Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Old Everton Pictures

Chris O'Connor said:
Remember that time he farcically blew up for time in a Brazil World Cup match just a second before a Brazilian headed the winner from a corner he allowed to be taken?
Click to expand...

On this one, I have to disagree with you. When time is up, that's it, the end of the game. Doesn't matter where the ball is, the ref should blow his whistle for 'no side'. You added time on for a stoppage due to an injury/injuries, or for a penalty to be taken (when the penalty is awarded it would be in normal time, but if that is seconds from the end, then the penalty would still be taken AFTER the end of time, with the proviso that the ball must not be touched by goalkeeper on the way into the net, otherwise, the instant the 'keeper gets a touch on it, that is the end of the game, and no goal is given).

We see all referees nowadays allowing play to continue because one team is attacking, with the opposition Manager going bananas when his team is ahead/level because the ref is giving the opposition an unfair advantage.
 
Old Blue 2 said:
On this one, I have to disagree with you. When time is up, that's it, the end of the game. Doesn't matter where the ball is, the ref should blow his whistle for 'no side'. You added time on for a stoppage due to an injury/injuries, or for a penalty to be taken (when the penalty is awarded it would be in normal time, but if that is seconds from the end, then the penalty would still be taken AFTER the end of time, with the proviso that the ball must not be touched by goalkeeper on the way into the net, otherwise, the instant the 'keeper gets a touch on it, that is the end of the game, and no goal is given).

We see all referees nowadays allowing play to continue because one team is attacking, with the opposition Manager going bananas when his team is ahead/level because the ref is giving the opposition an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...
Trying to defend the indefensible talk me through our winner v that lot by Brian Hamilton then ....?
He gave two different versions of why he disallowed it offside or handball - not one LFC player appealed.... yet he had to steal the limelight awful useless attention seeking Referee -
 
1605012060828.webp
 

Joey66 said:
Trying to defend the indefensible talk me through our winner v that lot by Brian Hamilton then ....?
He gave two different versions of why he disallowed it offside or handball - not one LFC player appealed.... yet he had to steal the limelight awful useless attention seeking Referee -
Click to expand...

I am not defending the indefensible. He was a cheat in that game. I was in the Everton end in the Kippax at that game. The Liverpool section was nearer that end of the pitch. After the game outside the Kippax, both sets of fans were discussing that disallowed goal (yeah, I know that sounds weird nowadays), and the RS supporters I spoke to said they didn't have a clue as to why Hamilton's goal was disallowed.

He was a 100% cheat in that game...
 
Old Blue 2 said:
On this one, I have to disagree with you. When time is up, that's it, the end of the game. Doesn't matter where the ball is, the ref should blow his whistle for 'no side'. You added time on for a stoppage due to an injury/injuries, or for a penalty to be taken (when the penalty is awarded it would be in normal time, but if that is seconds from the end, then the penalty would still be taken AFTER the end of time, with the proviso that the ball must not be touched by goalkeeper on the way into the net, otherwise, the instant the 'keeper gets a touch on it, that is the end of the game, and no goal is given).

We see all referees nowadays allowing play to continue because one team is attacking, with the opposition Manager going bananas when his team is ahead/level because the ref is giving the opposition an unfair advantage.
Click to expand...

There had to be leeway for common sense imo not strict adherence to the very letter of the law. A large percentage of refereeing decisions are subjective anyway, certainly before VAR, and how much time to add absolutely was. To then strictly go to the second seems ridiculous to me or rather a chance for the referee to get himself noticed, make it all about him and grab all the headlines for the wrong reasons, the infamous Clive Thomas fitted the bill perfectly.

Dermott Gallagher constantly points out that when the time added board goes up these days it indicates the referee has decided there will be at least that time added, not exactly that.
 
Last edited:
Chris O'Connor said:
There had to be leeway for common sense imo not strict adherence to the very letter of the law. A large percentage of refereeing decisions are subjective anyway, certainly before VAR, and how much time to add absolutely was. To then strictly go to the second seems ridiculous to me or rather a chance for the referee to get himself noticed, make it all about him and grab all the headlines for the wrong reasons, the infamous Clive Thomas fitted the bill perfectly.

Dermott Gallagher constantly points out that when the time added board goes up these days it indicates the referee has decided there will be at least that time added, not exactly that.
Click to expand...
1. Didn't that used to be called 'Fergie time'! ;)

2. There is no valid reason to over-run time. When I refereed Sunday League, if the game stopped for an injury, I would stop the stop-watch and also check my normal watch. I had a good handle on how long the game had stopped/how much to add on. It's very simple. When the added time was up - that's it, regardless of where the ball was on the pitch, or off, if it had gone out of play.

3. Yes, I know, that when the board goes up, it indicates a MINIMUM number of minutes to be added on. And yet you still ger Managers ranting on after the game about the amount of time added on. Don't they know it's a minimum? Are they thick? I suspect the two answers are, 'No' and 'Yes', in that order! lol
 

Old Blue 2 said:
1. Didn't that used to be called 'Fergie time'! ;)

2. There is no valid reason to over-run time. When I refereed Sunday League, if the game stopped for an injury, I would stop the stop-watch and also check my normal watch. I had a good handle on how long the game had stopped/how much to add on. It's very simple. When the added time was up - that's it, regardless of where the ball was on the pitch, or off, if it had gone out of play.

3. Yes, I know, that when the board goes up, it indicates a MINIMUM number of minutes to be added on. And yet you still ger Managers ranting on after the game about the amount of time added on. Don't they know it's a minimum? Are they thick? I suspect the two answers are, 'No' and 'Yes', in that order! lol
Click to expand...
He was just one of many but one of the worst Referees = end of -
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top