Dennie Wendt Portland, Ore. The time on Ben Olsen’s goal in the MLS Cup is listed as 48+. When did this annoying habit of listing injury time goals in this fashion start? If he had scored three minutes into the second half, would it also have been 48+? Did MLS Cup ’99 last 93 minutes? If it really did take place in the 48th minute of the first-half play (which I understand that it did not), then L.A. must surely have been robbed. A question of semantics, but it’s bothersome just the same. Mike Woitalla: I first encountered the plus-sign usage at the 1998 World Cup, and it’s really not that bad an idea — except that few people are accustomed to it. Ben Olsen’s goal came in the first half, in the 48th minute, because the referee added four minutes of stoppage time, as he is required to do for delays caused by injuries, goals, substitutions, etc. The plus sign is used to distinguish a goal scored three minutes into first-half stoppage time from one scored three minutes into the second half, which would be 48th minute without the plus sign. Traditionally, Olsen’s goal would have been reported in the scoring summary as occurring in the 45th minute. That’s why I say this new system, which FIFA has been advocating, is more specific. However, MLS compounded the confusion by changing its time-keeping method for the final. Before this year’s MLS Cup, MLS’s clock counted down and the referee would stop it — instead of adding time. Under the old MLS system, which we had four years to get used to, Olsen’s goal would have come with 1 minute left on the clock. Interestingly, this FIFA-plus sign method really isn’t catching on. FIFA uses it in its official stats, but European magazines tend to still call a goal scored three minutes into stoppage time at the end of a game a 90th minute goal. And so do we, at Soccer America Magazine. (If you have a question for a Soccer America Magazine editor, click “Q&A with SA Editors” in the left column of the home page under “Interactive.”)