I've always thought that there should be an independent time-keeper, as in rugby league at football league level. Surely Refs have enough to worry about, without players telling them when the game should end?
Yes Glenn I also remember that late late owls goal, and yes I do think referees are given some leeway regarding when to blow for full time. Back in the 70's with the incident with Clive Thomas and Brazil in the world Cup, we as supporters never knew how much longer over the 90 were going to be played, it was just down to the referee, whereas now we get to know the minimum time that can be played as when announced time added on we are always told a minimum of, and then the minutes. I don't mind too much the allowing of letting an attack continue to the conclusion of a match, yes its frustrating if your team are ahead or level and the other team are attacking, and it's over the time put up, but it's very frustrating when a referee has blown for time if it's your team on the attack trying to get either a winner or a leveller and some referees still do that too. UTM
I've always thought that there should be an independent time-keeper, as in rugby league at football league level. Surely Refs have enough to worry about, without players telling them when the game should end?
I do agree that an independent timekeeper would benefit the game Jocks, as they are all wired up and could talk to one another. Sometimes at the end of games I think the referee takes it to the extreme of allowing attacks to carry on and even allowing one or more corners to be taken well after the initial finish time. In rugby union when the whistle, or hooter, sounds, the game then stops, and finishes, when the ball next goes out of play. UTM