2009/10 Premiership

[Stramash]

In retrospect, and having watched all the timings on MOTD last night, there actually wasn't any extra minutes added on that shouldn't have been.

Seemed completely unreasonable at the end of the live game, but acceptable once you saw the later screening.

Ok I trust what you say but I still see the time keeping as being very inconsistent.

Look at the Man City Arsenal game. The 2nd half had 5 goals I think, the VP incident, Adebayors long run after he scored, maybe 4-5 subs and yet it only had 4 mins of extra time.

This game had 4 mins of extra time and then 3 extra mins added due to 1 Man City goal and 1 sub. And it seems that even when time is up refs will allow an attacking team to finish their attack before blowing the final whistle - which is what I suggest occured in this instance.

I don't understand why there is not an off field timekeeper in football who would then blow a siren regardless of where play was at. It would be simple as the field ref just needs to raise his hand when extra time should be added and then raise it again when play restarts, so the timekeeper knows exactly how much extra time to add.

What do you think?

the final whistle will not be blown until the ball is in a 'neutral zone' so a referee will wait till an attack is finished.

The referee in this instance followed all the rules; the 4 minutes had been posted before Bellamy's goal, Bellamy's celebration took 56 seconds, and 30 seconds to be added for the substitution. This gave a total of 5 minutes 26 to be played. Owen's goal was scored at the 95 min 27 mark.

Would it have happened anywhere else? Maybe, maybe not, but the added time was correct.

Incidentally, the time posted just before the 90 minute stage is a minimum to be played not an exact number.

Still hate Man U though...

[LakeGeneve]

In retrospect, and having watched all the timings on MOTD last night, there actually wasn't any extra minutes added on that shouldn't have been.

Seemed completely unreasonable at the end of the live game, but acceptable once you saw the later screening.

Ok I trust what you say but I still see the time keeping as being very inconsistent.

Look at the Man City Arsenal game. The 2nd half had 5 goals I think, the VP incident, Adebayors long run after he scored, maybe 4-5 subs and yet it only had 4 mins of extra time.

This game had 4 mins of extra time and then 3 extra mins added due to 1 Man City goal and 1 sub. And it seems that even when time is up refs will allow an attacking team to finish their attack before blowing the final whistle - which is what I suggest occured in this instance.

I don't understand why there is not an off field timekeeper in football who would then blow a siren regardless of where play was at. It would be simple as the field ref just needs to raise his hand when extra time should be added and then raise it again when play restarts, so the timekeeper knows exactly how much extra time to add.

What do you think?

the final whistle will not be blown until the ball is in a 'neutral zone' so a referee will wait till an attack is finished.

The referee in this instance followed all the rules; the 4 minutes had been posted before Bellamy's goal, Bellamy's celebration took 56 seconds, and 30 seconds to be added for the substitution. This gave a total of 5 minutes 26 to be played. Owen's goal was scored at the 95 min 27 mark.

Would it have happened anywhere else? Maybe, maybe not, but the added time was correct.

Incidentally, the time posted just before the 90 minute stage is a minimum to be played not an exact number.

Still hate Man U though...

I would hazard a guess that 9 times out of 10 at any other ground the amount of added time to extra time would not have reflected the amount of time lost in extra time.

Ok so extra time is a minimum time thus it is at the discretion of the ref. Maximises the error potential it seems to me esp. if the ref is under some pressure.

So again, what do you think about the idea of having a off field official responsible for time keeping and a siren to end the match?

[Stramash]

So again, what do you think about the idea of having a off field official responsible for time keeping and a siren to end the match?

oh yeah. great idea. and let's have a f*ckin' wurlitzer organ play every time someone scores...

:wink:

[joz_sling]

So again, what do you think about the idea of having a off field official responsible for time keeping and a siren to end the match?

about your question, if it works out they would do it long time ago,isn't it? and i think if they still play in Old Trafford, whether in or out, the result would be the same, isn't it???

kindda b*tch but still love Man Utd though :wink:

[CiaranM]

So again, what do you think about the idea of having a off field official responsible for time keeping and a siren to end the match?

oh yeah. great idea. and let's have a f*ckin' wurlitzer organ play every time someone scores...

:wink:

actually that is something being pushed in other sports not just football ... makes sense to me !!!! i mean why can't the 4th official look after the time keeping. although having seen how mately he was with Fergie on sunday probably wouldn't have made any f**king difference !!!

[zeusbheld]

Incidentally, the time posted just before the 90 minute stage is a minimum to be played not an exact number.

as i understand it, the minimum also tacitly implies a maximum--in other words, 4 means not over 5....

BUT

obviously the time keepers can add time for what happens in stoppage. i do think refs a) slightly favor the better players and teams and slightly favor a team on the attack when it comes to adding extra time. this, however, does not constitute a conspiracy. i think the guy in the guardian was being coy in order to fan the flames by not speculating on reasons for the inconsistency....

Still hate Man U though...

can't imagine anyone less gracious in victory than Fergie. one of the many reasons why united are most likely the team most hated by neutrals.

[zeusbheld]

So again, what do you think about the idea of having a off field official responsible for time keeping and a siren to end the match?

oh yeah. great idea. and let's have a f*ckin' wurlitzer organ play every time someone scores...

:wink:

actually that is something being pushed in other sports not just football ... makes sense to me !!!! i mean why can't the 4th official look after the time keeping. although having seen how mately he was with Fergie on sunday probably wouldn't have made any f**king difference !!!

yeah that chumminess doesn't necessarily imply any sort of conspiracy, but it was in shockingly bad taste and a stunning example of piss-poor sportsmanship. i have respect for Baconface' talent, but *not* for the shriveled up soul inside his past-due-for-shuffling-off-the-mortal-coil carcass*.

_________

* (and before anyone--especially a certain someone says *anything* about me being inconsistent regarding religious ideas.... it's a metaphor. odds on they cover metaphors in high school where you're from, they do here in Thailand).

[LakeGeneve]

So again, what do you think about the idea of having a off field official responsible for time keeping and a siren to end the match?

oh yeah. great idea. and let's have a f*ckin' wurlitzer organ play every time someone scores...

:wink:

actually that is something being pushed in other sports not just football ... makes sense to me !!!! i mean why can't the 4th official look after the time keeping. although having seen how mately he was with Fergie on sunday probably wouldn't have made any f**king difference !!!

It wouldn't have to be the 4th official, I think another person would be suitable.

Currently, the ref has to check his watch and keep time in the midst of intense periods of stoppage, say a controversial goal being scored or a penalty. A dedicated time keeper would take that away from the ref as all he has to do is raise his arm for stopping the clock and raise it again when he blows his whistle for play to restart.

And none of the letting the attacking team finish their play. Siren sounds at the end of extra time....period! Will make for some excitement when the crowd hears the siren just like in some other football codes.

No doubt Fergie will still try to pressure the system to his advantage.....

[Stramash]

So again, what do you think about the idea of having a off field official responsible for time keeping and a siren to end the match?

oh yeah. great idea. and let's have a f*ckin' wurlitzer organ play every time someone scores...

:wink:

actually that is something being pushed in other sports not just football ... makes sense to me !!!! i mean why can't the 4th official look after the time keeping. although having seen how mately he was with Fergie on sunday probably wouldn't have made any f**king difference !!!

It wouldn't have to be the 4th official, I think another person would be suitable.

Currently, the ref has to check his watch and keep time in the midst of intense periods of stoppage, say a controversial goal being scored or a penalty. A dedicated time keeper would take that away from the ref as all he has to do is raise his arm for stopping the clock and raise it again when he blows his whistle for play to restart.

And none of the letting the attacking team finish their play. Siren sounds at the end of extra time....period! Will make for some excitement when the crowd hears the siren just like in some other football codes.

No doubt Fergie will still try to pressure the system to his advantage.....

the main problem with your plan is that with some games, especially those in Liverpool and Manchester, as soon as a siren sounds, half the fans will start running away.

And while precise 'to the second' timings may work for a fragmented game like American Football, it would not sit so easily with a more free flowing game.

Under your proposal, the following is possible; dying seconds of injury time, a defender dispossesses the opposition just outside his own 18 yard box, runs the length of the pitch beating several other players, gets into the 18 yard box, rounds the keeper, then, just as he is about to administer a coup de grace, a bloody siren sounds.

no thanks.

Unless of course, you are willing to propose this to the FA yourself, and, if adopted, publicly acknowledge that the idea was yours, thus rendering yourself about as popular as Gary Glitter at Vietnamese orphanage.

Perhaps a better solution is

a) the rules and guidelines for injury time and time added to injury time are made clearer.

the 4th official signals the referee when there is a specific time (say 10 seconds) to the end of all allowed additional time. This would allow the ref to let the current flow of play end, or wait until the ball is in a neutral position, before blowing for full time.

[English_Bob]

I'm sorry, but during that extra time, were City banned from touching the ball?

Didn't they have the same opportunity as Man U to score?

If City had scored a dramatic last gasp winner, would there be all this hand wringing and complaining?

No the 'neutrals' would be dancing in the streets - "United shafted at their own ground!!" etc.

'Neutrals' hate Man U for one reason... their clubs have all lost more times to United than any other team.

Brits are great at building someone up and then tearing them down. Man U's legend grew from the tragedy of the Munich Air Crash and their spirited play that season. Then they became winners and were beloved.

But they made the mistake of continuing to win, and instead of being proud of the greatest British success story, the press and followers turned on them and rip them to shreds (verbally, no on the field, of course).

Man City! I used to have a soft spot for them because it was my 'other' local team.

But look at them now - filthy rich with oil money, buying every player they can and still bitching when they don't get a result.

And Bellamy? Walked 20 yards over to a fan being held by 4 security guards and slapped him in the face. And Mark Hughes called it 'self defense'!!

And Adebayor? - deliberate stamp - plain as day - the guy should be jailed.

[CiaranM]

I'm sorry, but during that extra time, were City banned from touching the ball?

Didn't they have the same opportunity as Man U to score?

If City had scored a dramatic last gasp winner, would there be all this hand wringing and complaining?

No the 'neutrals' would be dancing in the streets - "United shafted at their own ground!!" etc.

'Neutrals' hate Man U for one reason... their clubs have all lost more times to United than any other team.

Brits are great at building someone up and then tearing them down. Man U's legend grew from the tragedy of the Munich Air Crash and their spirited play that season. Then they became winners and were beloved.

But they made the mistake of continuing to win, and instead of being proud of the greatest British success story, the press and followers turned on them and rip them to shreds (verbally, no on the field, of course).

Man City! I used to have a soft spot for them because it was my 'other' local team.

But look at them now - filthy rich with oil money, buying every player they can and still bitching when they don't get a result.

And Bellamy? Walked 20 yards over to a fan being held by 4 security guards and slapped him in the face. And Mark Hughes called it 'self defense'!!

And Adebayor? - deliberate stamp - plain as day - the guy should be jailed.

in fairness Dave Man Ure do seem to get a lot of "injury time" when required ... i remember years ago them getting something like 8 minutes when playing Sheff Wed and at that time it was usually around 1 or 2 mins extra played !!

and sure Man City could touch the ball during the added time, but the goal was scored well after the 4 minutes indicated !!

[zeusbheld]

'Neutrals' hate Man U for one reason... their clubs have all lost more times to United than any other team.

red tinted specs? no actually when i first started watching English football (1994) my first impression was that United were very good--and loathsome. AND I DIDN'T HAVE A TEAM FOR UNITED TO BEAT.

my disdain for your faves is largely down to Fergie's complete lack of grace, even by the standards of football managers, in victory (or defeat). to be fair, though, you may not have to be arrogant and amoral to succeed managing in the prem, but these qualities sure seem to be assets.

over the course of the decade and a half to follow Fergie built a culture of success--but one of the side effects of his way of doing it is a sense of smug entitlement that has rubbed off on most of the fans.

PS: generally you're pretty balanced but sorry, United's success does *not* go in an unbroken line back to the Busby babes, take off those red tinted glasses.

as for Hughes backing Bellamy, errr... managers back their players. its' their job. if Wenger is to be believed about all the stuff he didn't see, he's apparently never watched Arsenal play.

Brits are great at building someone up and then tearing them down.

do agree with that though.

[LakeGeneve]

I'm sorry, but during that extra time, were City banned from touching the ball?

Didn't they have the same opportunity as Man U to score?

If City had scored a dramatic last gasp winner, would there be all this hand wringing and complaining?

No the 'neutrals' would be dancing in the streets - "United shafted at their own ground!!" etc.

'Neutrals' hate Man U for one reason... their clubs have all lost more times to United than any other team.

Brits are great at building someone up and then tearing them down. Man U's legend grew from the tragedy of the Munich Air Crash and their spirited play that season. Then they became winners and were beloved.

But they made the mistake of continuing to win, and instead of being proud of the greatest British success story, the press and followers turned on them and rip them to shreds (verbally, no on the field, of course).

Man City! I used to have a soft spot for them because it was my 'other' local team.

But look at them now - filthy rich with oil money, buying every player they can and still bitching when they don't get a result.

And Bellamy? Walked 20 yards over to a fan being held by 4 security guards and slapped him in the face. And Mark Hughes called it 'self defense'!!

And Adebayor? - deliberate stamp - plain as day - the guy should be jailed.

in fairness Dave Man Ure do seem to get a lot of "injury time" when required ... i remember years ago them getting something like 8 minutes when playing Sheff Wed and at that time it was usually around 1 or 2 mins extra played !!

and sure Man City could touch the ball during the added time, but the goal was scored well after the 4 minutes indicated !!

It is true Dave that had Man City scored I would have clapped and yelled "up yours Fergie". But had they scored in the 7th minute I would still be wondering where those extra 3 mins came from and having this discussion.

The Guardian article which Zeus linked above seems to support perceptions that United get more time when they need it as Ciaran says above;

In 2006-07, for example, United were winning 15 times on entering stoppage time and referees added an average 194.53sec. In the four games when United were not winning there was an average of 217.25sec. The following year the disparity was greater, Opta's figures showing an average 178.29sec added when United were winning and 254.5sec when they were not. Last season it was 187.71sec compared to 258.6sec.

If the research is correct then the trend is that United are accorded at least 1 extra minute when they are behind. That potentially adds up to a lot of mins to win a game or 2.

[CiaranM]

Man U's legend grew from the tragedy of the Munich Air Crash and their spirited play that season. Then they became winners and were beloved.

But they made the mistake of continuing to win, and instead of being proud of the greatest British success story, the press and followers turned on them and rip them to shreds (verbally, no on the field, of course).

now Man U went from Busby's time to 8 or 9 years into Fergies reign with not winning an awful lot. in fact it's widely believed (although quite possibly urban myth) that Fergie was 1 FA cup tie with Forest from getting the sack ... what might have been !!!

so it's not actually the "unbroken" run of success that has lead ppl to hate Utd ... more the smug superiority of the fans ... even when they were winning f**K all !!! and off course Fergie's attitude doesn't exactly endear him to opposition teams or fans, but don't suppose that's gonna bother him or Man U fans. anyway, i don't particularly hate any other teams, fans or players .... except the ones who r playing against Arsenal !!! but Fergie does have a face just made for punching !!!

[CiaranM]

The Guardian article which Zeus linked above seems to support perceptions that United get more time when they need it as Ciaran says above;

In 2006-07, for example, United were winning 15 times on entering stoppage time and referees added an average 194.53sec. In the four games when United were not winning there was an average of 217.25sec. The following year the disparity was greater, Opta's figures showing an average 178.29sec added when United were winning and 254.5sec when they were not. Last season it was 187.71sec compared to 258.6sec.

If the research is correct then the trend is that United are accorded at least 1 extra minute when they are behind. That potentially adds up to a lot of mins to win a game or 2.

actually that Guardian article is a load of bollocks !!!

but don't tell Dave that !!!

[lizardo]

This is like watching a replay of Football Focus with John Dykes....

you're all Dykes...the lot of ya!!

[zeusbheld]

actually that Guardian article is a load of bollocks !!!

but don't tell Dave that !!!

it's not *complete* bollox but it's definitely spin. i do believe that United's matches DO last longer when they're behind... but there can be a lot of reasons for that which don't require the refs being in 'conspiracy to boost United to victory.

i think the article is an example of the Guardian going all red-top--they are presenting a not-too-terribly menacing factoid in the most menacing possible way, with the sole purpose being to stir ****. their sports page does that a lot. they are no better than a red top on a fairly consistent basis.

[zeusbheld]

ps compare and contrast:

Busby:

"Winning isn't everything. There should be no conceit in victory and no despair in defeat."

Fergie:

?I am unhappy, because (the defensive errors) spoiled a really emphatic victory. We could have won 6-0 or 7-0 today, and the fact we made those mistakes made it probably the best derby game of all time. You?re left pondering what you?d rather have; win 6-0 or win the greatest derby game of all time. I?d rather win 6-0!?

[CiaranM]

actually that Guardian article is a load of bollocks !!!

but don't tell Dave that !!!

it's not *complete* bollox but it's definitely spin. i do believe that United's matches DO last longer when they're behind... but there can be a lot of reasons for that which don't require the refs being in 'conspiracy to boost United to victory.

i think the article is an example of the Guardian going all red-top--they are presenting a not-too-terribly menacing factoid in the most menacing possible way, with the sole purpose being to stir sh*t. their sports page does that a lot. they are no better than a red top on a fairly consistent basis.

i actually like the guardian and read it every day ... their sports coverage is usually pretty good, but that wasn't one of their better efforts !!!

[zeusbheld]

i actually like the guardian and read it every day ...

further evidence you're a tree-hugging communist.

in other news, a shocking confession from Greg Louganis.

[Stramash]

i actually like the guardian and read it every day ...

further evidence you're a tree-hugging communist.

in other news, a shocking confession from Greg Louganis.

"[Patrice] Evra gave me a little push ? a really little one ? but it sort of outbalanced me"

[zeusbheld]

i actually like the guardian and read it every day ...

further evidence you're a tree-hugging communist.

in other news, a shocking confession from Greg Louganis.

"[Patrice] Evra gave me a little push ? a really little one ? but it sort of outbalanced me"

taken out of context, that sounds like gay porn... especially considering the actors' names are Robin and Patrice...

[English_Bob]

ps compare and contrast:

Busby:

"Winning isn't everything. There should be no conceit in victory and no despair in defeat."

Fergie:

?I am unhappy, because (the defensive errors) spoiled a really emphatic victory. We could have won 6-0 or 7-0 today, and the fact we made those mistakes made it probably the best derby game of all time. You?re left pondering what you?d rather have; win 6-0 or win the greatest derby game of all time. I?d rather win 6-0!?

It's a different game now - it's a business!

Of course he wants to win 6-0, because that goal difference could be the difference between a trophy or nothing. And winning brings in the money to pay for the huge loans the club has.

Truth be known, it was a great derby - 7 goals and dramatic scenes. Man U deserved to win - they played a great game and fought hard to get the three points.

[Stramash]

[Stramash]

and this is a severe case of...WTF???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_z-hW6-gsJw

:shock: