[Football] Time Keeping

[Triggaaar]

@Weststander is really angry for some reason

 

[Weststander]

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.

Is it mandatory 30 seconds per set of subs, regardless of a Fulham or Villa player walking off ever so slowly.

 

[Triggaaar]

Is it mandatory 30 seconds per set of subs, regardless of a Fulham or Villa player walking off ever so slowly.

I seem to have fallen for this idea too, but apparently not...

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...

 

[Weststander]

@Weststander is really angry for some reason

…..

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Fulham scored in the first half.

This had no effect on second half added time.

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.

 

[jcdenton08]

I seem to have fallen for this idea too, but apparently not...

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.

 

[studio150]

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

 

[LamieRobertson]

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]

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

Your method is actually perfect and scaleable to premier league. They just have to display the stopwatch on the scoreboard.

 

[Triggaaar]

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 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.

 

[drew]

I would quite like the rugby union rule where once the final whistle goes, the game continues until the ball goes out of play.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

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.

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.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

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. It led me to think the game could benefit from timekeeping similar to Aussie rules. Whenever play is stopped the clock stops, therefore, no extra time is needed, the timekeeping is set and separate from the ref so it doesn't matter if there is a chance of scoring when the time is up the siren is blown. The only exceptions are (from Wikipedia) "The quarter or match ends when a field umpire hears the siren, with the exceptions that a score can result from a ball already in flight at the time of the siren, and that a player is allowed to kick for goal after the siren from a mark or free kick which was paid before the siren." I read an article on this where the author was saying if this type of timekeeping was introduced and the game was reduced to 60 mins we would get more time with the ball in play and time-wasting would become a non issue.

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.

 

[nickjhs]

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.

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]

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?