Liverpool FC Forum

by **Bad Bob** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:50 am

There's a column over on Footy 365 where a practicing lower league referee comments on the big decisions of the week. His opinion backs up what Mark's saying above--that Atkinson was well within his rights to let the game continue past the four minutes. Interestingly, however, he rubbishes this idea that a sub=30 seconds more. He says that was a directive from the FA a few years back that got scrapped sharpish and now it's left to the interpretation of the referee. That's interesting given how the Carrick for Anderson sub has featured so prominently in defense of the extra extra time: like Atkinson sensibly tacked on 30 more seconds for that sub on top of accounting for City'd goal celebration. Well, given the sub occured just as United were about to take a corner and, therefore, Anderson made way for Carrick sharpish, I don't think there's any grounds whatsoever for considering 30 extra seconds was warranted for that change. Hair splitting perhaps but titles are won and lost on these kinds of details at this level.

by **GYBS** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:57 am

Also why wasnt an extra minute added on after the man utd goal for their long celebration which to me seemed longer than bellamys

by **bigmick** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:08 pm

Bad Bob wrote:There's a column over on Footy 365 where a practicing lower league referee comments on the big decisions of the week. His opinion backs up what Mark's saying above--that Atkinson was well within his rights to let the game continue past the four minutes. Interestingly, however, he rubbishes this idea that a sub=30 seconds more. He says that was a directive from the FA a few years back that got scrapped sharpish and now it's left to the interpretation of the referee. That's interesting given how the Carrick for Anderson sub has featured so prominently in defense of the extra extra time: like Atkinson sensibly tacked on 30 more seconds for that sub on top of accounting for City'd goal celebration. Well, given the sub occured just as United were about to take a corner and, therefore, Anderson made way for Carrick sharpish, I don't think there's any grounds whatsoever for considering 30 extra seconds was warranted for that change. Hair splitting perhaps but titles are won and lost on these kinds of details at this level.

Surely as well the idea that 30 seconds could be added on for a sub only applies if it's the team who are seeking to use up time which makes it.

If you are 2-1 down with 2 minutes left, you can hardly expect to bring on 3 subs and get an extra 90 seconds added on in which to find an equaliser. Obviously if you are 2-1 up and make a substitution to use up time, it ought to be different. In this particular scenario when the Mancs were chasing the win, no time should be added for THEM making a subtitution, that's simply b0ll0cks.

The quotes of Ferguson and Quiroz slagging off this referee the last time he went there which Ciggy put up, are the reason the he played on, no question about it. Nobody will ever convince me that on his first trip there for two seasons he didn't feel the pressure of obligation towards them and sought not to incur the wrath of the Man Utd manager again.

It's a very serious situation, and as I said earlier Engliah football ought to be very careful indeed. As it is, it is the best league in the World by a mile and generates monstrous anmounts of money per season, but such blatant massaging of the rules which has gone on here only discredits the product. If the FA are not very careful, through their ineptitude and lack of backbone they could very well kill the goose which is laying all the eggs.

by **DrPepe** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:42 pm

bigmick wrote:If you are 2-1 down with 2 minutes left, you can hardly expect to bring on 3 subs and get an extra 90 seconds added on in which to find an equaliser. Obviously if you are 2-1 up and make a substitution to use up time, it ought to be different. In this particular scenario when the Mancs were chasing the win, no time should be added for THEM making a subtitution, that's simply b0ll0cks.

i'm not sure i'm reading your post right , mick - are you suggesting that the amount of time added on for a sub should be different depending on whether the team is winning or losing?

by **Owzat** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:47 pm

Here's a novel idea, why not add on the time taken to make the subsitution? Only for subs, it might make the players dragging their heels speed up a little bit as the time they waste will be added on.

While I appreciate refs can add on time they deem appropriate, what's the point of announcing the time to be added on if they then make it up as they go along? And fans immediately will make controversy of any decision which ultimately decides the result. To me it's like asking for a quote and being told it will cost a minimum of £350 - what's the point? I reckon a lot of refs have decided not to go beyond the announced time as they get enough criticism as it is without inviting further criticism for events after the announced time for stoppages.

Better to stop the clock on major stoppages and not have any stoppage time. If the players and management know that for free-kicks, corners, substitutions and penalties that the clock will stop until the ref blows his whistle then that could also do for time wasting. And I bet the immediate reaction of people reading this is that it will add maybe 20 minutes to a game. Well I say therein lies the point, how much time is enough when you suggest "out of play" policy on the clock then people will state that more time is wasted for stoppages than is ever allowed. Although that kinda makes the case for old twatford stoppage time, shame it doesn't apply elsewhere

by **bigmick** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:19 pm

DrPepe wrote:
bigmick wrote:If you are 2-1 down with 2 minutes left, you can hardly expect to bring on 3 subs and get an extra 90 seconds added on in which to find an equaliser. Obviously if you are 2-1 up and make a substitution to use up time, it ought to be different. In this particular scenario when the Mancs were chasing the win, no time should be added for THEM making a subtitution, that's simply b0ll0cks.

i'm not sure i'm reading your post right , mick - are you suggesting that the amount of time added on for a sub should be different depending on whether the team is winning or losing?

Absolutely. If you are 2-1 up and you make a change when there's two minutes remaining, there should be 30 seconds added on automatically (I actually think that once the time on the clock has gone past 80 minutes played, the team which is in the lead making a sub should lead to FIVE MINUTES EXTRA being added on). That would stop the practice overnight, and teams may even try and play with 10 in the event of an injury rather than have the time added on. Any time you add on only goes to cover for the departee scratching his erse, shaking the refs hand, clapping the fans and all that old b0ll0cks.

On the other hand if you are behind (OR IN THE REFS JUDGMENT IN THE EVENT OF A DRAW CHASING THE GAME) then there should be no time added on if you think making a sub gives you a better chance. In these circumstances, the player coming off sprints off anyhow so there's no need.

by **bunglemark2** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 1:37 pm

Owzat wrote:While I appreciate refs can add on time they deem appropriate, what's the point of announcing the time to be added on if they then make it up as they go along?

Because the "4 mins" on the board is accompanied by an announcement to state "There will be a minimum of 4 minutes additional time.....".....it's at the discretion of the referee....

by **SupitsJonF** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 8:30 pm

Blackpool scored!

by **GYBS** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 8:50 pm

scored another

by **GYBS** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 9:28 pm

3-3

by **GYBS** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 9:39 pm

stoke win it 4-3 in last minute

by **DrPepe** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 10:36 pm

bigmick wrote:
DrPepe wrote:
bigmick wrote:If you are 2-1 down with 2 minutes left, you can hardly expect to bring on 3 subs and get an extra 90 seconds added on in which to find an equaliser. Obviously if you are 2-1 up and make a substitution to use up time, it ought to be different. In this particular scenario when the Mancs were chasing the win, no time should be added for THEM making a subtitution, that's simply b0ll0cks.

i'm not sure i'm reading your post right , mick - are you suggesting that the amount of time added on for a sub should be different depending on whether the team is winning or losing?

Absolutely. If you are 2-1 up and you make a change when there's two minutes remaining, there should be 30 seconds added on automatically (I actually think that once the time on the clock has gone past 80 minutes played, the team which is in the lead making a sub should lead to FIVE MINUTES EXTRA being added on). That would stop the practice overnight, and teams may even try and play with 10 in the event of an injury rather than have the time added on. Any time you add on only goes to cover for the departee scratching his erse, shaking the refs hand, clapping the fans and all that old b0ll0cks.

On the other hand if you are behind (OR IN THE REFS JUDGMENT IN THE EVENT OF A DRAW CHASING THE GAME) then there should be no time added on if you think making a sub gives you a better chance. In these circumstances, the player coming off sprints off anyhow so there's no need.

wel that all sounds like it'll simplify matters.... :laugh:

I prefer the independent adjudicator of time added on , that sits upstairs with a stopwatch, and then lets the ref know when to blow up...

the refs have enough to do on the pitch, without worrying about added on extras

by **SupitsJonF** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:10 pm

GYBS wrote:stoke win it 4-3 in last minute

, not this year then

by **Dundalk** » Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:58 pm

Maybe in the FA Cup :laugh:

We need this game to happen

by **Owzat** » Wed Sep 23, 2009 1:04 pm

bunglemark2 wrote:
Owzat wrote:While I appreciate refs can add on time they deem appropriate, what's the point of announcing the time to be added on if they then make it up as they go along?

Because the "4 mins" on the board is accompanied by an announcement to state "There will be a minimum of 4 minutes additional time.....".....it's at the discretion of the referee....

Yes, I do get the concept. What I am saying is why bother announcing it at all if it simply causes controversy? It's like cowboy builders who tell you work will cost £140 then add on, add on some more and expect people to like it.

And the "discretionary" part of it is what causes the controversy, people saying Mr PR, Atkinson, added on as much time as he deemed necessary to let the mancs score and then immediately decide not to add as much time for their goal celebrations. Most of the time it is 1-3 minutes, what real gain is there announcing there will be a minimum 1-3 minutes when there might be 4-6, most people know that there will be 1-3 minutes as usual.

By the way, congratulations on quoting to me what I said myself in my post. Very 'clever' to quote me what I'd already said :no

Liverpool FC Forum

Other scores / results - Significant or not

Who is online