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

 

[al secord]

Just when you thought you've heard every insane football take...

 

[Savant]

Just when you thought you've heard every insane football take...

I don’t understand what’s insane here. I am talking about what actually happened. To me, this is insane.



It was a terribly officiated game at every level.

 

[robertmac43]

TBH I don't really see the issue here either way. Its obviously frustrating when your team is chasing a game and you feel like the other team is wasting clock through injuries and general sh*thousery...

At the end of the day, extra time is and always has been a crap shoot. Some games go slightly longer then others, push as hard as you can until the final whistle goes.

The drama that comes from extra time goals and moments is amazing.

 

[maclean]

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?

The time they spend on the ground is literally time that is not being played. Where is the time gain in that

 

[gary69]

IFAB rules are that if keeper is taking more than 6 seconds to release the ball, it should be an inderect free kick for the opponents. But refs rarely enforce this and give yellows instead, if they do anything at all.

IFAB are unhappy with refs not following the rules here and are planning to chance the rule, so that the ref will have to signal timewasting after 5 seconds, and if a goal kick isn't released within 8 seconds, a corner kick will given.

And if the keeper does this for the 2nd time in the match, he will be given a yellow card.

They've trialled this successfully in the U21 PL and in Italy U20 league, and it has practically stopped time wasting by keepers. So it's likely to be introduced to senior football leagues too.

 

[Savant]

The time they spend on the ground is literally time that is not being played. Where is the time gain in that

Ask Michael Oliver. He gave Everton every second of that back

IFAB rules are that if keeper is taking more than 6 seconds to release the ball, it should be an inderect free kick for the opponents. But refs rarely enforce this and give yellows instead, if they do anything at all.

IFAB are unhappy with refs not following the rules here and are planning to chance the rule, so that the ref will have to signal timewasting after 5 seconds, and if a goal kick isn't released within 8 seconds, a corner kick will given.

And if the keeper does this for the 2nd time in the match, he will be given a yellow card.

They've trialled this successfully in the U21 PL and in Italy U20 league, and it has practically stopped time wasting by keepers. So it's likely to be introduced to senior football leagues too.

Right, so where does this say that this time is being added on in additional to already given stoppage time. And again, if the ref can signal the keeper, Oliver is clearly signaling Alisson. That’s what happened

 

[Wee Baby Seamus]

Ask Michael Oliver. He gave Everton every second of that back

gave it BACK. gave it BACK. SAY IT WITH ME. SAY IT WITH ME ONE MORE TIME. GAVE IT BACK. TO GIVE BACK IS TO RETURN WHAT HAS BEEN LOST. the net result is the same amount of time played. it is not additional time.

an injury in stoppage time lasted an amount of time. the stoppage time was extended to reflect that. they were not given bonus, extra time on top of that. 90 seconds of stoppage time lost, 90 seconds tagged on. that's how it has always been.

how the f*** are we still going through this

why the absolute f*** would a team that is losing the biggest game of its season WASTE ITS OWN TIME. HOW CAN YOU NOT HEAR HOW RIDICULOUS THIS SOUNDS.

a team is down 1-0 and has a corner in the 94th minute of the Champions League final, and so their CB goes down with cramp to stretch out and waste 90 seconds, so that hopefully they can score in the 96 minute rather than the 94th. famously, teams losing late decide to play without urgency and they want the game to be as stop-start as possible.

sorry but this is genuinely breaking my brain

i genuinely just cannot conceive of the mental leaps necessary to think that a team losing a huge game would waste their own stoppage time as a form of gamesmanship

 

[bluesfan94]

gave it BACK. gave it BACK. SAY IT WITH ME. SAY IT WITH ME ONE MORE TIME. GAVE IT BACK. TO GIVE BACK IS TO RETURN WHAT HAS BEEN LOST. the net result is the same amount of time played. it is not additional time.

an injury in stoppage time lasted an amount of time. the stoppage time was extended to reflect that. they were not given bonus, extra time on top of that. 90 seconds of stoppage time lost, 90 seconds tagged on. that's how it has always been.

how the f*** are we still going through this

why the absolute f*** would a team that is losing the biggest game of its season WASTE ITS OWN TIME. HOW CAN YOU NOT HEAR HOW RIDICULOUS THIS SOUNDS.

a team is down 1-0 and has a corner in the 94th minute of the Champions League final, and so their CB goes down with cramp to stretch out and waste 90 seconds, so that hopefully they can score in the 96 minute rather than the 94th. famously, teams losing late decide to play without urgency and they want the game to be as stop-start as possible.

sorry but this is genuinely breaking my brain

i genuinely just cannot conceive of the mental leaps necessary to think that a team losing a huge game would waste their own stoppage time as a form of gamesmanship

At this point it's clearly willful ignorance.

 

[OmNomNom]

if everton doesn't score in the last minutes none of this conversation would be happening

blame oliver all you want, but it's not like he's the one who scored or was playing defense