So what would you have done? You're Pat Horan and the whistle is clenched between your lips. Around you 35,000 people are baying and you know from the rhythm and flow of the game that you have been in the middle of something primal and wonderful between Clare and Galway.

Normal time is ebbing and there is nothing between the teams. A foul, a converted free, would push this epic over the edge; there might be no time for a comeback. To whistle gives every player a whole new afternoon. What would you have done?

On Sunday in Croke Park, Horan took the path which is becoming ever more well-trodden as each championship year passes. With Clare and Galway deadlocked after a gargantuan 70 minutes, he pared injury time down to five seconds and blew time. Conventional wisdom has it that he cut the match short by anything from one to three minutes.

The very last sequence of the play featured Clare's Frank Lohan bodychecking Galway's Ollie Canning and, at first, the thought was that Horan had whistled for a free that would have paved the way for the game's defining score. Instead, it was all up. Afterwards, there was much conjecture over whether or not the free would have been scored.

"I think it's important to remember that a free was never awarded," points out Paddy Collins, chairman of the referees committee. "There may have been a foul committed, but no free was ever given. If there had been, time would have to have been allowed for it to be taken."

So commonplace have drawn matches in Gaelic games become that if matches are tight going into the final few minutes, the prospect of an immediate full-time whistle if the scores are level on 70 minutes is seen as something of an inevitability. Another pay-day for GAA is the grumble.

But doesn't the inexactitude of the current timekeeping system force an unspoken burden on referees? Isn't there a tacit pressure placed on them to wring another occasion out of heavenly encounters such as Sundays?

"There is no official pressure placed on referees to whistle early on such occasions. A referee's reputation is not lessened in any way if he plays the time he deems right and a game is won with a late score. Nor is it enhanced if he ends the game with the scores level," says Collins.

"I think if we were to be honest, we have probably all blown time on games where the scores are level before sufficient injury-time has elapsed. The fact that the whole area of injury-time is such a grey area allows that latitude," commented one current inter-county referee who preferred to remain anonymous.

"In the high-profile games, the big televised matches, the pressure referees are under is enormous. The natural thing to do is to end it while the scores are level. But the point is that referees shouldn't have the power to do that. The entire area of injury-time needs to be reviewed and a more definite system implemented."

Only last Tuesday night, at the monthly referees' board meeting, a lengthy discussion took place about the whole issue of timekeeping. According to Collins, it is not a function they see as sacrosanct or as central to their overall function.

"I think all referees have an open mind on this. It's something that is discussed and we are amenable to suggestions. But at the moment the system involves the use of the stopwatch and referees do their best by that."

Brian White of Wexford, well established as one of the choice officials in the game, says he is extremely comfortable with the current system.

"I wear a stopwatch and an ordinary watch which I just allow to run. When the stopwatch reads 35 minutes, that is it, game over."

White reckons he has become so accustomed to keeping time while officiating that it wouldn't be particularly advantageous if he was relieved of that duty.

"I don't know if I'd like to see it happen, but I believe it will be implemented over the next few years in some way or another. The clock for the women's football final seemed to work very successfully. But I don't know that it would be sustainable at club level, I don't think you'd be able to get the personnel."

He is, however, unequivocal about his attitude to tight games.

"I prefer to see them concluded at the first time of asking. I think you're as well play the added time and if a team wins it, so be it. Part of the reason is that it's not easy going back to officiate replays. For instance, that game in Croke Park went well for Pat (Horan) yesterday, he gave a fine performance. But come Monday, it might be a different sort of game and more difficult to officiate for all sorts of reasons."

As Collins pointed out, after Sunday's game the media went to pains to highlight the inconsistency in time-keeping but neglected to evaluate the overall quality of Horan's performance in a very taxing match.

"I went into the dressing-room after him and he was drained, naturally enough. That was a great game out there on Sunday and I thought he controlled it very well. No one took the time to mention that.

"It's only human to feel pressure in situations like that. I thought Pat did a good job yesterday and it's unfortunate that has been overlooked," offered another prominent official, who again wished to remain nameless.

"I think we are on the way to having an independent system which will take the heat off the referee. But, you know, the element of not knowing exactly how much injury-time remains has always added great excitement to games for spectators. I wonder if that will be lost if the system changes?"