brightonbaz
Active member
- Feb 22, 2009
- 182
Fed up with erratic decisions about how much time gets added on end of first half and full time. I want to see a stopping clock.....30 mins per half....then absolutely no arguments......
Stopping clock
- Thread starter brightonbaz
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Goring-by-Seagull
Well-known member
- Jan 5, 2012
- 1,982
What?
SeagullSongs
And it's all gone quiet..
45 minutes per half, you mean?
smeariestbat
New member
- May 5, 2012
- 1,731
no, i think he means 30. If you stop the clock every time the ball goes out of play for free kicks etc dont need 45 minutes. but i think 40 would be better, like in rugby. Also the majority of all injury time is only +3 minutes anyway, so seemsa bit extreme to take 15 off of a half. never happen though.
brightonbaz
Active member
- Feb 22, 2009
- 182
- Thread starter
- #5
You never get more than about 56/57 mins of ball in play over 90 mins.....added on time is a joke.......fergie always gets more added time and that's cos he moans.....ffs
kevo
Well-known member
- Mar 8, 2008
- 10,227
I agree - and it probably will happen eventually. It is ridiculous that the amount of time that gets added on is so random. Where did five minutes come from in the first place - and then why has he added another minute on, during which they score? The final whistle finally blown after eight minutes in total. Seriously, WTF?
- Jul 7, 2003
- 48,467
The five minutes came from the six substitutions, one goal, three or four injuries requiring treatment (Bridcutt, Orlandi, at least one other) and the referee making it quite clear he was watching the time the Albion were taking on a couple of corners in the second half.
Hope that clears it up for you.
Hope that clears it up for you.
Pole in Goal
New member
Does anyone know exactly why it is 45 minutes a half?
- Jul 7, 2003
- 48,467
They scored after 5'15 extra minutes. He signalled a minimum of 5. We have nothing to complain about on that score. Should have just kept the ball instead of buggering about in the corner & gifting them a goal kick.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 48,467
Good question.
Mr Burns
New member
Because 44 minutes was deemed to short, and 46 minutes to long.
kevo
Well-known member
- Mar 8, 2008
- 10,227
Where did you get 5 15' from? 5' 45 according to the BBC site.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
It's 30 seconds for each substitution plus injury treatment time so 5 minutes was slightly under what could have been added on. I looked at the big screen when the board went up, it was showing 16.47. Their goal was scored at 16.53.
Would we be having this conversation if we scored the equaliser in injury time. We lost because we did not convert the chances we had except 1 and because we could not keep the ball during injury time. It's the second time this season we have conceded in injury time and the 3rd penalty we missed, this is what I want Gus to work on
Blackcap
Member
Because it has to be something.
Buffalo Seagull
Active member
In that BBC article on Fergie time the other day they said it was a common misconception that there was a set amount of time added on for each substitution.
But we didn't lose? (Admittedly it feels like it)
*Gullsworth*
My Hair is like his hair
Often we have been gratful that 5 minutes are annouced as the extra time. Hard to swallow letting in the goal 6 minutes after the 90 but it was our fault not the Refs.
Helter Skelter
New member
Am I right in thinking that 30 seconds should be added on for a goal?
The aloof gatekeeper
Active member
- Oct 11, 2011
- 256
It should be as long as it takes for the kick-off to be taken after the goal is scored.