To add to this the discussion between Thatcher and the FA Chief Exec in the 80s:
Thatcher: 'We don't want football's hooligans in our society'
FA: 'We don't want society's hooligans in our football'
What I'm asking is, is it sport's place to bend to violent thugs? IMO it's not.
Sometimes you have to bend to compromise. Being absolutist doesn't help the problem either. Giving the thugs less to complain about does. It's a reality that unless you fingerprint or retinal ID all people entering the ground and refuse entry into the ground on that basis, there will be fights and riots. So unless you want to take the Orwellian approach, the sport will have to bend or accept that the riots and hooligans will be as much a part of the sport as the kick-off or bat and ball.
I agree with this but are you sure that all umpires are going to get it right all of the time??
Of course not nor do I expect them to. I just think that with this new technology if PROVEN to be accurate, the idiots would have less to genuinely complain about. Of course there are those who just look for reasons to riot and the ref isn't foremost in their mind but there's little that can be done about them under the present system.
Not all umpires are going to get it right all of the time. What about the "Human Element" that comes with umpires being human?? As an umpire myself, I can tell you that there are a hundred and one things an umpire must watch for on the field. It's not as easy as saying the umpires must not get it wrong and cannot have any help whatsoever.
Nah you missed my point. I wasn't saying that the umpires should be expected to get it right all of the time. I was saying that if people want higher standards of decisions then the means to do so should be provided to the umpires i.e. video technology and the like. This is provided the technology is as close to infallible as possible.
Until that day comes, let the umpires make ALL the decisions and accept that there WILL be mistakes. People seem to want a hybrid of both approaches where the 'human element' is left in the game but the mistakes are eradicated which doesn't make much logical sense and in practice has shown itself to be even less possible.
So either have the human element in the game entirely (i.e. NO third umpire etc.) and accept that there WILL be mistakes and that it's all part of the game etc.
OR MAKE SURE that no mistakes are possible using technology. This half-way approach that we have right now (where the technology can only be used on certain decisions and not others) is just stupid. APply the technology unilaterally or not at all is the crux of my point I guess.
