Added time

A referee on here will no doubt correct me

But added time consisting of at least 30 seconds per sub.

So every game is now going to get at least 5 minutes. Plus added time for Goals, Injuries and general time wasting

I do think seeing all these 8,9,10 plus mins of injury time is ruining the game.

I’ve always thought the idea of an In play timer would be so “unfootball” but I’d certainly like to see what games are like with one.

Yesterday’s issue wasn’t the added time - it was the added time on the added time!

"Minimum of. . " which ppl seem to forget.

I have no problem with goals being scored in whatever stage of the game.

Its the same for both teams, and no doubt even itself out over a season.


In all fairness if the keeper doesn’t drop a clanger we wouldn’t be discussing it.


If we’d have spent a bit more time trying to get a second goal and a bit less trying to waste time there would have been a lot less extra time.


One of my pet hates, taking the ball into the corner and trying to keep it there instead of trying to score a goal. We are terrible at it anyway. Don Goodman was brilliant at it, but mostly we have been crap.
I’m sure people will point to examples of when we continued to attack and conceded a late goal and say we should have been more conservative, but yesterday we did the ball in the corner thing, and the slow the game down thing, and the feign an injury thing, and we still conceded so just play normally. And use the subs.
I shall don my tin hat and await incoming…


Off on a tangent slightly, but I think there should be no subs allowed after 85 minutes. The constant replacing of players after this time ruins what, in many games, should be the most exciting part of a match. If a player is genuinely injured then it’s tough- but it’s the same for both sides.
Also, is the 30 second allowance per batch of subs, or for each sub?. It does not take twice, or three times as long to bring on 2 or 3 subs at the same time as it would for bringing on one, but I assume the ref would still add 60 or 90 secs on anyway? If this is the case then too much time would be added on.
Not bleating about yesterdays result, but when these things happen it provides food for thought.

Agree entirely. Play the game properly - it works best. One thing that seems obvious to me is that, if you want to be safe, keep the ball in their half and make sure they have to keep players back. As it was, we almost nicked a couple on the break.

TBF, there were breaks for drinks yesterday. But 8 minutes was already too much and 11 was ridiculous.


From The Laws of the Game, re Added Time.
Allowance for time lost.

Allowance is made by the referee in each half for all playing time lost in that
half through:
• substitutions
• assessment and/or removal of injured players
• wasting time
• disciplinary sanctions
• medical stoppages permitted by competition rules, e.g. ‘drinks’ breaks
(which should not exceed one minute) and ‘cooling’ breaks (ninety seconds
to three minutes)
• delays relating to VAR ‘checks’ and ‘reviews’
• any other cause, including any significant delay to a restart
(e.g. goal celebrations)

No mention of the 30 seconds per substitute often quoted.

1 Like

That’s where i think Flynn missed a trick yesterday in not making subs during injury time. If nothing else that break in play relieves the pressure a bit and lets us get organised again, and it also would have broken the tempo that Stevenage had. Having a few fresh players on the ptch at that time is another positive.


Just on the substitutions yesterday, 2 were made at half time by Stevenage so did not delay play or the 2nd half restart. So only 5 would have affected any extra time, giving 2.5 minutes added time for the substitutions. Yet they still found another 5.5 minutes, plus another 3 added on at the end. How?

1 Like

I think the ref had the game down for a score draw at the bookies or on the pool’s coupon ( if they still exist ) and wasnt going to blow his whistle until he got the right result


There were a couple of lengthy injuries, the one where their centre back (I think) was down in their area, and not such a long one for a player over towards the family stand. Might have been others that I forgot as well, plus there was time wasting.
I’ve always felt the officials are too soft over adding on time, they rarely seem, to me, to add enough, especially to penalise the time wasting. I hope they are starting to do that, although I doubt they will continue. It’s swings and roundabouts, we’ll benefit some of the time and lose out some of the time.


I do not disagree and I may be misremembering but, in recent years, I have a feeling that we have conceded in injury time more regularly than we have scored.

1 Like

Probably, because we haven’t been very good. In 2015-16 we scored a lot of late goals and conceded fewer than usual (it seemed, I don’t have the figures) because we were good team.
I’d hope that this season, with our strong defenders and pace up front, late goals will again be in our favour.

The allowance of 30 seconds per substitute does not necessarily apply to all football. It is up to the various leagues. 30 seconds is the tariff in the EPL and the EFL.

The biggest culprit for time-wasting is Owen Evans. He got a yellow card yesterday and I was amazed he did not get one against Newport where he was even worse!

It was very frustrating to concede in the 10th minute of stoppage time but, if we’re totally honest, Stevenage deserved a point - or possibly all 3.

1 Like

We probably wouldn’t be having this debate if it were US that had scored in the 100th minute :laughing: :wink:

In all fairness, I’ve noticed the last few games I’ve watched both Walsall and non Walsall games. Have gone nearer 100 mins than the 90. None of its accurate. Just annoys me.

5 subs is daft anyway

Shoul change the time keeping as in Rugby.
They play 40 minutes.
If the ball goes out the clock stops. If someone is injured the clock stops etc. etc.
There is two visible clocks in the stadium. One showing actual time the other the match time.
Stops time wasting and the always have 40 minutes of actual play.

1 Like

I am not really a fan of egg chasing but I understand the timing rules and I play hockey. I hate the football added time rules and lax nature with time wasting. I honestly think a big tweak of the rules to make time wasting irrelevant would improve things so much. Rugby is too slow for me personally but that’s one option of stopping the clock whenever there’s a break in play. Hockey on the other hand is shorter games but very quick and time wasting is virtually non existent, I know people love traditional football but for me time wasting is a part that ruins it and if a method could be trialed to remove it being a thing I’d support that. However I also realise when reading social media a lot of people are very against it!