Refs to enforce new time keeping guidelines
29 January 2016
New time keeping guidelines for referees could see the duration of GAA matches increase from tomorrow's National Football League openers.

Referees have been instructed to stop their watches for a number of matters such as substitutes, relevant delays caused by travelling distances to take frees and stoppages that require the intervention of Hawk-Eye in Croke Park.

The Irish Independent reports that the new guidelines will cover incidental and deliberate delays which have crept into the game in recent years.

Croke Park's national match officials manager Pat Doherty explained that stoppages will range from 20 seconds for substitutes and players travelling distances for frees to 30 seconds for use of Hawk-Eye.

"We'll be instructing the referees that they must stop their watches for those things to happen from now on. Even in games where there are no stoppages, there's been two minutes at the end of a half," said Doherty

Will that immortal phrase "additional time, at least 2 minutes" become a thing of the past?

MesAmis (Dublin) - Posts: 13707 - 29/01/2016 10:24:56    1820256

And heres me proposing amalgamating counties.The GAA have finally decided,after 130 years,to add the requisite amount of time at end of each half.Who said the GAA is slow to make change?

cuederocket (Dublin) - Posts: 5084 - 29/01/2016 10:46:30    1820266

Thanks for setting this up .

It DRIVES ME INSANE when they only add 2-3 minutes at the end of a game. This might actually be the biggest issue in our games but never gets highlighted. In most matches , there should be 6- 8 minutes added on

TheRightStuff (Donegal) - Posts: 1688 - 29/01/2016 10:55:07    1820273

Absolutely rightstuff.I often thought "5 mins" would have been appropriate.And when it goes into injury time any further "time wasting"was never added.Kerry were going mad when S Cluxton took his time to score the winner with no extra time added.I could see their point,but it has always been like this.Farcical really.

cuederocket (Dublin) - Posts: 5084 - 29/01/2016 11:07:27    1820279

The sentiment is right but I wonder how many refs will implement it to the full. Very few, I fear.

neverright (Roscommon) - Posts: 1648 - 29/01/2016 12:04:28    1820305

They have similar guidelines in soccer, but this doesn't stop any time wasting there. A step in the right direction all the same.

elvistheking (Galway) - Posts: 99 - 29/01/2016 13:09:31    1820341

Use the clock and hooter system. If implemented properly problem solved.

SLLY (Dublin) - Posts: 463 - 29/01/2016 13:35:33    1820350

Just take the time keeping off the ref and give it to someone in the stand and when there's a stoppage in play we can all see he's stopped the clock like in rugby simple problem solved.

clondalkindub (Dublin) - Posts: 9926 - 29/01/2016 13:44:24    1820354

The Dubs are fecked so! They'll never win another All Ireland now that the time wasting will be stopped, you might as well hang up them boots now Cluxton ;)

TheHermit (Kerry) - Posts: 6354 - 29/01/2016 13:49:57    1820359

Is it not up to the fourth official to implement this?

keeper7 (Longford) - Posts: 4088 - 29/01/2016 14:11:14    1820374

Yeah, why can't the clocked be stopped for any subs, free kicks, 45's etc?

Dubsfan28 (Dublin) - Posts: 2509 - 29/01/2016 14:20:27    1820379

I think games rarely should have 5/6+ minutes added on time. From a refereeing perspective "nothing good can come in the 6th minute of added on time" to quote several top referees ive heard speak on this issue.
1 minute for first half and at max about 3 minutes in the second bar extreme circumstances

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 29/01/2016 20:12:33    1820524

Ormond how does a standardised additional time makes sense, why not change the time of the first half to 36 and the second half to 38 that way with your thinking we won't need any additional time.

elvistheking (Galway) - Posts: 99 - 30/01/2016 08:07:47    1820579

I think games rarely should have 5/6+ minutes added on time. From a refereeing perspective "nothing good can come in the 6th minute of added on time" to quote several top referees ive heard speak on this issue.
1 minute for first half and at max about 3 minutes in the second bar extreme circumstances

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts:10802 - 29/01/2016 20:12:33 1820524

I have to say I think that probably snatches the award for the most redicioulous post that I have encountered on this forum as long as I'm on it. It makes no sense on so many levels that I cannot fathom how you could even put a collection of words together that would be any dafter.
If you put a chicken in a lab with a test tube and the Ebola virus it would probably make a better hand of coming up with a logical explanation as to how best tackle the problem.

SLLY (Dublin) - Posts: 463 - 30/01/2016 12:44:49    1820621

I have to say I think that probably snatches the award for the most redicioulous post that I have encountered on this forum as long as I'm on it. It makes no sense on so many levels that I cannot fathom how you could even put a collection of words together that would be any dafter.
If you put a chicken in a lab with a test tube and the Ebola virus it would probably make a better hand of coming up with a logical explanation as to how best tackle the problem.

SLLY (Dublin) - Posts:437 - 30/01/2016 12:44:49What's RIDICULOUS about the post? How does it not make sense? Ive heard this point and similar made by referees in several sports? Why do you need so much added on time? From a refereeing perspective you only need one minute or so at end of the first half and maybe two in the second. Why is so much more time needed?

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 30/01/2016 18:16:04    1820685

In fairness ormo between stoppages for frees, injuries, line balls, players deliberately time wasting, hawk eye checks Id say it would add up to at least 5 minutes.
It would be an interesting experiment to try out.

joncarter (Galway) - Posts: 2692 - 30/01/2016 18:47:34    1820696

In fairness ormo between stoppages for frees, injuries, line balls, players deliberately time wasting, hawk eye checks Id say it would add up to at least 5 minutes.
It would be an interesting experiment to try out.
joncarter (Galway) - Posts:2211 - 30/01/2016 18:47:34 In fairness jo cat why do you need 5 minutes added on time. Do you add more time if there has been line balls etc in injury time. No time should be added for lineballs unless delay to restart game is unnecessarily long.
Deliberate wasting time yes but in general injury time needs to be only 1 or 2 minutes
Ormond how does a standardised additional time makes sense, why not change the time of the first half to 36 and the second half to 38 that way with your thinking we won't need any additional time.
elvistheking (Galway) - Posts:88 - 30/01/2016 08:07:47Read my post again elvistheking. I didn't say anything about a standardised amount of injury time. In general there only needs to be a minute or two as "nothing good can occur in the 8th minute of injury time"

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 30/01/2016 19:46:43    1820707

Jo cat??? Aw man Ormo you have sure showed me. i wont mess with you again!!!!!
Anyway, my point is that i would at least like to see it tested. If the ball is only in play for 27/28 minutes of a 35 minute half, then 2/3 minutes injury time is not enough.
How long is "unnecessarily long" for a line ball anyway?

joncarter (Galway) - Posts: 2692 - 30/01/2016 19:51:50    1820712

It has been implemented very quickly because it is an eyesore on the game. Playing down the clock is done beyond the limits of sanity in the game now.

Donegalman (None) - Posts: 3830 - 30/01/2016 21:35:01    1820736

Jo cat??? Aw man Ormo you have sure showed me. i wont mess with you again!!!!!
Anyway, my point is that i would at least like to see it tested. If the ball is only in play for 27/28 minutes of a 35 minute half, then 2/3 minutes injury time is not enough.
How long is "unnecessarily long" for a line ball anyway?
joncarter (Galway) - Posts:2214 - 30/01/2016 19:51:5Don't be such a dick. Call me Ormond and leave it at that
The ball doesn't have to be in play for all of a game or a certain percentage. That the ball is only in play for 27/28 of 35 minutes doesn't automatically mean there has to be more than 1/2/3 minutes of added on time.

ormondbannerman (Clare) - Posts: 13473 - 30/01/2016 21:46:15    1820742