apologies for starting a new thread as I’m sure some have commented on the post match / player marks threads, but I wanted to easily finds answers to my post to see if I’m in the minority.
Now our history with Mr Stroud is well documented and like everyone I was fearing the worst today. However despite many comments on other threads slagging him off, I thought he reffed quite well and was pretty fair to both sides. First off, at least he didn’t give any red cards!!! Yes Mitrovic walked the line but did he really warrant a red? The challenge on Pearce at the far post was nothing much and the free kick given in injury time was fair considering Pearce man handled Mitrovic. The only criticism I have was the 8 added minutes which seemed a little OTT.
I wonder if us Charlton fans are judging him with tainted preconceptions
4
Comments
Didn't have many complaints about him today apart from the added time which I thought was a little excessive
The 7 minutes was ridiculous. I always have a guess at what is being added on and am usually right (9 times out of 10). I guessed 4 as I didn't see any real time wasting - unlike Swansea on Wednesday night, and to be fair, us on a few previous occasions this season. It felt like he was trying to give them every opportunity to win it.
The 7 minutes was shown by the 4th official ..... but of course, that's only guidance to the ref; or is it for the crowd's benefit?
You say the 7 minutes was ridiculous, Muttley ...... but I believe you've overlooked the long delay when Mitrovic went down injured early in the second half? At least 3 minutes on that occasion alone.
Add that to the regulation 30 secs for each sub, (count total 2 minutes for the 4 subs during the 2nd half; but don't count the 2 subs Fulham made at HT) plus other minor stoppages - perhaps 7 mins was about right after all?
There was also a significant injury stoppage during time added on, which evidently caused it to be further extended.
As for the 8 minutes...rant alert...
We, the "customers" have no idea how they calculate extra time, nor indeed who makes the decisions. One thing i do know; on the Continent you only see 8 mins very exceptionally, and as a result of a serious injury, or a hold up cos of a flare. 3 mins is typical. How often do you see as little as 3 minutes in an English game? Which is odd, isn't it, since we are supposed to be following FIFA rules, and UEFA guidelines. I keep hearing "30 seconds per substitute". Oh yeah? Where is that written then? Who wrote it? I remember a Euro match within the last season or so which Clattenburg reffed, and I wondered what he'd add on...3 minutes!
Of course, if we'd been behind, we'd have welcomed 8 minutes. My point is, we all need transparency, and it isn't difficult to set up. Make the 4th official, or maybe a dedicated official, responsible for timekeeping, and have their own timepiece wired up to a stadium clock, so if they stop it, we all see it and for how long. Then right on 90 minutes an automatic whistle blows, similar to ice hockey. Refs could then concentrate on the action. Refs like Stroud will resist it, because for them, blowing the final whistle confirms their Great Importance. Well sod him. He played on until, i think 97.52, certainly way beyond 97.30, and nobody will dissuade me that it was because Fulham were pressing hard and he wanted to see 'what happens".
And we need VAR, urgently.
Agree with the post re "injury time". I thought it was going to be 4 or 5 mins....but 7 !!! We've not had more than 5 in any game so far this season, and that includes time wasting by Brum. Also bear in mind that Fulham brought on 2 player at the start of the 2nd half so max (if 30 secs for substitutions) would have been 2 mins. A few minor injuries but nothing you would think would give another 5 mins.
Exactly, you wrote "regulation 30 seconds" . Whose "regulation"?
And as for extending beyond 7 mins injury time, Bonne was subbed but I don't recall an injury on top of that..but could be wrong, I was dying seven deaths at that time.
Not quite a James Linington (who is the most incompetent referee I’ve ever seen) performance but still way below par.
It seems to be the rule of thumb applied by refs at all levels throughout football.
It seems to be a 'guidance'. The referee has absolute authority to add whatever additional time he thinks reasonable: he can add as much time as he sees fit if he believes a player or the bench are unreasonably stringing out effecting a substitution.
Also take into account that Assistants and the 4th official are also involved in accounting for time keeping during the game.
The Laws of the Game state:
Law 7: Duration of the Match:
Allowance is made by the referee in each half for all time lost in that half through:
• substitutions
• assessment and/or removal of injured players
• wasting time
• disciplinary sanctions
• stoppages for drinks or other medical reasons permitted by competition rules
• any other cause, including any significant delay to a restart (e.g. goal celebrations)
Other than that, I thought he done okay today.
People overlooking the lengthy stoppage when Mitrovic went down injured for about 3 minutes very early in the second half.
That alone was the best part of half the original 7 minutes.
There was also the Pratley treatment - plus all the other stoppages taken into account.
Stroud is not my favourite referee, but today he seemed to apply added time in accordance with the Law 7, Duration of the the Match.
What point have I missed?