The Ref Stop

Ending the Game during promising attack

Status
Not open for further replies.
mikedn said:
So all you are worried about is your club marks, and don't want anyone moaning at you ?
I refereed a match where an attacker was on goal, keeper to beat.... i looked at my watch and 90 mins was up and i blew the whistle as he hit the ball and the keeper dived for it missed and the goal was scored..... i disallowed it because i blew the whistle. The forward said to me "Why is that not a goal?" I replied " Because time was up and you scored after i blew the whistle" He then said "Why didn't you let me shoot first?" I said " You have 90 minutes to score a goal, that time was up when i blew the whistle" He just looked at me then walked off.
Didn't bother me what he thought of me then, i applied the laws of the game(it doesn't say anywhere in them to add time on for an attack) i achieved my "goal" in doing my job properly by not circumventing the laws to please other people......
Click to expand...
:eek::eek: Cant believe you did that !!!
You are obviously 100% sure that you added on every second a player wasted a bit of time during the game and also every discretionary second when the ball went miles behind the goal and the keeper strolled to get it back ?
Did you start your watch before you blew for kick off ? or after ? Did the substitution take 3 seconds more or less than the 30 secs you allowed for it ?
Sorry Matey but the word Pedantic is springing to mind concerning that call
not being offensive please don't take it the wrong way
 
The Ref Stop
Add on every second? you been watching Back to the Future too much.

It seems some of you are prepared to circumvent the laws of the game to add on time after the 90 minutes ( just to see if a goal might / might not be scored, thus handling an unfair advantage to the attacking side, say what you will but in my little black book that is wrong......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can't believe some of the stuff I am reading in this thread & there was me thinking it was only "unqualified helpers" that blow bang on time regardless of where play is because their smartphone said time is up!

sticker,375x360.u3.png
 
Allowing one team a final chance to score is not a reason for allowing additional time on top of the additional time you've already added for legitimate reasons.......

Once you've reached 90 minutes, you have your minimum stoppage tine....so unless you have further substitutions, injuries or bookings in that stoppage time once it has expired that's game over....don't care where the play is.

Nothing to do with not understanding the game (which is another common excuse of those wanting to be popular rather than correct) or being pedantic....its about applying the LOTG correctly.
 
Padfoot said:
Allowing one team a final chance to score is not a reason for allowing additional time on top of the additional time you've already added for legitimate reasons.......

Once you've reached 90 minutes, you have your minimum stoppage tine....so unless you have further substitutions, injuries or bookings in that stoppage time once it has expired that's game over....don't care where the play is.

Nothing to do with not understanding the game (which is another common excuse of those wanting to be popular rather than correct) or being pedantic....its about applying the LOTG correctly.
Click to expand...
LOTG........LOTG........LOTG.......we cannot constantly hide behind a book and quote facts that are all seemingly open to interpretation !! Understanding of the game of football .....the players , individual situations that arise during games and applying common sense are vitally important ingredients to being a Referee

I'm afraid you are talking a load of rubbish !!!

Come out from behind your LAW barrier and give some opinions for a change.
 
Padfoot said:
They'll support the being popular option....because that's what assessments are all about....preparing referees to sacrifice principles in order to progress.....
Click to expand...
That's your opinion mate. The forum users you are denigrating are some of the most consistently helpful and knowledgeable on here. They have time and again set out their stall to help anyone who asks for assistance. You cannot say the same. Hint hint - how about you Use your evil and annoying powers for good, helping and supporting others rather than running others down and being boringly and cynically bitter.

From now on watch how you address other forum users padfoot. Or you will get more warning points. Also this your warning you are about to get removed from an interesting discussion.

To everyone else involved in the discussion; let's not make this a personal argument. We discuss and debate the laws. We are referees, the guardians of the LOTG. Not bbc pundits.
 
Beezer said:
LOTG........LOTG........LOTG.......we cannot constantly hide behind a book and quote facts that are all seemingly open to interpretation !! Understanding of the game of football .....the players , individual situations that arise during games and applying common sense are vitally important ingredients to being a Referee

I'm afraid you are talking a load of rubbish !!!

Come out from behind your LAW barrier and give some opinions for a change.
Click to expand...

So you believe that it is perfectly acceptable to act in favour of one team over the other?

I'm not saying that you can't extend stoppage time to allow for legitimate time lost during the stoppage time period....I'm saying that 'a promising attack' is not a legitimate reason for suddenly finding an extra minute or so on the off chance that it might benefit one team over the other.

Let's be honest...you're on a hiding to nothing either way....if you let the attack continue and they score the defending team will be on your case.....if you blow up, the attacking team will be on your case.....
So why not take the honest option and blow up, rather than inventing some more stoppage time in an effort to look like Billy Big ******** and make it all about you?
 
Padfoot said:
So you believe that it is perfectly acceptable to act in favour of one team over the other?

I'm not saying that you can't extend stoppage time to allow for legitimate time lost during the stoppage time period....I'm saying that 'a promising attack' is not a legitimate reason for suddenly finding an extra minute or so on the off chance that it might benefit one team over the other.

Let's be honest...you're on a hiding to nothing either way....if you let the attack continue and they score the defending team will be on your case.....if you blow up, the attacking team will be on your case.....
So why not take the honest option and blow up, rather than inventing some more stoppage time in an effort to look like Billy Big ******** and make it all about you?
Click to expand...
So.......blowing up when a striker is running in on goal isn't making it all about you ???
Also stoppage time is not an exact science !!! if you call" last 5 " and someone is in on goal at 5 01 your gonna blow the final whistle ? don't believe it for a second (see what I done there ) :D

The additional stoppage time ...we are not talking about a minute we are on about 10 secs max

Sorry Guys no one is gonna say anything that will change my opinion on this one

Must end the game in a neutral situation

i
 
Beezer said:
So.......blowing up when a striker is running in on goal isn't making it all about you ???
Also stoppage time is not an exact science !!! if you call" last 5 " and someone is in on goal at 5 01 your gonna blow the final whistle ? don't believe it for a second (see what I done there ) :D

The additional stoppage time ...we are not talking about a minute we are on about 10 secs max

Sorry Guys no one is gonna say anything that will change my opinion on this one

Must end the game in a neutral situation

i
Click to expand...

Whichever way you do it, you're going to become the centre of attention....whether you allow they attack and they score (or even come close, the defenders are going to moan), or whether you blow up on the dot......the attackers will be the moaners....

My point is that to allow one team to pursue a final attack is favouring them over the other....the unbiased equitable solution is blow when it's time, rather than a quaint notion that we are obligated to find some extra time.

Maybe, just maybe, if the ball was in flight and literally just about to cross the line, you could make an argument for delaying for a second or two.......but nothing more than that.
 
Padfoot said:
Whichever way you do it, you're going to become the centre of attention....whether you allow they attack and they score (or even come close, the defenders are going to moan), or whether you blow up on the dot......the attackers will be the moaners....

My point is that to allow one team to pursue a final attack is favouring them over the other....the unbiased equitable solution is blow when it's time, rather than a quaint notion that we are obligated to find some extra time.

Maybe, just maybe, if the ball was in flight and literally just about to cross the line, you could make an argument for delaying for a second or two.......but nothing more than that.
Click to expand...
No ......you are the man with the watch and you are keeping time ...... every defending team in a close game near the end will be screaming " that's a long 2 mins ref " you hear it every week !! but to blow the whistle when a team is attacking is verging on Criminal in my eyes

its a pretty rare occurrence but you skill as a referee should make it possible not to blow the whistle during an attack !
 
There are some referees more concerned about their club marks methinks....this is like banging the head on the proverbial wall.
You are right Beezer though,you won't change your mind,stuck in your old ways, so i'll let it rest end of discussion for me.
 
mikedn said:
There are some referees more concerned about their club marks methinks....this is like banging the head on the proverbial wall.
You are right Beezer though,you won't change your mind,stuck in your old ways, so i'll let it rest end of discussion for me.
Click to expand...
You have got me very wrong my friend .....I am very open to change and very adaptable to different situations during a game of football .......BUT
If the alternative is blowing for full time when a player is one on one with the keeper :cry: I shall stick to doing it my way

No hard feelings though....... this is why the site is here ;)
 
Padfoot said:
So you believe that it is perfectly acceptable to act in favour of one team over the other?

I'm not saying that you can't extend stoppage time to allow for legitimate time lost during the stoppage time period....I'm saying that 'a promising attack' is not a legitimate reason for suddenly finding an extra minute or so on the off chance that it might benefit one team over the other.

Let's be honest...you're on a hiding to nothing either way....if you let the attack continue and they score the defending team will be on your case.....if you blow up, the attacking team will be on your case.....
So why not take the honest option and blow up, rather than inventing some more stoppage time in an effort to look like Billy Big ******** and make it all about you?
Click to expand...

Not acting in favour of one team over the other, that is a nonsense statement. I would do the same (let it play out) regardless of which team it was on the attack so I'm favouring none. Using your example awarding a penalty is therefore favouring one team over the other - just because a player was fouled in the penalty area doesn't mean he was about to score.

Besides, that oh so over quoted little book to which you constantly refer to clears this whole discussion up in one small sentence:- 'the referee is the sole timekeeper'.

Case closed, arguement done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top