By The End Of 2011 . . . . . . ?

[DerekM]

What about limiting challenges by the Captain to two as they are doing in the Ashes?

[ruudboy]

I can't agree with the idea Jowser, that we leave some things up to the gods. That would be okay if everyone got the same breaks over the season. But there is strong evidence that suggests otherwise. I'm not for stoppng the game every few minutes. In fact I'm not for stopping the game at all. Here's my recommendation:

Couldn't be more simple.

1. we have a video ref positioned in the stands watching live feed of the game.

2. He/She has a direct line to referees earpiece. Ref can hear him/her, he/she can hear ref (ref would be miked like in rugby)

3. Neville brings down WBA player, ref hasn't seen it, game continues. (very important, appeals by players to video ref NOT ALLOWED, Nor can the ref stop the game and ask the video ref was he right. this is what my idea hinges on)

4. while the game continues the video ref sees that the referee should have given a penalty.

5. The video ref speaks to the ref. ie. "you should have given a penalty there Howard, Neville made the foul"

6. The ref says Thanks, blows whistle and says to the players, we are going back for a penalty to west brom.

I believe this idea is the answer. Remember, there are no multi stoppages. Game continues WITHOUT everyone standing around watching a video. There maybe should be a limit of 90 seconds after an incident. If the video ref hasn't intervened by then, the fans know that the ref has gotten it right and everyone moves on.

I say again, in my system there is no right of inquiry afforded to captains, players, etc. Nor can the ref stop play and go to the video. NOONE can speak to the video ref unless he/she speaks first.

AND: the video ref can only interfere in decisions regarding penalties, ball over the line? red/yellow cards. Nothing else. Not free kicks, corners etc. Basically video ref gets involved in 18 yard box decisions and if someone should be booked/sent off.

I have been arguing this for ages now. I have looked at all the alternatives and believe this is fair.

[bill.glentoran]

was that not the case for zidanes headbutt in the world cup final?im not sure but i thought that the officials didnt see it at the time

[jabdc5]

5. The video ref speaks to the ref. ie. "you should have given a penalty there Howard, Neville made the foul"

5a But in the meantime the ball is quickly booted to the other end of the field and Man U score

6. The ref says Thanks, blows whistle and says to the players, we are going back for a penalty to west brom, Man U goal disallowed.


I can just imagine Sir Alex of Redface's response to that....

[ruudboy]

can't remember Bill, would need to look it up.

what you think of the idea in principle?

[fishtoast]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabdc5

5. The video ref speaks to the ref. ie. "you should have given a penalty there Howard, Neville made the foul"
5a But in the meantime the ball is quickly booted to the other end of the field and Man U score
6. The ref says Thanks, blows whistle and says to the players, we are going back for a penalty to west brom, Man U goal disallowed.I can just imagine Sir Alex of Redface's response to that....

You took the words right out of my mouth and thats why video refs are a BIG NO for me apart from Goal line cameras,but as we know Blatter and co think of the worst things that football can use [say extra people behind the goal-rubbish for me] and say because its fifa etc that they work great when we have seen they dont work as good as they say they work for me

[jake robinson]

That really is the problem how is the game stopped to allow it to be checked. Agree got to have some sort of techonology to help. In other sports cricket etc, rugby the game can stop. In football it is really difficult when and how to stop it.

[jabdc5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jake robinson

In other sports cricket etc, rugby the game can stop. In football it is really difficult when and how to stop it.

that is the problem,in one of the games I watched over the weekend one team tried for over 5 mins to get a sub on, but there was no break in play and the ball never went out.

[ruudboy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jabdc5

5. The video ref speaks to the ref. ie. "you should have given a penalty there Howard, Neville made the foul"

5a But in the meantime the ball is quickly booted to the other end of the field and Man U score

6. The ref says Thanks, blows whistle and says to the players, we are going back for a penalty to west brom, Man U goal disallowed.


I can just imagine Sir Alex of Redface's response to that....

Hey jab,

thanks for the response.

with regards to 5a the answer is simple, the united goal wouldn't stand. As long as the video ref has contacted the onfield ref within 90 seconds of the neville foul to tell him that he should have penalised gary neville and awarded wba a penalty.

And as for Fergie or any other manager losing their rag, they couldn't really, as when the game is over they see that what the video ref has done was correct. If they kick off after a video ref has intervened and ordered a penalty . . . send them off, that will soften their coughs fairly lively.

We can't ignore that drastic change is needed in the game now that the stakes have become so high. We canot continue to have promotion, relegation, cup finals settled by a bad decision. We shouldn't hide behind worrying about anomalies either. Of course there would be teething problems, you just deal with them as they arise.

By the way this is what I signed on to FSI for,

reasonable interesting debate.

[deadlywill]

I'd like to see the FA give the goal line technology a go - to blazes what fifa or anyone else thinks - let's trial it in the premier league. We lead - the others follow. They will see very quickly it works and they will all want it. The heads of fifa are corrupt - i don't even have to check - i know it. I don't think it's that big a deal with delays - you can see how quickly the tv stations replay what just happened - it's the matter of a few seconds really. It gives a few moments of tension for the fans also.

The fault with video refs in general play could be when a referee awards a goal that on replay shows it wasn't a goal (say cause the player was offside or whatever)How long before commentators and the like will be calling offside into the equation etc like they do in cricket now. First they check whether it was a no ball or not ,then they check the line and height and whether it would have hit the stumps or not. Then if they're going to look at that they'll also be asked to look at for instance the penalty area when a corner is being taken and in my opinion if they start looking at that on replay then no-one will ever score a goal from a corner again with all the shennanigans goin on in there....na... just a simple video camera in the crossbar that shows whether the ball went over the line or not.

[scudd]

Proper old school leather footballs made from the arse of a cow, with pigs bladder inners and laces tying them closed!

And wooden tennis rackets!

[ruudboy]

muppets!

Donīt ever let me read any of you having a go at FIFA again!!!

because by the sounds of you, (deadly,scudd) you should be working for them.

if they brought wooden tennis rackets back tomorrow. Bjorn borg (aged 70ish!) would win wimbledon immediately, or in June anyway.

[jabdc5]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ruudboy

with regards to 5a the answer is simple, the united goal wouldn't stand. As long as the video ref has contacted the onfield ref within 90 seconds of the neville foul to tell him that he should have penalised gary neville and awarded wba a penalty.

The problem in your idea as I see it , is that while 90 secs is about right for the video ref to check the evidence it is far too long a period to have to then stop the game. Within 90secs of the Neville foul a goal could have been scored at the other end and the game could have kicked off again. You couldn't re-start after that whether the video evidence was right of not, it would be a farce.

[ruudboy]

people would get used to it jab

how could it be a farce? Firstly if your centre half was next to someone who went down in the box, you are biting your nails while the game moves on, biting your nails because you know there is a more scientific and fair method being put into practice behind the scenes. If your striker then bangs one in and the ref waves it off and calls it back, I donīt see how it can be farcical. Fair play and integrity are not farcical.

The ref has to return to the penalty incident, award it and then add the time on at the end of the game.

Hey, Iīm not saying my idea is perfect, but it is one Iīd love to see trialed for a tournament. I mean, donīt we want to see fair play in the game? How can we say itīs okay if a team has played well in a game, gotten into the box and had a player upended, and the ref doesnīt see it?

I donīt think it is okay. I would welcome anything other than the current system. It has become abundantly clear to me that however fit and alert refs are, the game has become so fast, as to make it nearly impossible for us to have faith in them to get the really big decisions right in games.

They need help. Yes, goal line cameras or sensors would be a good start. I would like to see penalty and red card/yellow card decisions included.

Not corners, free kicks and anything that would have the game stopped regularly. Just what I have outlined.

Thatīs all I have to say about it, itīs a good debate. One the clubs and refs and associations should be having also.

[bill.glentoran]

we went to see an ice hockey game recently and it just reminded me just how shite american sport really is,stop,start,stop again,go for a beer,go for a shit or whatever,come back and youve missed nothing,any doubts about decisions are scrutinised by officials checked and rechecked,and then theres football,blink and youve missed it,get into work on monday morning and its the main topic,two kids with a ball (jumpers for goalposts) can play it.when chelsea lost the champs league semi against liverpool with the much talked about ghost goal,nothing changed because you need goals to win games,but as they didnt get the bit between their teeth and score one themselves,fuck them!
the only change i think would be a good idea is that only the captain should be allowed to speak to the ref.