated art form
While the world obsesses about productivity, football has gone the other way and become creative about frittering away time
www.theguardian.com
Quite a prescient article today in the Guardian, about precisely this subject.
"The most irksome aspect of this racket – the late double-substitutions, taking it in turns to go down with cramp, delaying free-kicks by pointing at some non-existent impediment to restarting the game – is that all are acted out with a vaudevillian commitment that suggests we cannot guess the deeper motive of the perpetrator. Time-wasting has been assimilated into football as an inevitable part of the game"
Greg Bobkin
Silver Seagull
- May 22, 2012
- 16,079
To be fair, if Albion played for an extra five HOURS, I doubt they'd score!