santa sangria
RefChat Addict
He didn’t restart AFAIK. Goal was the last kick.
ENG vs SEN
- Thread starter ARF
- Start date
one
RefChat Addict
Doesn't answer my question though. Time is up when the half time whistle is blown. Not with the last kick. But that proves my assumption that he did not add time for goal celebration.
one
RefChat Addict
If he blows half time immediately after the ball goes in (unlikely) then yes it was at the break. But if he blows say 15 seconds later then 15 seconds of the celebration was not at the break right?
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
The 'in law' justification for playing between 2 and 3 mins additional time (in a case like this, when there are no stoppages in additional time) is, exactly as others have said, that the 3rd team could have agreed that eg 2 mins 30 secs was the exact time to be added but then only been able to show 2 mins on the board.
The 'in reality' explanation for what happened today is, IMO, that the referee allowed play to continue slightly over two minutes because Senegal had a promising attack and then the speed at which this transformed into a super promising English attack was such that it would have been unfair not to have also allowed this second attack to complete. The ball was in the net at 2.16, twelve seconds after England got possession and I reckon there would have been (justifiable) uproar if the referee had stopped play at any point in that twelve seconds.
In any case .... it's coming home
The 'in reality' explanation for what happened today is, IMO, that the referee allowed play to continue slightly over two minutes because Senegal had a promising attack and then the speed at which this transformed into a super promising English attack was such that it would have been unfair not to have also allowed this second attack to complete. The ball was in the net at 2.16, twelve seconds after England got possession and I reckon there would have been (justifiable) uproar if the referee had stopped play at any point in that twelve seconds.
In any case .... it's coming home
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
I disagree that it would be good clock management to have let an attack play out after time and then allow a counter attack to play out. If letting an attack play out, time should end when the attack stops.
but interesting to not have the KO—a result of the fiasco with the KO, end of game, VAR intervention?
one
RefChat Addict
The only half time whistle replay I can find is one that you can hear the half time whistle in the background (unlikely a spectator) at around +3.22 minute. Make of it what you like but here is the time line.
Personally I don't mind what and how it transpired. But a good point raised.
- At 45' minimum 2' added time announced
- At +1.55 Senegal has a good attacking opportunity in attacking third
- At +2.04 Senegal attack ends
- At +2.05 England counter attack starts in their own third
- At +2.16 England scores
- At +3.22 half time is blown while England still celebrating.
Personally I don't mind what and how it transpired. But a good point raised.
Many times we've discussed mic-ing up referees and talked about referees giving views to journalists after matches.
Stoppage time is the major point of concern for me. How the hecking do we explain that we added the correct amount of time, but then added a bit more to allow a final attack to play out?
Stoppage time is the major point of concern for me. How the hecking do we explain that we added the correct amount of time, but then added a bit more to allow a final attack to play out?
Mooseybaby
Retired big bad baldy in all black!
We talk about a lot players over-theatrics when fouled, guess it's only fair to mention Kane's embarrassing complete over-reaction last night. Got caught, was a foul, but pretty sure it didn't justify the high jump, heels being pulled towards his backside and spin in the air 
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
As far as I recall, it is precisely the reason. When the practice of using a board to display the amount of added time was introduced, they explained all the various aspects of it. Based on my memory of it, the explanation for the whole minutes display was exactly as @RustyRef states above.
one
RefChat Addict
How can you explain the timeline I posted in post #48? Or that in 90% of games full time is blown on the full minute? We either follow the law and this concept or we don't. We can't have it both ways to justify one incident.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
I wasn't trying to explain or justify any individual instance of time keeping in an actual game.
I am just talking about the originally announced principles of how this was supposed to work.
Nor am I claiming that referees are all applying those principles the way they were originally intended, and announced to be. Indeed, the fact that so many referees blow up precisely on the whole minute mark, pretty much proves that they are not.
one
RefChat Addict
Fair enough. It's just that the bit of my post you quoted, the entire post and the discussion preceding it refered to 'this' individual instance.
