GWT: EPL - Matchweek 25 (ft. MW 15)

[Savant]

Regarding stoppage time, the injury timeout was 2 minutes. There were also two goal kicks where alisson took over 40 seconds and Oliver indicated he was stopping his watch. And TAA took 30 seconds on a throw in. So allowing for a reasonable amount of time for those stoppages, that’s an extra minute plus 2 minutes for the injury and yeah, it makes sense.

No one adds minutes to stoppage time for non-carded goal kicks and throw ins. I’ve seen time added for cards. I’ve never seen time added for neutral game. I am more than happy to be corrected on this though. And again, LFC didn’t get any time back for the VAR review. So no, it doesn’t make sense.

Man that is a cool shot.

I've always wondered and never googled it.... Is that a park or some randoms farm between the stadiums?

You are too nice. I think it (and all my other pictures) looks like a potato.

I haven’t been since 2020 so not sure if it’s the same now, but it’s all very underdeveloped over there. I knew the stadiums were close, but didn’t realize how close until I saw for myself. But yes - that is park in the literal sense. Stanley Park.

Stanley Park, Liverpool - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

When the owners were Hicks and Gillett they wanted to tear down Anfield and built a new LFC stadium over there. But for all the wrong reasons and everyone hated the idea. Then FSG came in and did the Anfield redevelopment; funnily enough one of the reasons they wanted to was because there was some symmetry with how they redeveloped Fenway Park

 

[bluesfan94]

No one adds minutes to stoppage time for non-carded goal kicks and throw ins. I’ve seen time added for cards. I’ve never seen time added for neutral game. I am more than happy to be corrected on this though. And again, LFC didn’t get any time back for the VAR review. So no, it doesn’t make sense.


You are too nice. I think it (and all my other pictures) looks like a potato.

I haven’t been since 2020 so not sure if it’s the same now, but it’s all very underdeveloped over there. I knew the stadiums were close, but didn’t realize how close until I saw for myself. But yes - that is park in the literal sense. Stanley Park.

Stanley Park, Liverpool - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

When the owners were Hicks and Gillett they wanted to tear down Anfield and built a new LFC stadium over there. But for all the wrong reasons and everyone hated the idea. Then FSG came in and did the Anfield redevelopment; funnily enough one of the reasons they wanted to was because there was some symmetry with how they redeveloped Fenway Park

Yes they do, all the time. Michael Oliver clearly held up his watch while alisson was loafing.

 

[OmNomNom]

phew they issued a statement this will solve everything.

have to wonder if that's why he came over to the LFC section - this probably happens ALL the time, but it doesn't make it right, that's for sure.

 

[Savant]

Yes they do, all the time. Michael Oliver clearly held up his watch while alisson was loafing.

Because he was warning him about a yellow card. Not because he was winding the clock. Also think it’s hilarious that’s the Arsenal fans going out of their way to defend Oliver now

 

[bluesfan94]

Because he was warning him about a yellow card. Not because he was winding the clock. Also think it’s hilarious that’s the Arsenal fans going out of their way to defend Oliver now

No because he was stopping his watch. Let’s use our brains. I’m not defending Oliver. He had a horrible match. Didn’t send off Bradley. Didn’t card Mac Allister or Jota for delaying restarts, didn’t card alisson or TAA for clear time wasting, didn’t give a penalty for Konate clawing the ball back. That he managed to appropriately handle stoppage time is a minor miracle, especially because it hurt Liverpool. Doubt PGMOL is happy with him for that.

 

[maclean]

Man that is a cool shot.

I've always wondered and never googled it.... Is that a park or some randoms farm between the stadiums?

I mean it's clearly a brawling ground and it's a brilliant bit of urban planning tbh

 

[Savant]

No because he was stopping his watch. Let’s use our brains.

Yes let’s use our brains. He is telling the keeper he is about to card him, because the keeper is in a situation where he is about to get carded

I’m not defending Oliver. He had a horrible match. Didn’t send off Bradley. Didn’t card Mac Allister or Jota for delaying restarts, didn’t card alisson or TAA for clear time wasting, didn’t give a penalty for Konate clawing the ball back.

And that’s not even mentioning the Everton parts! Sure reads like an Oliver defense to me

That he managed to appropriately handle stoppage time is a minor miracle, especially because it hurt Liverpool. Doubt PGMOL is happy with him for that.

I for one can’t wait to see what PGMOL says about this

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

I would assume that if a ref is telling a keeper "take your kick or I'll card you", he is already adding that time to the clock. You don't only get timewasting added on if it reaches the carding threshold of egregiousness. You're already being called out for timewasting and the ref is already taking that timewasting into consideration.

 

[luiginb]

I would assume that if a ref is telling a keeper "take your kick or I'll card you", he is already adding that time to the clock. You don't only get timewasting added on if it reaches the carding threshold of egregiousness. You're already being called out for timewasting and the ref is already taking that timewasting into consideration.

I can't believe this is so hard to comprehend, and I'm cheering for Liverpool to win this year

 

[Savant]

I would assume that if a ref is telling a keeper "take your kick or I'll card you", he is already adding that time to the clock. You don't only get timewasting added on if it reaches the carding threshold of egregiousness. You're already being called out for timewasting and the ref is already taking that timewasting into consideration.

I can't believe this is so hard to comprehend, and I'm cheering for Liverpool to win this year

Why would we assume that? If we assume that games would go on for infinity due to the stall tactics that happen in literally every game. Yes - time is added on for cards. That I can understand.

I don’t see how time is added on because someone is arbitrarily taking too long. Is it not a card if it’s 30 seconds but is a card if it’s 31 seconds? Does every ref adhere to these same standards? The answer is clearly no to both. If time is added for this, it’s certainly not 1 second to 1 second. Games would go on forever.

 

[bluesfan94]

Yes let’s use our brains. He is telling the keeper he is about to card him, because the keeper is in a situation where he is about to get carded

And that’s not even mentioning the Everton parts! Sure reads like an Oliver defense to me

I for one can’t wait to see what PGMOL says about this

Do....do you think that the ref only factors in time wasting if they give a card? Objectively I know this isn't your first time watching the sport but you make some arguments that make me wonder...

I listed six mistakes and you think it reads like a defense. Strange.

I assume you're expecting a PGMOL apology?

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Time is added on for cards because carding someone takes time. Time is added on for substitutions because a substitution takes time.

Time is also added for other things. Generally time is not added due to a regular ol' goal kick, but presumably if a goal kick is taking long enough that the referee is pointing to his watch and saying "get on with it", it is being taken into consideration.

This isn't rocket science! Something can be considered timewasting without it hitting a ref's yellow card threshold!

 

[maclean]

Hot takes are obviously not an uncommon occurrence on here, but the idea that extra time is only added (or should only be?!) to punish the leading team is a new one for me

 

[Savant]

Hot takes are obviously not an uncommon occurrence on here, but the idea that extra time is only added (or should only be?!) to punish the leading team is a new one for me

That’s not the point that I am trying to make, but additional time certainly has no benefit to the team in front does it. I am saying if the trailing team knows they can get more time on the clock because they know the ref will add more time the players stay on the ground, than what incentive to they have to get up? And why should they be rewarded additional time for staying on the ground if it had nothing to do with anything the opposing team did?

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

That’s not the point that I am trying to make, but additional time certainly has no benefit to the team in front does it. I am saying if the trailing team knows they can get more time on the clock because they know the ref will add more time the players stay on the ground, than what incentive to they have to get up? And why should they be rewarded additional time for staying on the ground if it had nothing to do with anything the opposing team did?

holy mother of f***ing god

guys normally stay on the ground because they know that the time added will be less than the time they spend on the ground. staying on the ground is a time wasting technique, not a time gaining one

and time added isn't a "reward", it has nothing to do with "anything the opposing team did"

genuinely flummoxed by this line of inquiry

 

[Savant]

Time is added on for cards because carding someone takes time. Time is added on for substitutions because a substitution takes time.

I agree with this

Time is also added for other things. Generally time is not added due to a regular ol' goal kick, but presumably if a goal kick is taking long enough that the referee is pointing to his watch and saying "get on with it", it is being taken into consideration.

I don’t agree with this. There is no standardized time for “too long on a goal kick” so you can’t add time just because you think someone is taking too long. It’s also rarely enforced. Maybe I am wrong here but especially to a keeper, I think you are telling them speed it up it’s more about “I am going to card you if you don’t” rather than “I’m adding on this stoppage one to one”

This isn't rocket science! Something can be considered timewasting without it hitting a ref's yellow card threshold!

holy mother of f***ing god

guys normally stay on the ground because they know that the time added will be less than the time they spend on the ground. staying on the ground is a time wasting technique, not a time gaining one

and time added isn't a "reward", it has nothing to do with "anything the opposing team did"

genuinely flummoxed by this line of inquiry

But that’s not what happened yesterday! Yesterday it WAS a time gaining technique. That’s what the issue is