Added time

This is one of FIFA topics for future changes in the game.
30 minutes each half with clock stopped when not in play so no need for added time.
Sure that will cause some major problems too. They reckon in average game of 90 minutes ball is actually only in play just over 60 minutes anyway. ?
 
lastmanback said:
This is one of FIFA topics for future changes in the game.
30 minutes each half with clock stopped when not in play so no need for added time.
Sure that will cause some major problems too. They reckon in average game of 90 minutes ball is actually only in play just over 60 minutes anyway. ?
Click to expand...
What major problems would you foresee with them going to ball in play timing?
 
all players walked off the field in one piece. 3 points. great GD. Statement made and a big Europe game coming up. Not twisting when you already have 21 is usually a good strategy
 
The game was done....I can see the point about another goal being important in the grand scheme of things.....

but what about if there was 7-8 mins and someone had done a hamstring or been levelled by one of the Stoke players....

Walker was basically strolling after the knock he took from the ex-rag twat and at one point told Silva not to pass to him as he was struggling
Game was over get them off and start recovery for the next game
As some have said if we lose the league by one goal whoever wins it will have been one exceptional team
 
East Level 2 said:
Probably not a major problem but having to admit there is currently around 60-65 minutes play in a 90 minute game.
Click to expand...
Well it's not exactly a secret. Some matches have significantly fewer than 60 minutes. And that's the issue, the disparity between one match and another. How many minutes they decide to have per half doesn't overly bother me, I suspect they should aim a bit higher and 35 mins would be better than 30, but as long as every match has the same amount of play I'll be happy. Think it's a disgrace that some teams are masters of time wasting and are able to make sure that they only have to play for about 45-50 mins v decent teams. It's a form of cheating that seems to be totally accepted. As for yesterday, it's not up to the referee to decide whether a team needs putting out of their misery, he's supposed to stick to the fucking rules. It's no wonder refs don't crack down on time wasting, the ****s make it up as they go along.
 
Jazzcat said:
We definitely might have scored another one and an 8-2 score would've been a memer's dream but, the way we're going, I doubt it would make much of a difference towards the end of the season. 8 Games in and we're already 6 goals ahead of the "free scoring" rags and 15 ahead of spurs.
And I think we'll just take it on points anyhow.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you but the point was to the poster who said it didn't matter and of course it might make a difference to where Stoke finish
 
There was a report recently about how long the ball is actually in play, i cant remember off the top of my head,pretty sure no club in the English top flight last season averaged more than 58.1 minutes of playing-time per game in 2016-17.. Which means we are definitely being short changed. Although as a blue at the moment we are getting our monies worth for sure. In the NFL the matches there are 60 minutes and the ball is generally in play for 11 minutes !!
 
I was flabbergasted myself at the 3 mins because Shakiri alone was around 5( the ref was even looking at his watch incessantly ). Then we had a few other episodes equalling a few minutes and on top of that there was their usual time wasting antics. It should of been nearer 10 but that was never gonna happen in the circumstances. I'd like to think if were chasing the game he'd have given us 6 or 7 but I just think he gave them a mercy killing. Either way, it was so good to give the backward Stokie oatcake snorting bastards a good hiding!!
 
Match officials making it up as they go along as usual.

I didn't particularly want any more playing time, but there were far more than 3 minutes to be added after 3 lengthy injury breaks, 5 goals scored and 4 substitutions in the half.

Is there anything in the rules or guidelines that covers this?
 
5402fc7a8d9be05144984b3cba7a840f6d747fba5ab57c47896aebb54107bc28.jpg
 
you don't need to stop the clock every time the ball goes out of play, you just need to stop it when a player is injured or for subs, the rest (including time-wasting the ref just has to be tougher on)
 
1.618034 said:
Match officials making it up as they go along as usual.

I didn't particularly want any more playing time, but there were far more than 3 minutes to be added after 3 lengthy injury breaks, 5 goals scored and 4 substitutions in the half.

Is there anything in the rules or guidelines that covers this?
Click to expand...

From FIFA

Allowance for time lost

Allowance is made by the referee in each half for all time lost in that half through:
  • substitutions
  • assessment and/or removal of injured players
  • wasting time
  • disciplinary sanctions
  • stoppages for drinks or other medical reasons permitted by competition rules
  • any other cause, including any significant delay to a restart (e.g. goal celebrations)
The fourth official indicates the minimum additional time decided by the referee at the end of the final minute of each half. The additional time may be increased by the referee but not reduced.
The referee must not compensate for a timekeeping error during the first half by changing the length of the second half.

Clearly 3 mins was wrong Can't find anything thats says he can allow less if one team is getting battered
 
Gordyola said:
From FIFA

Allowance for time lost

Allowance is made by the referee in each half for all time lost in that half through:
  • substitutions
  • assessment and/or removal of injured players
  • wasting time
  • disciplinary sanctions
  • stoppages for drinks or other medical reasons permitted by competition rules
  • any other cause, including any significant delay to a restart (e.g. goal celebrations)
The fourth official indicates the minimum additional time decided by the referee at the end of the final minute of each half. The additional time may be increased by the referee but not reduced.
The referee must not compensate for a timekeeping error during the first half by changing the length of the second half.

Clearly 3 mins was wrong Can't find anything thats says he can allow less if one team is getting battered
Click to expand...

Thanks for that.

I reckon the key word in all of that is "allowance".

Gives them a way of ending it without having to add on every second of time "lost". Which I suppose is sensible in the situation.
 
Working on what FIFA have said about injury time, if memory serves me right, it should be the following:- 30secs for each sub made, 30secs for each goal scored. So going just for the second half4 subs that is 2mins. then there was 5 goals so that is .1/2mins, plus the injury time for the Stoke player being treated and John as well. The injury time should have been about 6mins or so and not the 3mins that the ref gave. He probably felt sorry for them and blew early
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top