*Official* English Football Season 2009-2010

[sledger]

In theory this is fine, but then what happens if the TV ref disagrees with the one field one, if a decision is overuled, there could be uproar. I mean, can you imagine, if at Old Trafford Rooney was brought down in slightly dubious circumstances, as in, the type of situation where you think it could be given, but equally it would be a bit soft or dodgy, and the TV ref reversed the call of the on field ref? There would be a massive backlash from the likes of Sir Alex and all the camel coat wearing, cigar chewing pundits who already do a great job of putting the boot into refs and saying how **** they are.

 

[GIMH]

Backlash from Sir Alex? ****ing do it, in that case

 

[sledger]

Backlash from Sir Alex? ****ing do it, in that case

Yeah, it would be funny, but people like that have a pull with the FA. Introducing such a system would also create a problem of setting a precedent, which would be near impossible to follow, and would end up with endless complaints about consistancy etc.. I do think it is in theory a fine idea, but introducing it would in all likelihood create more problems than it would solve.

 

[grecian]

Interesting article here. Actually it's not that interesting, but it does contain a wonderful comedy quote from Jack Walker, which is why I'm linking to it

 

[GIMH]

Haha, thanks for that mate, I enjoyed it

 

[sledger]

 

[Ikki]

In theory this is fine, but then what happens if the TV ref disagrees with the one field one, if a decision is overuled, there could be uproar. I mean, can you imagine, if at Old Trafford Rooney was brought down in slightly dubious circumstances, as in, the type of situation where you think it could be given, but equally it would be a bit soft or dodgy, and the TV ref reversed the call of the on field ref? There would be a massive backlash from the likes of Sir Alex and all the camel coat wearing, cigar chewing pundits who already do a great job of putting the boot into refs and saying how **** they are.

Better than it is now. Are we playing politics or trying to get as many rulings right as possible?

 

[sledger]

Better than it is now. Are we playing politics or trying to get as many rulings right as possible?

Well, yes again, in theory it would be better. But it would require quite an overhaul of the reffing system (well, it wouldn't really but I'm sure it would be made out as such), which arguably would not improve things a great deal. I agree with you, it would be best to try and get as many decisions right as possible, but I imagine this idea would be mainly rebutted because it would (supposedly) be a lot of work and reform for something that may only make minimal difference. Obviously there is no way to test out how effective it is without actually trying it, but I could see it being blocked for this reason, for better or worse.

 

[aussie]

Yea replays to penalties should have really been in the game already.

 

[aussie]

You could probably say Ashley Cole likes a phone up his arse.

Haa..still grudging big Ash for some odd reason i see..

 

[duffer]

Haa..still grudging big Ash for some odd reason i see..

Not sure it's odd tbh.

 

[Uppercut]

With Rooney's pen (and I don't have any gripes with it being given, it does look absolutely nailed-on in real time) the issue I have is that he was already going down before the contact. The Sky super slomo thingy clearly shows his knees buckling before the collision with Alumunia.

There would've been contact and it would definitely have been a pen had he not anticipated it beforehand, but however one jazzes it up it was a dive, just one done with rather more aplomb than Eduardo's.

The only way the ref could've known tho is having recourse to the same replay the whole country saw.

I don't think video evidence would clear anything up at all, because even on replay we can't agree on whether it was a penalty. You seem to think that because he fell a split-second early whilst being blatantly fouled it's not a penalty, and I disagree.

Goal-line technology is all I can see working at the moment. Football doesn't really have the stop-start mechanism of cricket, rugby or tennis. Am certainly open to suggestions though.

 

[Ausage]

I don't think video evidence would clear anything up at all, because even on replay we can't agree on whether it was a penalty. You seem to think that because he fell a split-second early whilst being blatantly fouled it's not a penalty, and I disagree.

Goal-line technology is all I can see working at the moment. Football doesn't really have the stop-start mechanism of cricket, rugby or tennis. Am certainly open to suggestions though.

It could be done. I mean in the Rooney example the game had been stopped anyway. Maybe the ref could make a decision, send it to the video ref to check it, and if nothing conclusive shows up (for example the Rooney case would be inconclusive, and the Eduardo case would be conclusive) the refs decision stands and the game moves on.

You wouldn't use it to clear up who should get a throw in, but penalties and decisions on goals are so important, I could see video being useful without being too detrimental to the flowing nature of the sport.

 

[sledger]

Haa..still grudging big Ash for some odd reason i see..

Because he has a phone up his arse.

 

[Uppercut]

It could be done. I mean in the Rooney example the game had been stopped anyway. Maybe the ref could make a decision, send it to the video ref to check it, and if nothing conclusive shows up (for example the Rooney case would be inconclusive, and the Eduardo case would be conclusive) the refs decision stands and the game moves on.

You wouldn't use it to clear up who should get a throw in, but penalties and decisions on goals are so important, I could see video being useful without being too detrimental to the flowing nature of the sport.

The game had stopped then, but just say the decision went upstairs and they decided it was a penalty... then later in the match, an identical situation occured in the United penalty box except for the fact that the ball stayed in play. Do you:

a) Stop the game in the middle of play, perhaps with United about to break, doing them (and the quality of the game itself) a horrid disservice if a penalty isn't awarded,
or,
b) Allow play to continue, effectively handing Arsenal a match-deciding disadvantage on the grounds that the ball didn't go out of play just after their penalty appeal, and nothing ore.

I say neither. I want technology that tells us when a goal has been scored, and I want fourth officials to have the ability to watch replays on a TV and inform the ref if (say) El Hadji Diouf is caught gobbing at someone. Penalty decisions, yet to find a way they can really work.

 

[Ausage]

The game had stopped then, but just say the decision went upstairs and they decided it was a penalty... then later in the match, an identical situation occured in the United penalty box except for the fact that the ball stayed in play. Do you:

a) Stop the game in the middle of play, perhaps with United about to break, doing them (and the quality of the game itself) a horrid disservice if a penalty isn't awarded,
or,
b) Allow play to continue, effectively handing Arsenal a match-deciding disadvantage on the grounds that the ball didn't go out of play just after their penalty appeal, and nothing ore.

I say neither. I want technology that tells us when a goal has been scored, and I want fourth officials to have the ability to watch replays on a TV and inform the ref if (say) El Hadji Diouf is caught gobbing at someone. Penalty decisions, yet to find a way they can really work.

I would assume in your scenario that the referee had reason to believe the second incident did not warrant a penalty. (as the game did not stop) Why not just leave it at that? Not every incident need be scrutinized, and I think going upstairs for every penalty shout would be to the detriment of the game.

As an aside I think we'd get far fewer penalty shouts if players knew that they were less likely to get away with a penalty they didn't deserve.

Besides in this scenario at least video technology has ensured that one of the two decisions was correct. The first incident is better scrutinized, and in the second incident the outcome is not any different than it would have been without video help.

 

[Johnners]

The game had stopped then, but just say the decision went upstairs and they decided it was a penalty... then later in the match, an identical situation occured in the United penalty box except for the fact that the ball stayed in play. Do you:

a) Stop the game in the middle of play, perhaps with United about to break, doing them (and the quality of the game itself) a horrid disservice if a penalty isn't awarded,
or,
b) Allow play to continue, effectively handing Arsenal a match-deciding disadvantage on the grounds that the ball didn't go out of play just after their penalty appeal, and nothing ore.

I say neither. I want technology that tells us when a goal has been scored, and I want fourth officials to have the ability to watch replays on a TV and inform the ref if (say) El Hadji Diouf is caught gobbing at someone. Penalty decisions, yet to find a way they can really work.

Agree with this.

Don't think it's fair, or even makes sense, to implement technology for Penalty decisions if you can only use it once play is stopped.

 

[Craig]

I would be in favour of the microchip in the ball so when it crosses the line of the goal it would let us know whether or not the ball has gone in the questionable goals/goal line clearances. Why this isn't in place is beyond me. However, TV replays wouldn't be practical for penalty decisions.

In other news, Southampton sign Papa Waigo on loan from Fiorentina.

 

[Uppercut]

I would be in favour of the microchip in the ball so when it crosses the line of the goal it would let us know whether or not the ball has gone in the questionable goals/goal line clearances. Why this isn't in place is beyond me. However, TV replays wouldn't be practical for penalty decisions.

In other news, Southampton sign Papa Waigo on loan from Fiorentina.

Largely just because the technology isn't good enough I believe.

 

[PhoenixFire]

What?

Are you saying that we can put man on the moon, but we can't use technology to tell whether a ball has crossed a line? You must be joking.