Jump to content

Injury Time


Recommended Posts

One of the things I found refreshing about the World Cup was the unprecedented injury time allowance, not just at full time but at half time.  I think this caught the media off guard as it meant programming schedules were often delayed.  Personally I thought it was brilliant as it offered much more game time and therefore value to matches.  I was disappointed it doesn't seem to have carried over into domestic football.   

At the last Ross County home game on Tuesday night we played Hibs which saw a game ending injury to Kevin Nisbet as well as 7 other subs.  The injury time was 3 minutes... 

So my question is should refs across the SPFL take injury time more seriously?   Should we have a "stop the clock" rule like rugby?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pete the Jakey said:

One of the things I found refreshing about the World Cup was the unprecedented injury time allowance, not just at full time but at half time.  I think this caught the media off guard as it meant programming schedules were often delayed.  Personally I thought it was brilliant as it offered much more game time and therefore value to matches.  I was disappointed it doesn't seem to have carried over into domestic football.   

At the last Ross County home game on Tuesday night we played Hibs which saw a game ending injury to Kevin Nisbet as well as 7 other subs.  The injury time was 3 minutes... 

So my question is should refs across the SPFL take injury time more seriously?   Should we have a "stop the clock" rule like rugby?

No.

Who wants to prolong a game by 15-20 minutes so we can watch players being treated for injury etc? Also, folk like to know within reason when games will finish to make plans etc 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pete the Jakey said:

One of the things I found refreshing about the World Cup was the unprecedented injury time allowance, not just at full time but at half time.  I think this caught the media off guard as it meant programming schedules were often delayed.  Personally I thought it was brilliant as it offered much more game time and therefore value to matches.  I was disappointed it doesn't seem to have carried over into domestic football.   

At the last Ross County home game on Tuesday night we played Hibs which saw a game ending injury to Kevin Nisbet as well as 7 other subs.  The injury time was 3 minutes... 

So my question is should refs across the SPFL take injury time more seriously?   Should we have a "stop the clock" rule like rugby?

Lead rangers 2-1 in the 89th minute and it’ll happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pete the Jakey said:

One of the things I found refreshing about the World Cup was the unprecedented injury time allowance, not just at full time but at half time.  I think this caught the media off guard as it meant programming schedules were often delayed.  Personally I thought it was brilliant as it offered much more game time and therefore value to matches.  I was disappointed it doesn't seem to have carried over into domestic football.   

At the last Ross County home game on Tuesday night we played Hibs which saw a game ending injury to Kevin Nisbet as well as 7 other subs.  The injury time was 3 minutes... 

So my question is should refs across the SPFL take injury time more seriously?   Should we have a "stop the clock" rule like rugby?

I agree, I thought the World Cup was refreshing in the amount of added time was given. 

I am sure they said the ball was in play something stupid like an average of 55 mins in a typical game. As a fan, I want to watch as much football as possible, or get the most for my money at least. Anything they can do that increases that is good for me.

As for stop clock, I'm pretty sceptical about it on the basis that not all teams have scoreboards that keep the time. At least watching the game now you know there are 45 mins then you get the added time by the 4th official / announcer. Adding stop clock means lots of fans wouldnt really know how much time was left and would be left in limbo a bit, which I dont like. If they could find a way to keep fans effortlessly in the know, then all for trying it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Livi v Killie had 6 minutes of second half added time last Saturday. That's the first match I've been at post-WC that's had more than the previously "accepted" upper limit of 4 minutes. So I don't think there's been much movement on this other than a bit less spectator outrage if more than 4 minutes are added. Officials probably were given more leeway by the WC example but don't seem to have wanted to use it. They've largely just stuck with the pre-WC norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion on this depends whether we're chasing the game or trying to hold a lead. 

I do enjoy watching our players go down with cramp to delay a goal kick and think that there's a real skill to the brinkmanship required to take two minutes for a throw in. 

Other teams are cheating time wasting c***s and should be punished by having double added on. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what if the ball is in play for only 55 minutes? Do we think this is a new thing? Were there halcyon days of football that consisted of 90 minutes of actual play? 

Of course not. Perhaps the 90 minute game time takes account for how long the ball is in play for already. 

I can see the adding on of 10 minutes of injury time benefiting only the top sides. It'll be harder to shitfest a draw or win against one of the top sides as it is. It's getting harder still with them being able to bring on 5 subs, never mind giving them an extra 10 minutes or so to crack a tiring opposition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, VincentGuerin said:

Ball-in-play time is another one of these invented problems that some mad geeks have suddenly decided is a problem football desperately needs to solve.

I wish these c***s would just stop it and leave fitba alone.

Has nobody learned from the VAR catastrophe?

Americans is your answer here. Can't have this weird new sport everyone likes cutting into commercials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pete the Jakey said:

One of the things I found refreshing about the World Cup was the unprecedented injury time allowance, not just at full time but at half time.  I think this caught the media off guard as it meant programming schedules were often delayed.  Personally I thought it was brilliant as it offered much more game time and therefore value to matches.  I was disappointed it doesn't seem to have carried over into domestic football.   

At the last Ross County home game on Tuesday night we played Hibs which saw a game ending injury to Kevin Nisbet as well as 7 other subs.  The injury time was 3 minutes... 

So my question is should refs across the SPFL take injury time more seriously?   Should we have a "stop the clock" rule like rugby?

Against St Mirren on Wednesday, there were 6 minutes added to the first half and 6 minutes added to the second half. Oh, and please change the thread title to “added time” it’s not “injury time”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's definitely more being added on because of VAR but it's nothing like the world cup. For years I've been puzzled by how they work it out. A first half could see a goal, an injury, a sub and 1 minute goes up then the second half has little to no stoppage and we get 3 mins.

I quite liked the longer stoppage time in the world cup but don't know if I'd want to see that being brought in as standard. I've seen us concede too many stoppage time goals over the years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Pete the Jakey said:

At the last Ross County home game on Tuesday night we played Hibs

Mate, if I wanted value from these games, i'd pay them not to add any extra time on, including the initial 90 minutes. Bugger watching that for any longer than it needed to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, velo army said:

So what if the ball is in play for only 55 minutes? Do we think this is a new thing? Were there halcyon days of football that consisted of 90 minutes of actual play? 

Of course not. Perhaps the 90 minute game time takes account for how long the ball is in play for already. 

I can see the adding on of 10 minutes of injury time benefiting only the top sides. It'll be harder to shitfest a draw or win against one of the top sides as it is. It's getting harder still with them being able to bring on 5 subs, never mind giving them an extra 10 minutes or so to crack a tiring opposition.

 

Agree with this, but can honestly see 60 minutes' play becoming what's required and timed by the 2030 World Cup. 

Including half time, matches will generally take well over 2 hours to complete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...