Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 19:24:00 GMT 1
How can the game have any shred of credibility when you look at the appeals that regularly fail... They even got away with John Shea missing out on any sort of punishment in lieu... www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31683163
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Mar 2, 2015 19:40:09 GMT 1
ref 'dealt' with the incident..
ok, he sent off the wrong player.. that can only be rescinded, you cant change the decision he made at the time..
retrospectively is when the ref does not see the incident or does not make a decision on it..
he saw this one, made the wrong call..
when we get rid of refs and tv makes all the calls, it will all be ok...will be a 100 penalties in every game and it will end up 5 a side for a bit first though...
|
|
jasonhand
Frank Worthington Terrier
Posts: 1,971
|
Post by jasonhand on Mar 2, 2015 19:49:47 GMT 1
The sooner we get away from this ridiculous concept that the referee dealt with at the time the better. It's not about pro portioning blame at the referee it's about the correct outcome on an incident in a game the referee may not have seen correctly. As I've mentioned before I've refereed in the past and that was for hungover ever so slightly over weight never beens. Refs need all the help they can ger
|
|
|
Post by Frankiesleftpeg on Mar 2, 2015 20:13:52 GMT 1
There's far too many sendings off in my opinion. It was a penalty so surely that is punishment enough.
|
|
|
Post by richhtfc on Mar 2, 2015 20:17:57 GMT 1
I think the sooner everyone realises that it's a just a game and one which has always had human decisions at its core the better. If we turn every decision into a black and white, video reviewed, incontestable definite the game will lose a lot of its charm. Wrong decisions happen, people are fallible, nobody dies from a contentious decision and if you remove them from the game you'll remove a lot of the talking points, grudges and memories which make the game so enjoyable.
|
|
|
Post by galpharm2400 on Mar 2, 2015 20:27:51 GMT 1
although I agree with the above..at least reffing by tv would mean we could sack off all the bleeding experts who pore over every decision made in a split second, whilst watching endless slo mo and 10 different camera angles???
refs decision is final or its not...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 20:29:04 GMT 1
Not shocked by this. Game being run by dinosaurs in the dark ages.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Mar 2, 2015 20:29:06 GMT 1
There's far too many sendings off in my opinion. It was a penalty so surely that is punishment enough. Agreed.... Why are the lawmakers trying to make it easier for there not to be an 11 v 11 contest ? It's a spectator sport and the game usually loses something when teams are reduced to less men
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 22:02:17 GMT 1
|
|
jb1
Junior Terrier
Posts: 88
|
Post by jb1 on Mar 2, 2015 22:18:01 GMT 1
The ref got it wrong, the FA have rescinded the red card for brown as he clearly was the wrong man, is that such a big deal? If Mr East had sent O'Shea off he would have been banned, so the question is, should O'Shea be retrospectively banned? I think you could look at every game and see several incidents where the ref gets it wrong and if the correct decision was made there would have been a sending off and a subsequent ban, I'm not sure that this is a path we should go down. Yes to looking at violent conduct retrospectively, like Jedinak's assault at the weekend, but surely we just have to accept that ref's will make mistakes and leave it at that. Football is played at a million miles an hour nowadays, even with replays mistakes will still be made. It's the lack of stoppages in football that make it so successful, no other sport packs as much action into the actual playing time, constantly second guessing referees is the biggest danger to this free flowing action. Anyone who watches NFL, Rugby League, Rugby Union or cricket, where replays are often used, will know just how much of an atmosphere killer these systems can be. let the ref's ref the game and then let's move on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2015 23:04:07 GMT 1
Those are fair points JB1...
I think video refs are good in the right sports and in the right context (limited decisions) - I guess it's just that normally for clubs below the radar this would have been brushed aside, yet the more airtime you get they tend to re-think things. 1 rule for one etc...
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 2, 2015 23:15:57 GMT 1
Not shocked by this. Game being run by dinosaurs in the dark ages. To rules laid down over a century ago.
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 2, 2015 23:20:37 GMT 1
I think the sooner everyone realises that it's a just a game and one which has always had human decisions at its core the better. If we turn every decision into a black and white, video reviewed, incontestable definite the game will lose a lot of its charm. Wrong decisions happen, people are fallible, nobody dies from a contentious decision and if you remove them from the game you'll remove a lot of the talking points, grudges and memories which make the game so enjoyable. Codswallop. Huge amounts of money at stake in the game nowadays, decisions need to be made accurately and correctly. The technology is there to help referees, it should be put into action.
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Mar 3, 2015 0:04:19 GMT 1
I think the sooner everyone realises that it's a just a game and one which has always had human decisions at its core the better. If we turn every decision into a black and white, video reviewed, incontestable definite the game will lose a lot of its charm. Wrong decisions happen, people are fallible, nobody dies from a contentious decision and if you remove them from the game you'll remove a lot of the talking points, grudges and memories which make the game so enjoyable. Codswallop. Huge amounts of money at stake in the game nowadays, decisions need to be made accurately and correctly. The technology is there to help referees, it should be put into action. Not sure what money has to do with it 3 pipe?! Big money exists in big business......but they make massive mistakes. Football is a spontaneous game at its best and part of that is the humanity of it - mistakes from players, managers and officials. That's why the top players are worshipped....they simply make fewer mistakes than the mortals don't they? Totally agree we should use technology for the really key decisions........but to me if you really want to improve the game, then start using video footage for blatant diving, cheating and thuggery and ban the guilty parties retrospectively. It doesn't alter the game when the incident was missed, but it will have players more concerned about their actions if they could dace a long ban afterwards surely?
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 0:21:36 GMT 1
Not sure what money has to do with it 3 pipe?! There's more at stake than there was 30/40 years ago. A bad decision could cost a club millions. Re the spontaneity, video technology is often cited as potentially slowing down the game. I'd argue what takes longer, a quick 10 second referral to a video ref or 2 minutes of captain arguing with ref, players argy bargying about, handbags, referee giving offenders a 'talking to' and still there's an underlying injustice that'll only fuel it all kicking off again. The game is getting ever quicker and it's making the referees look poorer. This season has been the worst I can ever remember. They need help.
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Mar 3, 2015 0:34:47 GMT 1
Not sure what money has to do with it 3 pipe?! There's more at stake than there was 30/40 years ago. A bad decision could cost a club millions. Re the spontaneity, video technology is often cited as potentially slowing down the game. I'd argue what takes longer, a quick 10 second referral to a video ref or 2 minutes of captain arguing with ref, players argy bargying about, handbags, referee giving offenders a 'talking to' and still there's an underlying injustice that'll only fuel it all kicking off again. The game is getting ever quicker and it's making the referees look poorer. This season has been the worst I can ever remember. They need help. More at stake? In financial terms yes, but overall I'm not so sure. Fair point re video technology - I have no issues with the big decisions (pens/goal or not a goal/last man sendings off etc).....what would happen though IMO is the same now as in cricket where the refs would look upstairs for almost all the decisions rather than give what they saw. Agree re the refs.......video won't help this lot out though! They have removed common sense from the game due to the financial implications so we get anodyne half wits who think the crowd have come to watch them not the players. Not helped by imbecilic assessors who put the fear of god into the guys and we get jobs worth buffoons far too often.
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 0:43:43 GMT 1
A lot of valid points there Shawsie. It would also help if they owned up when they've cocked it up. This Wes Brown wrong man thing is even more shocking by how the ref has tried to wriggle his way out of it. If the refs can't be 100% honest with themselves what hope is there?
I did mean more at stake financially, yes. A trophy is a trophy and will always be the same, indeed some trophies are believed to be worth less nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by pieeater on Mar 3, 2015 6:50:49 GMT 1
Codswallop. Huge amounts of money at stake in the game nowadays, decisions need to be made accurately and correctly. The technology is there to help referees, it should be put into action. Not sure what money has to do with it 3 pipe?! Big money exists in big business......but they make massive mistakes. Football is a spontaneous game at its best and part of that is the humanity of it - mistakes from players, managers and officials. That's why the top players are worshipped....they simply make fewer mistakes than the mortals don't they? Totally agree we should use technology for the really key decisions........but to me if you really want to improve the game, then start using video footage for blatant diving, cheating and thuggery and ban the guilty parties retrospectively. It doesn't alter the game when the incident was missed, but it will have players more concerned about their actions if they could dace a long ban afterwards surely? Personally I disagree though I take your point. I had rather people remembered it's a bloody game. Ref's decision final, end of. They cock up, so what? Human beings cock up. Go down the 'We must get everything right' route and we'll have court cases over refs' decisions in a matter of weeks. No thanks. edit: Sorry Shawsie, was 3pipe I was responding to... not sure why I quoted your post
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Mar 3, 2015 7:11:17 GMT 1
Of course goal line technology is a good thing. But it was the thin end of the wedge. The game in ten years will be tedious and tawdry with every incident analysed on the spot to the nth degree... Refs won't make any decisions and every decision will be made by the video screen.... In some South East asian stadium...Then someone will say " hang on wasn't it a better spectacle when refs used to ref And English teams used to play in England ?" ... Who cares about there being more money at stake ? If should be about trying to keep football as football
|
|
|
Post by richhtfc on Mar 3, 2015 9:04:56 GMT 1
So most people agree that the amount of money washing around the game, ridiculous wages, seat prices, transfer fees, etc is having a detrimental effect on the game. So what we should do is take the game increasingly seriously by removing human error, and introducing cameras and video jury's. That way we can make sure no decisions are wrong to protect a growing collective of very rich folk with more money then sense who are taking the game too seriously and might lose money? Good logic
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 9:16:48 GMT 1
Of course goal line technology is a good thing. But it was the thin end of the wedge. The game in ten years will be tedious and tawdry with every incident analysed on the spot to the nth degree... Refs won't make any decisions and every decision will be made by the video screen.... In some South East asian stadium...Then someone will say " hang on wasn't it a better spectacle when refs used to ref And English teams used to play in England ?" ... Who cares about there being more money at stake ? If should be about trying to keep football as football Why won't it be football anymore just because we're getting decisions right? 200 years on and The Luddites are still going strong. The naysayers for goal-line technology, don't hear a peep from them now.
|
|
|
Post by swissterrier on Mar 3, 2015 9:22:01 GMT 1
I'm pretty sure this is what the pundits on MotD predicted would happen.
However, what I don't understand is that in the past, If a player received a yellow card for an offence it can't be upgraded to a red afterwards, as the Ref had dealt with it. As O'Shea wasn't penalised for the tackle (afaik) why can't the red card be transferred to him?
Out of interest does anyone think that having the extra officials in European matches makes any difference to the overall standard of officialdom?
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 9:22:37 GMT 1
So most people agree that the amount of money washing around the game, ridiculous wages, seat prices, transfer fees, etc is having a detrimental effect on the game. So what we should do is take the game increasingly seriously by removing human error, and introducing cameras and video jury's. That way we can make sure no decisions are wrong to protect a growing collective of very rich folk with more money then sense who are taking the game too seriously and might lose money? Good logic That's exactly where we should be aiming. The money in the game you can't do owt about, what solutions are you offering up barring sticking your head in the sand. If some of the money knocking about in the game was fed into improving the officiating - which is in a dire state at present - that can only be a good thing. Are you guys really happy with referees who can't keep up with the pace of the game? I'm not. Can't believe I'm having to have this debate really.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Mar 3, 2015 9:29:00 GMT 1
Of course goal line technology is a good thing. But it was the thin end of the wedge. The game in ten years will be tedious and tawdry with every incident analysed on the spot to the nth degree... Refs won't make any decisions and every decision will be made by the video screen.... In some South East asian stadium...Then someone will say " hang on wasn't it a better spectacle when refs used to ref And English teams used to play in England ?" ... Who cares about there being more money at stake ? If should be about trying to keep football as football Why won't it be football anymore just because we're getting decisions right? 200 years on and The Luddites are still going strong. The naysayers for goal-line technology, don't hear a peep from them now. Goal line technology is black and white.... And fast.... If it's extended to every incident it will slow everything down. And refs will stop taking any responsibility Happy to be a Luddite mate
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 9:29:32 GMT 1
I'm pretty sure this is what the pundits on MotD predicted would happen. However, what I don't understand is that in the past, If a player received a yellow card for an offence it can't be upgraded to a red afterwards, as the Ref had dealt with it. As O'Shea wasn't penalised for the tackle (afaik) why can't the red card be transferred to him? Because the referee was deemed to have seen the incident. They can only change decisions retrospectively if the referee didn't see it. The system is antiquated and corrupt to fuck anyway, the FA being run on an old boy's network principle. But that's OK apparently because it gives us plebs something to talk about in the pub afterwards. Out of interest does anyone think that having the extra officials in European matches makes any difference to the overall standard of officialdom? No, they do pretty much nothing because they are told to do pretty much nothing.
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 9:42:52 GMT 1
Why won't it be football anymore just because we're getting decisions right? 200 years on and The Luddites are still going strong. The naysayers for goal-line technology, don't hear a peep from them now. Goal line technology is black and white.... And fast.... If it's extended to every incident it will slow everything down. And refs will stop taking any responsibility Happy to be a Luddite mate Why should it be extended to every incident? Why should it mean refs can't still make decisions in the majority of the game. It's about getting the big ones right. If it's instigated properly it will improve the game no end. Despite seeing first hand how video technology has speeded up the decision making process in one area of the game why state it will it slow everything down if applied to other areas? There is no logic there. Luddite, lovely romantic swashbuckling concept, but what did they ultimately acheive barring getting hung or sent off to Australia?
|
|
Htfc65
Junior Terrier
Posts: 93
|
Post by Htfc65 on Mar 3, 2015 9:59:20 GMT 1
The problem is the game is a lot faster and more skilful add to that all the cheating/kidology whatever you want to call it and the referee is onto a hiding to nothing. The referee definitely needs help in making key decisions i.e diving for a penalty , offside goals etc , because the game is faster the referee's arn't and only have the same thought time. These key decisions can be referred to the video ref whilst the cheating player is receiving treatment for a non existent injury or whilst the goalscoring team is celebrating a dubios goal. This wouldn't harm the game in anyway and make for a far better match.
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 10:06:55 GMT 1
The problem is the game is a lot faster and more skilful add to that all the cheating/kidology whatever you want to call it and the referee is onto a hiding to nothing. The referee definitely needs help in making key decisions i.e diving for a penalty , offside goals etc , because the game is faster the referee's arn't and only have the same thought time. These key decisions can be referred to the video ref whilst the cheating player is receiving treatment for a non existent injury or whilst the goalscoring team is celebrating a dubios goal. This wouldn't harm the game in anyway and make for a far better match.
|
|
|
Post by Chips Longhorn on Mar 3, 2015 10:07:49 GMT 1
Goal line technology is black and white.... And fast.... If it's extended to every incident it will slow everything down. And refs will stop taking any responsibility Happy to be a Luddite mate Why should it be extended to every incident? Why should it mean refs can't still make decisions in the majority of the game. It's about getting the big ones right. If it's instigated properly it will improve the game no end. Despite seeing first hand how video technology has speeded up the decision making process in one area of the game why state it will it slow everything down if applied to other areas? There is no logic there. Luddite, lovely romantic swashbuckling concept, but what did they ultimately acheive barring getting hung or sent off to Australia? 3 pipe.... You are entitled to your opinion but it feels like you are putting others down for theirs.... First the goal line... Then offside... Then penalties.. Then free kicks..... Why not 11 cameras to study jostling from corners ? I can't be bothered with it all personally... And as for " there is more money in the game now " argument ... So what ? It all goes into the players and agents obscenely fat wallets.... It's still a game of 11 vs 11 .. Best team usually wins... Players and officials drop the odd clanger.... That's how I prefer it.. If you don't that's fine.. I'm not criticising your opinion, I'm just not agreeing with it
|
|
|
Post by 3Pipe on Mar 3, 2015 10:14:52 GMT 1
It will happen, it might have some initial teething problems (it might not), but ultimately it will work and you will see I am right (as I was about the goal-line tech). It's a complete no-brainer to me. Referees need help - bottom line - not putting anyone down.
|
|