Time added on

[CTID1988]

I do think added time should still be played, who knows what can happen in 5 minutes

 

[kaz7]

I do think added time should still be played, who knows what can happen in 5 minutes

Of course it should , it is a rule of the game , the ref shouldnt be able to please himself

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Time added on is totally at the discretion of the on field referee.

Ut wouldn’t surprise me if both managers were asked, by the fourth official, if they were happy to end bang on 90 mins.

 

[jimharri]

Time added on is totally at the discretion of the on field referee.

Ut wouldn’t surprise me if both managers were asked, by the fourth official, if they were happy to end bang on 90 mins.

That actually sounds plausible. But it shouldn't be down to the managers, or the referee. Time is to be added on for goals (and the subsequent celebrations), injuries, substitutions and time wasting. There were four goals in that second half, 8 substitions (granted 3 of them were at the same time) and various stoppages for injuries. 3 or 4 mins added time wouldn't have been unreasonable.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

That actually sounds plausible. But it shouldn't be down to the managers, or the referee. Time is to be added on for goals (and the subsequent celebrations), injuries, substitutions and time wasting. There were four goals in that second half, 8 substitions (granted 3 of them were at the same time) and various stoppages for injuries. 3 or 4 mins added time wouldn't have been unreasonable.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that 0 minutes added on was technically correct, just that in dead ties, referees tend to add far less time than is accurate as it’s dead time.

It happened when we beat Watford in the final. Had we had injury time, we might hold the biggest winning margin in a final now.

There wasn’t much uproar then about it though.

Playing more time last night would only have risked players getting injured. It was the sensible approach, in my opinion.

 

[pace89]

I assumed added time wasn't played because both managers agreed to knock it on the head and as others have said it's at the discretion of the ref.

It did cross my mind, however, that it might have suited ITV to have 5 or 6 more minutes to play with.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

assumed added time wasn't played because both managers agreed to knock it on the head and as others have said it's at the discretion of the ref.

You're probably right.
the last 5 minutes of the game Pep and Rob Edwards were having a great old laugh with each other, no interest whatsoever in the game
I'm guessing they had more interest in the Everton " six or dix points" shenanigans.
Due to cutbacks at Kenilworth Road, Pep was a bit miffed to discover he was only going offered 2 cans of Tennents instead of his customary favourite bottle of red wine.

 

[Eds]

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that 0 minutes added on was technically correct, just that in dead ties, referees tend to add far less time than is accurate as it’s dead time.

It happened when we beat Watford in the final. Had we had injury time, we might hold the biggest winning margin in a final now.

There wasn’t much uproar then about it though.

Playing more time last night would only have risked players getting injured. It was the sensible approach, in my opinion.

Hate to tell you but at least three minutes were added on in that final! Probably should have been more given there were four breaks for subs and four goals scored but the whistle definitely didn't sound at 90 mins. And at score does a ref decide to add on no injury time at all, when someone is winning by three goals, four or more. What happens if a team is down to 10 men, is losing by two goals and has hardly had a kick all second half, does the ref decide that the team down to 10 won't score twice in the five minutes that should added. When does a game become a dead game?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Hate to tell you but at least three minutes were added on in that final! Probably should have been more given there were four breaks for subs and four goals scored but the whistle definitely didn't sound at 90 mins. And at score does a ref decide to add on no injury time at all, when someone is winning by three goals, four or more. What happens if a team is down to 10 men, is losing by two goals and has hardly had a kick all second half, does the ref decide that the team down to 10 won't score twice in the five minutes that should added. When does a game become a dead game?

A fair cop if true. Someone else quoted that before and I trusted it was correct.

A dead game is one called dead by the ref and probably both managers.

If a team is 4 goals up, I think the vast majority of football fans would agree that the game was dead at 90 mins.

 

[give it to gordon]

I'd like a rule where if a team like these who have wasted time constantly,but are only one goal behind coming into 90 mins, then the other team get offered the chance to either play the added time or no time at all. It really doesn't seem fair that a team who have offered nothing in a game get a punchers chance for 10 minutes or so.

It does seem wrong that the team that has been time wasting and losing than get an extra 10 minutes to try to equalise