Y
Yacinho
Guest
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmhhhhh
no.
Maybe you should use that extra 5 minutes to read the book
no.
Maybe you should use that extra 5 minutes to read the book
A strange five minutes
- Thread starter LHref
- Start date
Didn't need the whole 5 minutes, I just forgot the page reference (page 29), luckily I found it again.
"The match lasts two equal periods of 45 minutes, unless otherwise mutually agreed between the referee and the two teams."
Y
Yacinho
Guest
Please quote the whole thing
"The match lasts two equal periods of 45 minutes, unless otherwise mutually agreed between the referee and the two teams. Any agreement to alter the duration of the periods of play (e.g. to reduce each half to 40 minutes because of insufficient light) must be made before the start of play and must comply with competition rules."
So no, you can't decide to shorten the game at the 85th minute when you see that the teams don't play anymore, so no, you couldn't have done anything different from the OP
Plus, did you check that it comply with the competition rules ?
Your last post was right but I'm afraid it had nothing to do with the original issue and you saying that you would have decide to shorten the game
"The match lasts two equal periods of 45 minutes, unless otherwise mutually agreed between the referee and the two teams. Any agreement to alter the duration of the periods of play (e.g. to reduce each half to 40 minutes because of insufficient light) must be made before the start of play and must comply with competition rules."
So no, you can't decide to shorten the game at the 85th minute when you see that the teams don't play anymore, so no, you couldn't have done anything different from the OP
Plus, did you check that it comply with the competition rules ?
Your last post was right but I'm afraid it had nothing to do with the original issue and you saying that you would have decide to shorten the game
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Stoppage time is discretionary anyway, so no real issue with not playing that.
Personally, I don't see the issue and I don't see the need for the referee to 'force' a game.I wouldn't be reporting it.
Personally, I don't see the issue and I don't see the need for the referee to 'force' a game.I wouldn't be reporting it.
Last edited:
What would u report them for?
Correct. I agree in law you are 100% right to play the full 5 minutes. But this is when common sense needs to prevail.
No one wants to play, neither team plans on changing their tactics so the game will just finish after 5 minutes exactly the same as it would if I finished it early.
I don't see a problem and don't think anyone else at the game would. This is where we as referees can use something to detach from the stereotypically wooden "rules is rules" and can actually try to help teams with some common sense.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not too sure what this whole reporting nonsense is about. We are there to facilitate the game and allow it to take place, we cannot be demanding that the players play football. In law, you would not have a leg to stand on in terms of cautioning any players. Reporting it to the league would most probably cause you to look like a 'busy' referee, I very much doubt that in the competition rules it explicitly states that both teams have to be competitively competing for the fixture throughout the whole 90 minutes. So how would you report it?
In terms of what I would do, had there been 5 minutes of extra time and this occurred, I'd walk to the captains and ask if this was their intentions for the rest of the five minutes and would blow the final whistle shortly after. Nobody would complain, whereas playing the last couple of minutes the teams will be pestering you to finish the match along with the touchlines, they can see how it is going to play out. Who is not to say that in extra time, two players get talking, engage in a few indecent words and break out into a mass confrontation - is unlikely, but very possible. Save yourself this hassle and play slightly less stoppage time than you had originally thought.
In terms of what I would do, had there been 5 minutes of extra time and this occurred, I'd walk to the captains and ask if this was their intentions for the rest of the five minutes and would blow the final whistle shortly after. Nobody would complain, whereas playing the last couple of minutes the teams will be pestering you to finish the match along with the touchlines, they can see how it is going to play out. Who is not to say that in extra time, two players get talking, engage in a few indecent words and break out into a mass confrontation - is unlikely, but very possible. Save yourself this hassle and play slightly less stoppage time than you had originally thought.
Y
Yacinho
Guest
Yeah, nice to see some ref with no morality whatsoever
As the referee, there is nothing you can / should do. They are breaking no LOTG and observing the League rules.
Where action has been taken before, is for bringing the game into disrupt. However, this would be an action started and taken by the League itself. They would do it to protect the interest of the other clubs as all league have an obligation to compete fully for the season.
No players would / could be sanctioned, it would be the clubs in general.
Normally the charge is brought when they decided this before or early in the game. 5 minutes to go - no chance of any punishment being made.
I wouldn't say it was lack of morality to save everyone time, and possible consequences like the possibility of the fight that @CA quite rightly pointed out. I would call it smart refereeing but that might just be the language barrier
Y
Yacinho
Guest
Yes, smart refereeing to stop a game before his end to save everyone 5mn
Genius refereeing I might say
Genius refereeing I might say
Y
Yacinho
Guest
Obviously ! And the two teams needed a 0-0 anyway so who needs two halves ? Let's just jog a little 2mn and blow three times the whistle, smart refereeing, no wasting time playing football, doing our job and all that crap
This is where the issue is coming. The points you are bringing up, to attempt to stupefy my comments from earlier on are fundamentally wrong in law. As quoted on page 29:
Please do remember that the stand point I am coming from is a Sunday morning match. Not one in the Football/Premier League which would have multi-millions of pounds resting on. As has been discussed numerous times, the two games are worlds apart, officials at the top end of the spectrum can get away with many things we would not be able to and vice-versa.
I am unsure of the definition of 'discretion' in other areas of the world, but according to the Oxford English dictionary is:
In this situation, we are given the option (by the Laws of the Game) to decide in the situation, what cause of action we would like to pursue. By law, nobody is incorrect in this debate. It is merely an opinion based debate which will not be won through quoting law. I can completely understand why some officials would choose to continue with the additional 5 minutes of the match and as I would do, I can see why some officials would choose to shorten the amount of additional time.
Please do remember that the stand point I am coming from is a Sunday morning match. Not one in the Football/Premier League which would have multi-millions of pounds resting on. As has been discussed numerous times, the two games are worlds apart, officials at the top end of the spectrum can get away with many things we would not be able to and vice-versa.
Y
Yacinho
Guest
We are not talking about added time here, we are talking about the 85th to 90th minutes of a game, so no, not everybody is right in law here. Those 5mn aren't "additionnal" just because the teams are happy with the current result of the game.
And stop trying to blame me for not understanding what you're saying, my english is fine thank you very much, I just don't agree with the smart-wrong in law refereeing going around here.
And stop trying to blame me for not understanding what you're saying, my english is fine thank you very much, I just don't agree with the smart-wrong in law refereeing going around here.
Apologies, had become completely distanced from the OP and thought we were discussing additional time.
In that case, I completely side with yourself, the game cannot be shortened during the match, should be decided before-hand.
In that case, I completely side with yourself, the game cannot be shortened during the match, should be decided before-hand.
Wasn't blaming you at all for not understanding, was just trying to add depth to my side of the argument, which was wrong in reference to the OP. Apologies.
Y
Yacinho
Guest
Damn, now HullRef is the only ref with common sense around here 
Y
Yacinho
Guest
Did you issue the caution as well ?