by T.R.O.L.I. » 11 Feb 2007 20:06
by Wycombe Royal » 12 Feb 2007 09:35
by weybridgewanderer » 12 Feb 2007 09:48
by Stranded » 12 Feb 2007 09:57
LegendStrandedLegendstarliaisonRoyalBlue
Yes, I do actually. In the past the club have said, on more than one occasion that they are unable to have the clock count up because of league regulations. I beliebve that answer has also been relayed back through STAR/a fans forum. As for clubs that ignore the regulation, Wycombe immediately springs to mind.
As the one who asked the question I am afraid that I have to correct you. The club did not say that the clock has to count down, but that it cannot count beyond 45/90 if it counts up and hence Legend's request would not achieve his desire of seeing added on time.
It has been suggested that some clubs get around this by showing a clock next to the count down/up, but not sure if anyone actually ignores the rule and counts beyond 45/90.
Thank you
So what's the reasoning behind the clock not allowing to pass 45 / 90 minutes ?
Seems absolutley ridiculous to me.
Same reason that they can't show replays of contentious issues - in case it inflames the crowd. Can you imagine what could happen if the board shows 2 mins and a winning goal is scored against the home side with the clock showing 93:24 for example.
Time added on is the minimum time.
The ref aint gonna blow up ten minutes after the allocated time is he, unless he wants a riot
by Harps stay sharp » 12 Feb 2007 10:02
by Silver Fox » 12 Feb 2007 10:58
by weybridgewanderer » 12 Feb 2007 11:30
Silver Fox What would have happened if the "nightmare scenario" of an incident occuring after the minimum additional time had happened on Saturday, given that those of us with decent eyesight (or glasses) could read the time after the 90 on the PremPLus coverage shown on the scoreboard?
by el_presidente » 12 Feb 2007 11:37
Silver Fox What would have happened if the "nightmare scenario" of an incident occuring after the minimum additional time had happened on Saturday, given that those of us with decent eyesight (or glasses) could read the time after the 90 on the PremPLus coverage shown on the scoreboard?
by Spirit of Elm Park » 13 Feb 2007 14:58
by Magnus » 14 Feb 2007 11:25
Spirit of Elm Park I hated maths.
by Whistle » 15 Feb 2007 22:39
by Harps stay sharp » 06 Mar 2007 09:14
by rabidbee » 06 Mar 2007 10:59
el_presidenteSilver Fox What would have happened if the "nightmare scenario" of an incident occuring after the minimum additional time had happened on Saturday, given that those of us with decent eyesight (or glasses) could read the time after the 90 on the PremPLus coverage shown on the scoreboard?
In the first half there was only 1 min of additional time, but Clattenburg let Villa take a corner with the clock on about 46:30. I mentioned it at the time and would not have been impressed had they scored.
by zac naloen » 06 Mar 2007 13:15
rabidbeeel_presidenteSilver Fox What would have happened if the "nightmare scenario" of an incident occuring after the minimum additional time had happened on Saturday, given that those of us with decent eyesight (or glasses) could read the time after the 90 on the PremPLus coverage shown on the scoreboard?
In the first half there was only 1 min of additional time, but Clattenburg let Villa take a corner with the clock on about 46:30. I mentioned it at the time and would not have been impressed had they scored.
As has been pointed out to me on numerous occassions before, the fourth official indicates the *minimum* amount of time to be added.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests