Football
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
can't get on the golf course this morning so i thought i'd have a pop at my favourite topic, officiating in big football matches.
firstly lets get the goal that wasn't given to utd out of the way.
i don't hang any blame on the linesman for that because the speed that it occured at allied to the fact that the defenders foot was moving forward as he cleared it would have given him the impression that the ball hadn't crossed the line, he would have been guessing at best, and the fact is that officials shouldn't have to make those calls as technology is more than capable of clearing those situations up in a matter of seconds.
i watched the west ham/chelsea game live on tv.
in the first half atkinson dissallowed a west ham goal that was technically a foul, but i would venture wouldn't be given in the vast majority of cases. he then goes on to allow one in the second half were the attacker was all over the defender and would be dissallowed nine times out of ten.
surely such decisions should not be decided on the whim of a referee, and if they want to start "cleanig up" what goes on in the box that's fine with me, but surely they ought to try and achieve something approaching a consistent attitude to such offences.
i watched the city everton on a stream, and quite frankly was amazed at the inconsistency shown towards contact in that game. it was as if probert was assesing challenges with a "mythical coin toss" as to whether he would penalise them or not, and climaxed with him awarding city a pen for the most innocous challenge by fellani when there were two worse challenges by city players occuring simultaneously.
to my mind there's far too many occasions where match changing situations are being decided by referees on a whim, and the inconsistency of approach from ref to ref is bad enough, but when individual referees are showing inconsitancy with challenges in the same game it's defineatly time to bring in whatever technology is required to help officiate games at the top level.
firstly lets get the goal that wasn't given to utd out of the way.
i don't hang any blame on the linesman for that because the speed that it occured at allied to the fact that the defenders foot was moving forward as he cleared it would have given him the impression that the ball hadn't crossed the line, he would have been guessing at best, and the fact is that officials shouldn't have to make those calls as technology is more than capable of clearing those situations up in a matter of seconds.
i watched the west ham/chelsea game live on tv.
in the first half atkinson dissallowed a west ham goal that was technically a foul, but i would venture wouldn't be given in the vast majority of cases. he then goes on to allow one in the second half were the attacker was all over the defender and would be dissallowed nine times out of ten.
surely such decisions should not be decided on the whim of a referee, and if they want to start "cleanig up" what goes on in the box that's fine with me, but surely they ought to try and achieve something approaching a consistent attitude to such offences.
i watched the city everton on a stream, and quite frankly was amazed at the inconsistency shown towards contact in that game. it was as if probert was assesing challenges with a "mythical coin toss" as to whether he would penalise them or not, and climaxed with him awarding city a pen for the most innocous challenge by fellani when there were two worse challenges by city players occuring simultaneously.
to my mind there's far too many occasions where match changing situations are being decided by referees on a whim, and the inconsistency of approach from ref to ref is bad enough, but when individual referees are showing inconsitancy with challenges in the same game it's defineatly time to bring in whatever technology is required to help officiate games at the top level.
Show More
As far as I see it the way forward is simple. Any goal/penalty/potential red card can be reviewed if any player, official or manager thinks there is some controversy there. It takes about 7 seconds. When the video evidence is looked at, if there is good reason to think the on field ref got it wrong the decision is changed accordingly. If there is any doubt the on field decision stays.
Easy.
Easy.
Any goal/penalty/potential red card can be reviewed if any player, official or manager thinks there is some controversy there
I think it would have to be captain only and importantly, as in tennis and cricket, a limit to the number of incorrect reviews
I think it would have to be captain only and importantly, as in tennis and cricket, a limit to the number of incorrect reviews
Maybe there should be a lip-reader on hand as well, to adjudicate on any claims of racism or homophobia?
You’d have to limit the number of challenges imo.
Ultimately though, I’m not in favour of goal-line technology.
Suppressing the rage following Pedro Mendes’ goal at Old Trafford has been quite a character-building exercise.
You’d have to limit the number of challenges imo.
Ultimately though, I’m not in favour of goal-line technology.
Suppressing the rage following Pedro Mendes’ goal at Old Trafford has been quite a character-building exercise.
as much as i agree with marychain, they've resisted the most obvious technology until now, there's not a cat in hell's chance that they'll extend it to anything over than goal-lin tech. Once Sepp goes, you have to assume Michel gets the post. We're doomed with that garlic muncher at the helm.
it seems to me that it's absolutely ridiculous that the most popular game in the world continues to bury it's head in the sand, whereas all other major sports have embraced technology wherever they think that human error can be minimized ,thus doing all they can to protect the integrity of the result.
i think its the consistency issue that prevents video evidence being used as some incidents just are not clear, even on video
they need to get 100% certainty before video evidence is introduced
they need to get 100% certainty before video evidence is introduced
Trouble is football doesn't have a natural break, for instance
if a ball is cleared off the line, when do they have a look at
the video evidence?
if a ball is cleared off the line, when do they have a look at
the video evidence?
Video evidence isn't used because it would threaten the billion pound industry of match flexing. Rules change every year yet there are lots of unfair instances in every game that always effect the natural progression towards finding the true result.
watching that game last night we knew within seconds that man u had a perfectly good goal dissallowed.
just needs somebody to blow in the refs ear.
just needs somebody to blow in the refs ear.
...and stop play to have a look? What happens if Reading,
in the mean time, go up the other end and score?
in the mean time, go up the other end and score?
what happens if reading go up the other end and score?
well obviously that goal is dissallowed because instead of mounting an attack they should have been kicking off.
as regards the other incidents i cited they were followed by a stoppage in play so the incident could be reviewed very quickly, and if there was reaon to overturn the refs decision it would be done, if it was marginal the refs origianl ruling stands.
well obviously that goal is dissallowed because instead of mounting an attack they should have been kicking off.
as regards the other incidents i cited they were followed by a stoppage in play so the incident could be reviewed very quickly, and if there was reaon to overturn the refs decision it would be done, if it was marginal the refs origianl ruling stands.
In instances such as when Suarez scored in injury time against Everton and play went dead then video must be used. The referees decision must be as normal so when he does stop play for penalty or blows to disallow a goal then a challenge can be used by one of the teams if they choose to do so. Basically things could be tightened up without any increases instoppages of game. There would still be mistakes and things to argue over but this would become less so and the referees would stick out more with bad decisions.
Also why not have 4 linesmen so 2 would be able to call the same decisions taking out the ' refs view was blocked ' excuse. Goal line technology coming in for that little flaw in the game.
Also why not have 4 linesmen so 2 would be able to call the same decisions taking out the ' refs view was blocked ' excuse. Goal line technology coming in for that little flaw in the game.
newc v wigan
another game ruined by a dreadfull decision by a dopey referee
another game ruined by a dreadfull decision by a dopey referee
mexicano, Gary Neville looked at it about 20 times and still
couldn't make up his mind whether it was a penalty or not, yet
you want to blame the referee for a 'dreadful decision'. IMO
having watched it a few times the ref should have given the
defender the benefit of the doubt. He gave a pen, sent the
player off, who will now be suspended ! It's over the top.
couldn't make up his mind whether it was a penalty or not, yet
you want to blame the referee for a 'dreadful decision'. IMO
having watched it a few times the ref should have given the
defender the benefit of the doubt. He gave a pen, sent the
player off, who will now be suspended ! It's over the top.
Supernap is right.
You can have your goal-line technology, you can examine every decision, you will still be debating that Man City penalty on Saturday.
I think you will kill football the day you stop the game to see if the ref was right.
Essentially, you are advocating the creation of a new game. I oppose you, because I don’t think that new game will be better.
I accept Roy Carroll’s own goal, and Lampard’s against Germany. And that horrible little bar steward’s hand-ball. Those moments shape one’s life.
Football cannot be clinically dissected.
Sometimes the referee is wrong. Get over it.
You can have your goal-line technology, you can examine every decision, you will still be debating that Man City penalty on Saturday.
I think you will kill football the day you stop the game to see if the ref was right.
Essentially, you are advocating the creation of a new game. I oppose you, because I don’t think that new game will be better.
I accept Roy Carroll’s own goal, and Lampard’s against Germany. And that horrible little bar steward’s hand-ball. Those moments shape one’s life.
Football cannot be clinically dissected.
Sometimes the referee is wrong. Get over it.
"referees and consistency"
Referees are consistent this season: they're consistently giving Everton fúck all.
:: Two perfectly good goals against the Mags disallowed
:: Two good penalty shouts at Reading
:: Penalty not given against Arsenal
:: The penalty at City on Saturday
:: Joke of a red card for Pienaar at QPR (which meant he missed the derby)
:: Three good penalty shouts at Wigan before we got one when two players were fouled
And before you mention Suarez's "goal" in the derby, he should have been off for trying to break Distin's ankle 15 minutes earlier.
Referees are consistent this season: they're consistently giving Everton fúck all.
:: Two perfectly good goals against the Mags disallowed
:: Two good penalty shouts at Reading
:: Penalty not given against Arsenal
:: The penalty at City on Saturday
:: Joke of a red card for Pienaar at QPR (which meant he missed the derby)
:: Three good penalty shouts at Wigan before we got one when two players were fouled
And before you mention Suarez's "goal" in the derby, he should have been off for trying to break Distin's ankle 15 minutes earlier.
Regards penalties, referees can do two things. (1) They can
award a penalty when it's not or (2)They can refuse to award
a pen when it's thought to be. They mainly chose the latter
because it's less controvential is quickly forgotten, and
eliminates being fooled by simulation also the first option
carries such heavy retribution, a penalty awarded, player
sent off, suspension etc. I was more than surprised that he
awarded the pen last night so he must have been absolutely
certain an offence had been committed. For that reason I think
it was (probably) the correct decision.
award a penalty when it's not or (2)They can refuse to award
a pen when it's thought to be. They mainly chose the latter
because it's less controvential is quickly forgotten, and
eliminates being fooled by simulation also the first option
carries such heavy retribution, a penalty awarded, player
sent off, suspension etc. I was more than surprised that he
awarded the pen last night so he must have been absolutely
certain an offence had been committed. For that reason I think
it was (probably) the correct decision.
did the lino have any input into the decision
2 wigan players very nearly got themselves sent off after the penalty
for some very agressive confrontation of said linesman
we had more or less the same view, but from a raised position, and it looked a penalty
to us
2 wigan players very nearly got themselves sent off after the penalty
for some very agressive confrontation of said linesman
we had more or less the same view, but from a raised position, and it looked a penalty
to us
Its really easy. You dont stop the game, you wait until the next time the ball goes out. And the decision is only changed if there is good reason to think the on field ref got it wrong. If there isnt, or its only 50/50 or debatable in any way, you leave it with the on field ref's original decision.
That way, you get rid of the howlers, which has to be the main aim.
Last night's one is a different case entirely, namely that the 'professional foul' rule of an automatic red card and a free kick (or penalty) is unsatisfactory in certain scenarios.
In the case of last night, where the team who commit the foul get a penalty against them, a man sent off and a suspension, is total overkill.
The other scenario is the one where late on, a similar offence takes place outside the box and a red card and a free kick is not enough of a punishment.
imo in all 'preventing a goalscoring opportunity cases', inside and outside the box, a better punishment would be a yellow card+penalty.
That way, you get rid of the howlers, which has to be the main aim.
Last night's one is a different case entirely, namely that the 'professional foul' rule of an automatic red card and a free kick (or penalty) is unsatisfactory in certain scenarios.
In the case of last night, where the team who commit the foul get a penalty against them, a man sent off and a suspension, is total overkill.
The other scenario is the one where late on, a similar offence takes place outside the box and a red card and a free kick is not enough of a punishment.
imo in all 'preventing a goalscoring opportunity cases', inside and outside the box, a better punishment would be a yellow card+penalty.
i think you have to be a rather narrow-minded individual if you cant understand why refs give most decisions, even if you dont agree with them....it's the rare occasions when you cant fathom why or when they apply the rules incorrectly (ie good percentage of handball decisions) are the ones to get uppity about
The game is simply too quick to consistently allow for broad reviews. Perhaps the moaners and whingers should get their heads around the fact that it is a game and just grow up instead of constantly slinging their toys out of their prams.
it's not a case of throwing ones toys out of the pram. it's all about the integrity of the result.
last nights incident is a prime example. i reckon if you gave that ref 10 identical situations he'd maybe award a pen about half the occasions .
the fact is it was such a close call, and the punishment so great [automatic red if he gives the pen]that it can't be allowed to be decided on a whim.
as was stated gary neville looked at it umpteen times in slow mo' and was still loathe to call it one way or another.
IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IF HE'S NOT SURE THE REF SHOULD NOT ACT.
because he'd virtually decided the outcome of the match on an "iffy" call.
such decisions decide matches,titles, and relegations.
in any other major sport it would have been reviewed.
that was the third match i watched live over the weekend, and in each game the ref made a call that potentially effected the result.
AND THAT AINT RIGHT.
last nights incident is a prime example. i reckon if you gave that ref 10 identical situations he'd maybe award a pen about half the occasions .
the fact is it was such a close call, and the punishment so great [automatic red if he gives the pen]that it can't be allowed to be decided on a whim.
as was stated gary neville looked at it umpteen times in slow mo' and was still loathe to call it one way or another.
IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IF HE'S NOT SURE THE REF SHOULD NOT ACT.
because he'd virtually decided the outcome of the match on an "iffy" call.
such decisions decide matches,titles, and relegations.
in any other major sport it would have been reviewed.
that was the third match i watched live over the weekend, and in each game the ref made a call that potentially effected the result.
AND THAT AINT RIGHT.
In F1 they review and either punish or call it a 'racing incident' and move on.
Last night at NUFC it was a 'football incident'. 2 players running full tilt towards the ball. One fell over.
Refs have an impossible job. The rest of us are sat still, heartbeats normal, looking at the game from a lofty camera angle with no fans or players shouting at us.
FIFA, UEFA, the FA, the Premier League and the fans EXPECT these blokes to run miles, head spinning, (to see it all), hearts racing, ears burning, legs throbbing and STILL call it right every time.
Ok...........
Last night at NUFC it was a 'football incident'. 2 players running full tilt towards the ball. One fell over.
Refs have an impossible job. The rest of us are sat still, heartbeats normal, looking at the game from a lofty camera angle with no fans or players shouting at us.
FIFA, UEFA, the FA, the Premier League and the fans EXPECT these blokes to run miles, head spinning, (to see it all), hearts racing, ears burning, legs throbbing and STILL call it right every time.
Ok...........
that's the point injera
hence the need for some video help imo.
hence the need for some video help imo.
kenilworth 02 Dec 12 14:05
...and stop play to have a look? What happens if Reading,
in the mean time, go up the other end and score?
mexicano 02 Dec 12 14:09
what happens if reading go up the other end and score?
well obviously that goal is dissallowed because instead of mounting an attack they should have been kicking off.
as regards the other incidents i cited they were followed by a stoppage in play so the incident could be reviewed very quickly, and if there was reaon to overturn the refs decision it would be done, if it was marginal the refs origianl ruling stands.
If having made all 3 substitutes, a Reading player injures himself in scoring this goal. What happens then? Do Reading play with a man less or are they able to make a 4th substitution?
...and stop play to have a look? What happens if Reading,
in the mean time, go up the other end and score?
mexicano 02 Dec 12 14:09
what happens if reading go up the other end and score?
well obviously that goal is dissallowed because instead of mounting an attack they should have been kicking off.
as regards the other incidents i cited they were followed by a stoppage in play so the incident could be reviewed very quickly, and if there was reaon to overturn the refs decision it would be done, if it was marginal the refs origianl ruling stands.
If having made all 3 substitutes, a Reading player injures himself in scoring this goal. What happens then? Do Reading play with a man less or are they able to make a 4th substitution?
is that supposed to be a reason against technology?
surely you can do better than that
?
surely you can do better than that
?
it's all about the integrity of the result.
.. in which case how many decisions do we review;Corners/Throw ins/free kicks?
Footballers themselves appeal for set pieces that they know are not in their favour. Do we send off players for cheating every time that is reviewed and shown that they are wrong? It's a bit of a sticky wicket this,especially if we are looking for consistency..
.. in which case how many decisions do we review;Corners/Throw ins/free kicks?
Footballers themselves appeal for set pieces that they know are not in their favour. Do we send off players for cheating every time that is reviewed and shown that they are wrong? It's a bit of a sticky wicket this,especially if we are looking for consistency..
So when would the incident last evening be looked at? The referee called a pen
and everything carries on, as it did. But if he hadn't called a penalty, the
ball is in play and when would it be looked at, remembering that no
offence has been committed according to the referee? An 'offence' is not an
offence unless the referee or linesman call it. Who and when does someone
decide otherwise?
and everything carries on, as it did. But if he hadn't called a penalty, the
ball is in play and when would it be looked at, remembering that no
offence has been committed according to the referee? An 'offence' is not an
offence unless the referee or linesman call it. Who and when does someone
decide otherwise?
If Gary Neville can't call it after 20 views he's in the wrong job
An obvious free kick anywhere on the pitch, denies a goal scoring chance too
An obvious free kick anywhere on the pitch, denies a goal scoring chance too
It can take max a minute to conclude an incident is inconclusive. Mexicano is right, to rid glaring mistakes it can take 20 seconds .
What happens if a penalty shout is reviewed 5 minutes later, and in the meanwhile the penalty taker has been red carded
Will he be allowed to take the penalty before leaving the pitch ?
As he would have done if it had been awarded straight away
Will he be allowed to take the penalty before leaving the pitch ?
As he would have done if it had been awarded straight away
kenilworth
obviously, as in cricket, there would be a bedding in period.
it seems to me that [as in the afl] all scoring incidents should be reviewed.[this would negate the linesmen from having to officiate offside goals as when they're really tight they're guessing at best].
smaller calls throw ins corners etc ,and non controversial "calls" don't really need a review as the defending team know the position and can defend the situation.
then maybe a facility for a limited number of challenges.
any debatable try, wicket, boundary,service ace, home run, is looked at by officials in other sports.
why have they done this?
to protect the integrity of the result, that's why.
if it can happen in other sports there's no reason why it shouldn't in the most popular sport on the planet.
obviously, as in cricket, there would be a bedding in period.
it seems to me that [as in the afl] all scoring incidents should be reviewed.[this would negate the linesmen from having to officiate offside goals as when they're really tight they're guessing at best].
smaller calls throw ins corners etc ,and non controversial "calls" don't really need a review as the defending team know the position and can defend the situation.
then maybe a facility for a limited number of challenges.
any debatable try, wicket, boundary,service ace, home run, is looked at by officials in other sports.
why have they done this?
to protect the integrity of the result, that's why.
if it can happen in other sports there's no reason why it shouldn't in the most popular sport on the planet.
donny; that is ridiculous.
can't you come up with anything better than that?
can't you come up with anything better than that?
It's a simple question that will require a ruling
If you can't see that fair dos
If you can't see that fair dos
no mate it's a false premise.
because if there was a review it would happen immediatly.
once the game restarts "all bets are off".
because if there was a review it would happen immediatly.
once the game restarts "all bets are off".
The big, big problem and hard to overcome, is that
soccer doesn't have a natural break like cricket or
rugby.
soccer doesn't have a natural break like cricket or
rugby.
No
A penalty is claimed, but the ref misses it and plays on, 5 minutes later something happens, the whistle is blown, play stops and a review takes place, video ref awards the penalty
Non of the crowd has a clue what's going on
Ref sends off a player who then wants to take the penalty
A penalty is claimed, but the ref misses it and plays on, 5 minutes later something happens, the whistle is blown, play stops and a review takes place, video ref awards the penalty
Non of the crowd has a clue what's going on
Ref sends off a player who then wants to take the penalty
rugby dosen't have a natural break. but they still manage to review all scoring plays.
if it appears that a touchdown has been scored even though the ball has broken loose and been gathered by the defending team the game is stopped and an adjudication is made.
if it appears that a touchdown has been scored even though the ball has broken loose and been gathered by the defending team the game is stopped and an adjudication is made.
Video refs for off-sides and touchline only. Anything else is down to interpretation and that can differ from ref to ref and not always clear cut or obvious from replays.
mexicano
it's all about the integrity of the result.
On the contrary. If it is all about anything it is the integrity of the game and that is being undermined by whingers and moaners on and off the pitch.
it's all about the integrity of the result.
On the contrary. If it is all about anything it is the integrity of the game and that is being undermined by whingers and moaners on and off the pitch.
but donny the review could only be done immediatly [either at the refs request, or a challenge should we go that way] if the game progresses there's no review.
there may well be the odd one that slips under the net, but that happens occasionally in the forementioned sports, but it's got to be better than where we are now.
there may well be the odd one that slips under the net, but that happens occasionally in the forementioned sports, but it's got to be better than where we are now.
mexicano
it's all about the integrity of the result.
On the contrary. If it is all about anything it is the integrity of the game and that is being undermined by whingers and moaners on and off the pitch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
see here we go again.
so if we stop questioning refereeing howlers, will everything be ok?
of course nothing would change.
we have the technology now that we didn't have before, by nuetrelisinf officials mistakes it would make it fairer, and stop officials having an inordinate effect on the result.
the opposing point of view is tending towards a "luddite" attitude.
it's all about the integrity of the result.
On the contrary. If it is all about anything it is the integrity of the game and that is being undermined by whingers and moaners on and off the pitch.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
see here we go again.
so if we stop questioning refereeing howlers, will everything be ok?
of course nothing would change.
we have the technology now that we didn't have before, by nuetrelisinf officials mistakes it would make it fairer, and stop officials having an inordinate effect on the result.
the opposing point of view is tending towards a "luddite" attitude.
i find it incredible that somebody thinks the integrity of the result is in jeopardy because people question the effects of decisions made by people who's sole purpose in being is to try and make sure fair play prevails.
Fair enough, I misread the proposal of a review at next break being your proposal
My problem is the quality of camera, and you'd need about 12 super slow mo at each match, get them and then you're talking
My problem is the quality of camera, and you'd need about 12 super slow mo at each match, get them and then you're talking
donny
they have the cameras now, the review would be quick, and if it were inconclusive you go with the refs original decision.
they have the cameras now, the review would be quick, and if it were inconclusive you go with the refs original decision.
The main problem is the incredible pressure that the officials are put under by the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd's yob players.
Well the linesman and the ref included (for not over ruling the decision) should be shot in the Malaga game.
cahillisgod 04 Dec 12 20:33 Joined: 06 Apr 04 | Topic/replies: 9 | Blogger: cahillisgod's blog
The main problem is the incredible pressure that the officials are put under by the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd's yob players.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it was in danger of being a half decent debate.
there's always at least one
The main problem is the incredible pressure that the officials are put under by the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd's yob players.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
it was in danger of being a half decent debate.
there's always at least one
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539