Injury Time

[socal lurker]

It's pretty straightforward - if you don't have a separate timekeeper, the referee does it. They've been using a stopping clock in NFHS games with no problem for literally decades now, where although there is normally an official timekeeper, the NFHS rules also state that:

Not close to the same thought. In NFHS we stop time for goals, cautions, and injuries, which is manageable. We don't stop every time the ball goes out of play--and I can't imagine trying to do that while reffing. If IFAB/FIFA want to capture all that time, it is completely manageable within the existing Laws: all they have to do is tell the Rs and 4O that is the expectation and they 4O is responsible for accurately timing stoppage from injuries, goals, misconduct. The fact that isn't the instruction makes it pretty clear that the powers that be see the cure as worse than the disease.

I do think other areas of enforcement would also have an impact. The rule change I would make is the sanction for the GK IFK infractions. Part of why refs are very reluctant to call these is the resulting IFK that comes about, which is always a cluster %#&$. Change the restart on GK IFK infractions to a CK (or borrow from field hockey and make it a "short corner" from the PA/GL intersection. That is still bad for the defending team, but not the same chaos as the IFK. And tell R's to call it--give a warning at 6 seconds and call it three seconds later if the GK is still holding the ball. As we saw with PKs, the players will adapt. After the first season it will almost never get called.

I also wouldn't mind borrowing from basketball on restarts--delay your own restart, and its a turnover to the other team. Yup, that GK becomes a CK. I think GKs are going to be less interested in risking that result than a meaningless caution, but it still isn't so draconian that it can't be called.

A bit radical, but I think less radical in effect than a stop clock, which I think would radically change the flow of the game.

 

[RustyRef]

The broadcasters wouldn't have it as it would play havoc with their schedules, they'd have no idea whether a game was going to take 110 minutes or 180 minutes. Not so bad for the likes of Sky and BT who have buffers after games, but BBC and ITV tend to have a very short time after games and they'd be in a right mess. Even worse for the overseas broadcasters as they show the Saturday 12:30 followed by the 15:00 games followed by the 17:30, they could end up overlapping. Perhaps if you only stopped the clock for injuries, subs and goals it might work, but if you stop for throws, goal kicks, and generally any stoppages I just can't see it.

And before anyone says it, yes I know that broadcasters shouldn't control what happens in football, but at the top levels they most certainly do.

 

[ladbroke8745]

I watched a game on TV last night where 5 minutes were added, and literally in the first few seconds a penalty was awarded.
VAR check took between 2 and 3 minutes, ref sent to screen.
By the time the penalty was taken, nearly all 5 minutes had been used.
I know we don't allow time added for the taking of a penalty but we do for VAR.
Wouldn't have changed the result as it finished 2-0 with the scoring of penalty, but he blew for full time on 95:50.
Seems as fans we're told additional time, and I know it's always down to referees timekeeping only, but once, in this case 5 minutes, the times up of what was shown, the ref wants to end ASAP regardless of what's happened in those 5 minutes.
I've seen games where multiple subs have happened, goal being scored and a lengthy celebration. Nothing gets topped up, well extremely rare anyway.

 

[ladbroke8745]

Just watched the Juventus v Torino ending...
4 minutes added.
On the TV clock, 93:59 played. No problems really as it was a goal kick just awarded. But twice Juventus awarded a free kick and twice Torino wasted time by arguing. The 2nd one the juventus player must've said something as the ref literally points and suggests he has the time. But doesn't add anything onto the end.

Why not?
Why publicly suggest you've got the watch then blow virtually bang on time?

 

[Goldfish]

Just watched the Juventus v Torino ending...
4 minutes added.
On the TV clock, 93:59 played. No problems really as it was a goal kick just awarded. But twice Juventus awarded a free kick and twice Torino wasted time by arguing. The 2nd one the juventus player must've said something as the ref literally points and suggests he has the time. But doesn't add anything onto the end.

Why not?
Why publicly suggest you've got the watch then blow virtually bang on time?

My understanding is that UEFA officials have been advised that if the referee advises the 4th official to show says 4 minutes then play the 4 minutes only. If there is a clear obvious reason to add on further time such as a substitution, injury that will be dealt with as it is expected. Sure the ref might have said To Juve that there is time left not that he was adding it on.

 

[SpecsSaver66]

If added time on for the ball going onto a nearby main road or behind the goal after a shot and the ball's retrieval I would play longer than an American Football match!