Just found out why it was originally added.

It was added in 1891 because of an incident which happened in a match between Stoke and Aston Villa.

Trailing 1–0 and with just two minutes remaining, Stoke were awarded a penalty. Villa's goalkeeper kicked the ball out of the ground, and by the time the ball had been recovered, the 90 minutes had passed and the game was over. Resulting in Villa winning 1-0 and the penalty not being taken.

You learn something every day.

Couldn't they just have used another ball.

Can you imagine if Alex Ferguson had been around then?

I wonder if these days a ref would have the guts to blow a final whistle just before a penna was taken, even if, technically, time was up.

was it george courtney who gave a corner and they scored from it but he said he had already blown for fulltime before it went in

Clive Thomas once did it in a World Cup match.

was'nt sure about who it was but i'am getting on and the memory is'nt what it was

Wasn't there an british ref who disallowed a goal in the World Cup because he had blown for time before the ball crossed the line.

Bloody hell beat me to it.

Isn't there something in the rules that says time has to be allowed for a penalty to be taken.
I'm not sure like.
Any refs out there????

That's one of my first World Cup memories, which is a bit sad. Sweden v Brazil in '78 I think.

Time is not up though. It's only up when the ball hits the net, so a goal is scored, or it's missed whether that going past post ,over or hitting bar, or the goalkeeper saving it.

He can blow his whistle once the goalkeeper has saved it,or hit woodwork and not allow any one to put rebound in.

But the penalty has to be taken.

The same thing happened to York about 8 years ago, I seem to remember. Someone hit a long ranger (think it was Barry Conlon) and was busy celebrating with his team-mates upon realising the ref had blew the full time whistle whilst the ball was in mid flight! Gutted!

It always annoys me when you see in the paper that someone scored in the 93rd minute or whatever as the game is 90 mins long and the added time is to make it up to 90 mins of playing time.

I don't even like the 90+ 3mins they use as well because it means Jack if you don't know how much added time there was anyway. It's 90 minutes and that's that.

I don't know why it annoys me it just does............help me off this soap box someone will you

I remember a PL game - Liverpool v Everton I think - where the keeper kicked the ball straight at the back of Duncan Ferguson and it bounced back into the net but the ref blew for half time before it hit the net and didn't count.

That's an interesting point, tim. I never thought of it in that way before.

On the other hand it'll irritate me too, now, every time I see it.

Frank Reid?

Sure that incorrect as cant remember it being in the law book, more like an un-written rule that ref's just do.

According to Bob (above), the penalty has to be taken. Who's going to volunteer to look up t'rules?

I like the Rugby Union system where the ref calls the clock off and back on for stopages and it counts up to the alloted 80 minutes. When it reaches 80 minutes the play continues to the next breakdown in play and the game is over unless its a penalty (or direct free kick in the case of football). Sensible and fully transparent. Even Alex Ferguson might find it difficult to complain about that system.