The Added Time Debate

[Blue Coop]

Reading the Saints forum after the match goes along the lines of ‘robbed by the ref’ - simple question, are we getting more added time now because we are deemed a big team in the title race? Does it come from the managers intensity? Ferguson had it for years.

Southampton were wasting plenty of time in the first half, that didn’t carry on too much in the second because they went 1-0 down early on and didn’t respond until 75’. Cédric was down for a spell and a couple of subs. Was 5 mins generous? Would it have been 3 or 4 a few years back? Those minutes are important at this level.

I’ve seen a few other comments around 96/97 minutes. Yes the clock went that far but Sterling scores with the last kick at 95 mins and then celebrations run the clock. If he hits they wide the whistle goes.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Live by the sword...

 

[Fred_Quimby]

Not to mention the time wasting in extra time. And no I don't think we get any favours from referees judging by last night'.

 

[Nightmare Walking]

It's a pet hate of mine how the ref also keeps the time. It should be taken out refs hands. Big clock on the scoreboard, clock stops when ball goes out of play. Have two 30 minute halves. Everyone knows where they stand and there are no arguments in regards to time keeping.
Football is supposedly an entertainment. Time wasting is not entertaining at all.

 

[BringBackSwales]

Not to mention the time wasting in extra time. And no I don't think we get any favours from referees judging by last night'.

Given the amount of time wasting (which the weak ref did absolutely fuck all about) then 5 mins was inadequate in the first place. However even within the 5 mins there was time wasting, and a disallowed goal that stopped the game for a minute

 

[Blue Coop]

My personal view is that the big teams do get more extra time, not as a gift, but simply because the opposition take 10 extra seconds to do everything because they’re looking to hold on.

Every freekick, every throw in, every small knock. Southampton against Huddersfield last night would be looking to get the ball in play quickly and grab a winner. That shift in mentality would mean fewer added minutes.

Edit: Often there’s no major single time consuming event, but the ref knows when the game has slowed right down because of one team because it’s blindingly obvious. The fans also make a bigger deal of it when they’re expected to win the game, which probably helps highlight how frequently it happens as well. I thought 5 was fair last night.

 

[homerdog]

The ref added 5 minutes at Huddersfield when we were winning 2-1, nobody even mentioned it.

 

[dadnlad]

the ref lost control at 84 minutes one of southampton players played injured and then was subbed in total took 3/4 minutes then that supposed england keeper still had to place the ball for goal kick i was amazed he added it on
need refs to book the captain or keepers for time wasting

 

[Gray]

Southampton set about their pitiful time wasting tactics from the off, they even insured after their last injury that the player left the pitch by the longest route possible.

The referee has a duty to the paying public to ensure they get what they have paid for which is entertainment.

The sly and extremely dubious tactics of the Saints (should drop that title after last night) came back to bite them in the arse big time.

Got what they deserved the cheating twats.

 

[M18CTID]

Personally, I think 5 minutes added time was on the low side given the amount of time-wasting on Southampton's part. I don't blame the Saints players for that though - the ref should've been more strict about it but let way too much of it go.