Added time when there is an ongoing injury

[Russell Jones]

Had an unusual situation in a reasonably high level game. Interested to hear views, especially from those mathematically inclined (@RefJef maybe?! )

Towards the end of the match, there was a serious injury to one of the players. This injury stoppage was still ongoing when we reached the 45 minute mark of the second half. The match eventually restarted a few minutes beyond the 90th minute. The referee / 4th official needed to decide how much additional time would be played, what would be shown on the 'subs' board and when this amount of time would be indicated to those in the ground

If we say the injury stoppage began 3 minutes before the 90, finished 4 minutes after the 90 and prior to this incident there were already 5 minutes of stoppage time to be played then .....

a) how much additional time should be indicated on the board?
b) in what minute will the game actually finish?
c) when should the board be held up to communicate additional time?

 

[RustyRef]

The board still goes up bang on 90 minutes, and would go up with 8 even though in reality you know it is going to be more. If my maths are correct in would end after 112 minutes.

 

[PinnerPaul]

Agree with the 8 ( 5 + 3) but as we get going again on 94' - don't we finish on 102 (94 + 8) ?

 

[RustyRef]

Agree with the 8 ( 5 + 3) but as we get going again on 94' - don't we finish on 102 (94 + 8) ?

I did say if my maths were correct. I went to add 90 and 12 and came with with 112 ....

 

[PinnerPaul]

I did say if my maths were correct. I went to add 90 and 12 and came with with 112 ....

Wouldn't matter in real life though as we just report anything as 90+....whatever!

Saw an AR and a ref have an argument at a Cup Final about this sort of thing regarding drinks breaks, Ref said he would stop his watch and other AR (not me!),although I agree, said time should always be left to 'run' and ANY stoppages - injury, drinks, fireworks! are always included in the added time.

Would you agree?

I suppose the only exception, would be something like floodlight failure, when you take the players off the pitch for a lengthy period?

 

[RustyRef]

Wouldn't matter in real life though as we just report anything as 90+....whatever!

Saw an AR and a ref have an argument at a Cup Final about this sort of thing regarding drinks breaks, Ref said he would stop his watch and other AR (not me!),although I agree, said time should always be left to 'run' and ANY stoppages - injury, drinks, fireworks! are always included in the added time.

Would you agree?

I suppose the only exception, would be something like floodlight failure, when you take the players off the pitch for a lengthy period?

I only stop my watch if it is clear it is going to be a long injury, of if, as you say, the game has to be suspended for a reason. For other stoppages I just keep a tally and add that on. You will find very few referees at L3 and above that stop their watches routinely.

 

[lincs22]

Everybody has heard of Fergie Time, but it first real instance was against Sheff Wed in 1992 (?). The referee was Mike Peck (?) and he stopped his watch for an injury. His instructions to his assistant was also not to stop their watches for serious injuries. He failed to restart his at the commencement. He was guessing how long was needed at the end and Man U scored the winner - the invention of Fergie Time !

 

[Big Cat]

I only stop my watch if it is clear it is going to be a long injury, of if, as you say, the game has to be suspended for a reason. For other stoppages I just keep a tally and add that on. You will find very few referees at L3 and above that stop their watches routinely.

Agreed. Having amazing attention to detail, I used to employ my second watch to stop/start/accrue added time only. So, I'd start the watch to execute a caution (or sometimes a player) and stop it again after the execution. However much time had accrued would constitute stoppage time.
Not only did I ultimately decide this process was a pointless distraction, time added using 'ordinary thinking' normally tallied up with what was on the watch anyway. Such as 60s for an obvious injury and 30s for a goal, sub, or misconduct for example. That's how I decide on additional time these days
Never thought of @Russell Jones 's predicament, but I make you right in your response

 

[Russell Jones]

Interesting responses folks. Largely I agree with @RustyRef . It just intrigued me that whatever the officials do, it's open to misinterpretation ... show the board saying 8 mins at 90 minutes and people might query why you're then still playing at 101 mins. Show the board saying 8 mins when the match restarts and some might think that the match will finish four minutes from that point. That said, obviously the critical point is that the teams get their needed 8 mins of playing time from whenever the match restarts

 

[one]

And of course you have not mentioned, given you are playing a fair bit of injury time there may be additional injury time during that time. So 102 minutes is the earliest the game would finish and may not be the actual time for question b.

Yet another complexity to add to misinterpretation by players and spectators.

 

[Nij]

Had an unusual situation in a reasonably high level game. Interested to hear views, especially from those mathematically inclined (@RefJef maybe?! )

Towards the end of the match, there was a serious injury to one of the players. This injury stoppage was still ongoing when we reached the 45 minute mark of the second half. The match eventually restarted a few minutes beyond the 90th minute. The referee / 4th official needed to decide how much additional time would be played, what would be shown on the 'subs' board and when this amount of time would be indicated to those in the ground

If we say the injury stoppage began 3 minutes before the 90, finished 4 minutes after the 90 and prior to this incident there were already 5 minutes of stoppage time to be played then .....

a) how much additional time should be indicated on the board?
b) in what minute will the game actually finish?
c) when should the board be held up to communicate additional time?

5' existing + 3' new = 8' added time from when play resumes.
94' clock done + 8' clock to go = 102' clock total.

The board should have shown 8' added, but officials know (and should helpfully remind managers) that the referee can extend that time for any further delays after the board is shown, which accounts for the other 4'.

 

[JamesL]

Had an unusual situation in a reasonably high level game. Interested to hear views, especially from those mathematically inclined (@RefJef maybe?! )

Towards the end of the match, there was a serious injury to one of the players. This injury stoppage was still ongoing when we reached the 45 minute mark of the second half. The match eventually restarted a few minutes beyond the 90th minute. The referee / 4th official needed to decide how much additional time would be played, what would be shown on the 'subs' board and when this amount of time would be indicated to those in the ground

If we say the injury stoppage began 3 minutes before the 90, finished 4 minutes after the 90 and prior to this incident there were already 5 minutes of stoppage time to be played then .....

a) how much additional time should be indicated on the board?
b) in what minute will the game actually finish?
c) when should the board be held up to communicate additional time?

A) However much time has been lost during 90 minutes. Therefore 8 minutes
B) 102 minutes.
C) as per law the board is shown at the end of the last minute of normal time.
It is sensible to communicate to everyone at this point that it's 8 minutes from when the game restarts.

Wouldn't matter in real life though as we just report anything as 90+....whatever!

Saw an AR and a ref have an argument at a Cup Final about this sort of thing regarding drinks breaks, Ref said he would stop his watch and other AR (not me!),although I agree, said time should always be left to 'run' and ANY stoppages - injury, drinks, fireworks! are always included in the added time.

Would you agree?

I suppose the only exception, would be something like floodlight failure, when you take the players off the pitch for a lengthy period?

Time lost for a drinks break/cooling break should be added on. So the watch keeps running else how would you time. It to ensure it wasn't longer than the maximum allowed time for the break?
Suspending the match is a different kettle of fish, you are physically stopping the game, so the clock stops, to be restarted up one recommencement of the game.

 

[GraemeS]

Everybody has heard of Fergie Time, but it first real instance was against Sheff Wed in 1992 (?). The referee was Mike Peck (?) and he stopped his watch for an injury. His instructions to his assistant was also not to stop their watches for serious injuries. He failed to restart his at the commencement. He was guessing how long was needed at the end and Man U scored the winner - the invention of Fergie Time !

This is why I wear 2 watches - the one on my left wrist I will stop for any injuries, cards, subs or delays in getting hold of a decent quality ball, but the one on my right runs non-stop. Ideally we get to 45/90 and stoppage time is the difference between the 2 watches, but on the off chance I've forgotten to restart it, I just just use the wildly inaccurate addition method and pick a number between 2 and 5.....

 

[RefIADad]

The key to remember is that the time on the board is the minimum added time. So you are calculating the added time that has occurred up to the 45 minutes of the half. So any added time you have after the 45 minutes is done will be added on (no pun intended) to the original added time as of 45 minutes.

My Garmin has an app where the running time keeps going while my "start/stop" of the watch records added time, so admittedly I don't have to worry about this. My watch does the math for me.

 

[socal lurker]

My two cents: what is posted on the board and when it is posted is the least important part of how the R handles this unusual situation. The most important is that the ref accounts for the lost time and gives reasonable clarity to the teams on how much time is left before the game restarts. The rest is window dressing.

(For my games (which never have a 4O), I use the injury stoppage feature on one watch for any break I expect to be significant and let the other run. The nice thing about the ref app I use on the Garmin is that it vibrates when in stoppage mode to remind you to turn it back on.)

 

[Big Cat]

On a related note... players from both sides were down for genuine njuries for 9 and a half minutes in the first half New v Leeds
Now don't get me wrong. It was a half that couldn't come soon enough for the pitiful home team, yet AT added 5 mins
He also stopped for FT 5 seconds early
I struggle to aspire towards these elite refs when they get the absolute basics wrong. We'll end up with an NFL clock and refs will be partly responsible

 

[Russell Jones]

My two cents: what is posted on the board and when it is posted is the least important part of how the R handles this unusual situation. The most important is that the ref accounts for the lost time and gives reasonable clarity to the teams on how much time is left before the game restarts. The rest is window dressing.

(For my games (which never have a 4O), I use the injury stoppage feature on one watch for any break I expect to be significant and let the other run. The nice thing about the ref app I use on the Garmin is that it vibrates when in stoppage mode to remind you to turn it back on.)

Whilst COVID has obviously changed things, I'm not sure that I agree that the board showing is mere 'window dressing'. It's the only accepted way to clearly communicate to everyone in the stadium (players, officials, fans, media) the reality of the specific situation. That's why I find it interesting that in the OP, there's no easy and obvious way to avoid the risk of miscommunication / misunderstanding. Of course, the ref team should do their best to inform the teams directly but the board remains the 'official' communication

 

[PinnerPaul]

And of course you have not mentioned, given you are playing a fair bit of injury time there may be additional injury time during that time. So 102 minutes is the earliest the game would finish and may not be the actual time for question b.

Yet another complexity to add to misinterpretation by players and spectators.

Agree and can't imagine 'everyone' being happy if a match deciding goal was scored in the 102nd minute!

 

[socal lurker]

Whilst COVID has obviously changed things, I'm not sure that I agree that the board showing is mere 'window dressing'. It's the only accepted way to clearly communicate to everyone in the stadium (players, officials, fans, media) the reality of the specific situation. That's why I find it interesting that in the OP, there's no easy and obvious way to avoid the risk of miscommunication / misunderstanding. Of course, the ref team should do their best to inform the teams directly but the board remains the 'official' communication

Well, you're exaggerating what I said. I didn't say the board is window dressing. I said in this weird context everything beyond communicating clearly to the teams is window dressing. The critical element is to get the timing right and make sure the teams are not surprised. Everything else is a "nice to have."

 

[Jtpetherick1]

I genuinely couldn’t tell you when I last stopped a watch. If it’s obvious time wasting or an injury I’ll look at the watch and think ‘we stopped at 76 and it’s now 79’ - I’ll play 3. I usually pass this to my 4O too so if he puts up 5 he can say ‘your lad was down for 3 on 76 and then there were the changes’ and so on. I don’t love the idea of asking my 4O to tell me how much time there should be - first and foremost it’s my game and I’d rather be able to sell my decision to the bench than the 4O’s to the players.