Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Time Keeping







Herr Tubthumper

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
64,134
The Fatherland










BRIGHT ON Q

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
9,379
The Fulham keeper wasted a lot of time, including straightening his socks before kicking it, so an extra 30 secs or so seemed fair overall.
Yep and moving the ball to the other side for a goal kick taking all the time in the world
 


brighton_tom

Well-known member
Jul 23, 2008
6,108
But if there were 5 minutes of injury time from a 90 minute game, does it not then make logical sense that you may have roughly 20 seconds injury time from that 5 minutes? And as others have said its a 'minimum of 5 minutes' injury time, so could be anywhere up to 5 minutes 59 seconds. Plus, for those 20 seconds we had the ball around the box, so an official is unlikely to stop the game during an attack. The sentiment from the thread is correct, but not relevant to this incident.
 






jcdenton08

Joel Veltman Fan Club
NSC Patron
Oct 17, 2008
16,351
Plus there is the point that the referee may have intended to give anywhere between 5:01-5:59 precisely, so his only option is to indicate “a minimum of 5 additional minutes”. Six minutes would be more than he ever intended, and five too few.

This is a non story, fake news
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
13,326
The final whistle should always be blown when. The ball is in mid air from a hoofed goal kick.
This is how I remember every game ending, from my youth.

The rule should be changed so that once the Injury time is up, both teams play on until the ball has been hoofed over half-way line from a goal kick.
 


Lady Whistledown

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 7, 2003
48,232
I can't understand how anybody can't grasp the concept of it being a minimum, not a set period. If you didn't add time on for all the dicking about that happened IN added time, then a winning side might as well just take the piss entirely and suck up a few yellow cards.

Why should we or anybody else lose out because Emi Martinez develops a sudden back spasm just as he's about to take a goal kick when one nil up in the third minute of time added on (for all his other time wasting)?
 




Dick Swiveller

Well-known member
Sep 9, 2011
9,791
Bizarre take given that refs always allow an attack in progress for a few seconds after. What was strange was he gave them another attack. Surely the penalty should have been the last kick?
 








Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 25, 2011
71,395
Withdean area
Fulham scored in the first half.

This had no effect on second half added time.

I know. I was referring to the time wasting to shorten the first half. It worked, just 2 minutes added on, despite the 3 minutes of celebrating and assorted other Leno cheating.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
54,854
Goldstone
Let's be honest: if we had a penalty against us 20 seconds after extra time should have finished, there would be howls of outrage.

Don't be ridiculous. The foul was 14 seconds after 5 minutes had been played. It's a minimum of 5 minutes, even if there's no time lost during that 5 minutes. We were on the attack with the ball in their box. It would have been odd for the ref to blow the whistle.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
54,854
Goldstone
Yes that is a nuance I completely missed.

Fair enough.


That aside are you saying you wouldn't have been calling foul when it went past 5 mins and the opponent gets a penalty?

I'd be feeling very sorry for myself, but I'd honestly not think there was a problem after just 14 seconds. We've seen so much more than that, well over a minute sometimes. Stopping at attack that close to the time would be very unusual.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
54,854
Goldstone
I was surprised when the board went up for as many as 5 minutes. It didn't feel like there were many stoppages in the second half. A couple of VAR checks for the offsides and substitutions but I was expecting 3, maybe 4 minutes added on.

There were 9 substitutions in the second half, across 6 different times. That alone is 3 minutes. (edit - ignore this bit - Then the VAR for Van Hecke's goal - which was surprisingly long), plus 2 shorter VAR's for our two disallowed goals. Then you've got the standard time wasting.
 
Last edited:




PILTDOWN MAN

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 15, 2004
20,120
Hurst Green
There were 9 substitutions in the second half, across 6 different times. That alone is 3 minutes. Then the VAR for Van Hecke's goal which was surprisingly long, plus 2 shorter VAR's for our two disallowed goals. Then you've got the standard time wasting. That was easily 5 minutes total.
We scored in the first half
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here