Stuck In The Dark Ages

[oldgit]

I've just read a report on the BBC website that,once again,the rule makers have ruled out the use of goal line technology and video replays.The International Football Association Board voted as follows:

i) FOR.....The English and Scottish F.A's

ii) AGAINST........The Welsh and Irish F.A's and FIFA, who have four votes.Ironic that the Irish F.A. voted no after the Thierry Henry incident!

The Welsh F.A chief executive voted against because he was "worried that you end up with a stop start situation where you review all decisions and I don't see that as part of the game."

The Irish F.A. chief executive commented "we very much appreciate the human side of the game,debate and controversy."Pity most managers don't see it that way!

The board did,however, leave the door open for an extra official to be used behind the goal at a later date. This will be discussed at another meeting on 17-18 May.

Now,looking back in the BBC archives,this very point has been on the agenda since 2005 when they decided to use a ball with a micro chip in the Under-17's World Cup in Peru. It has been discussed and voted on a number of times since.It makes you wonder what they get up to at these meetings when the skirt around the same issue time and time again.It seems to me that they want the poor old referee to carry the can for any decision he makes without any outside interference.

[mrbojangles]

The sooner those old cronies get the <deleted> out of football, the better IMO.

One of the richest sports in the world and yet it lags behind Dwarf Tossing in the use of technology

[StevieH]

long may it continue.

[carmine]

long may it continue.

Lack of technology usage or Dwarf Tossing?

[smokie36]

Debate and controversy? How about plain wrong decisions which cost titles or see clubs relegated. What a muppet!

[Xangsamhua]

The "human side of the game,debate and controversy" is fine for amateur sport (the best kind of sport, really, and the only kind most of us will engage in), but in professional and international sport the technology is really necessary to ensure that justice prevails, even if injustice is unintended.

It also saves the crocodile tears when Sep Blatter has to apologise to the Australians and the Irish (and others?) for crucial errors of judgement .

[Sparkles]

In last nights game it took a whole 30 seconds to see a replay that the ball had indeed crossed the line. It takes referees at least 1 minute from any free kick near the box to get the players back the required distance and try to stop them encroaching. Who are these dinasours who are making these decisions do they have names ? They should be named and shamed

[mrbojangles]

but in professional and international sport the technology is really necessary to ensure that justice prevails, even if injustice is unintended.

Yep

In last nights game it took a whole 30 seconds to see a replay that the ball had indeed crossed the line. It takes referees at least 1 minute from any free kick near the box to get the players back the required distance and try to stop them encroaching. Who are these dinasours who are making these decisions do they have names ? They should be named and shamed

and yep again

Never had StevieH down as a Dinosaur until today. Must have been spawned from the loins of Blatter, poor sod

[oldgit]

The sooner those old cronies get the <deleted> out of football, the better IMO.

One of the richest sports in the world and yet it lags behind Dwarf Tossing in the use of technology

Do they have dwarf tossing in Saudi,BJ? Seriously though,I couldn't believe how long they had been discussing this until I checked. They go to too many meetings and not enough football matches.

[StevieH]

long may it continue.

Lack of technology usage or Dwarf Tossing?

oh both of course.

The "human side of the game,debate and controversy" is fine for amateur sport (the best kind of sport, really, and the only kind most of us will engage in), but in professional and international sport the technology is really necessary to ensure that justice prevails, even if injustice is unintended.

It also saves the crocodile tears when Sep Blatter has to apologise to the Australians and the Irish (and others?) for crucial errors of judgement .

'justice' can fuc_k off. football is about mistakes, by players and by officials. so long as they're honest mistakes and not bent ones, that's fine.

[redrus]

Agree with Steve.

Although, I think we should have four linesmen instead of two, they each look after a quarter and, can move along the the by line towards the goal. I don't want technology introduced, as I believe that the good (human) decisions and the bad ones make football the way it is and the great sport it is.

redrus

[StevieH]

Agree with Steve.

Although, I think we should have four linesmen instead of two, they each look after a quarter and, can move along the the by line towards the goal. I don't want technology introduced, as I believe that the good (human) decisions and the bad ones make football the way it is and the great sport it is.

redrus

i still disagree about the number of linesmen rus. this has only become a debate since there were 24 sky cameras at every ground. mistakes always happened, always will.

[mrbojangles]

Tell you what. Lets go back to the days when there were no TV cameras at all, eh. Is that far back enough to rid the game of all the Technology ? Some people just don't like change, even though they have been gradually experiencing changes.

I hope you guys still wring you clothes out in a mangle and cook your own bread in a clay oven.

[Mossfinn]

Do they have dwarf tossing in Saudi,BJ?

BJ is the Middle East Individual Champ, 2 years running

[mrbojangles]

Do they have dwarf tossing in Saudi,BJ?

BJ is the Middle East Individual Champ, 2 years running

How did you find that out. You know I never like to brag

[bkkjames]

Agree with Steve.

Although, I think we should have four linesmen instead of two, they each look after a quarter and, can move along the the by line towards the goal. I don't want technology introduced, as I believe that the good (human) decisions and the bad ones make football the way it is and the great sport it is.

redrus

i still disagree about the number of linesmen rus. this has only become a debate since there were 24 sky cameras at every ground. mistakes always happened, always will.

Stevie reminds me of the guy on his death bed refusing treatment because back in the day - that's how it was done.

[nev]

Dont think things need to change as stevie as stated if down to human error ok.

But i do think in the big games maybe the top ref's around europe could be used.

[LeungKen]

Quote from Rupert Murdoch's Rochdale & Oldham Observer :-

"Dwarf Tossing Goes Hi-Tech"

It was announced last night at the Rochdale & Oldham Dwarf Tossers Association's A.G.M. that all future world events would include the use of microchips. However if microchips weren't available, then micro-blackpuddings would be acceptable.

[StevieH]

Stevie reminds me of the guy on his death bed refusing treatment because back in the day - that's how it was done.

not at all james, some of the modern changes to the game have been very much for the better - the backpass rule and the ban on the tackle from behind to mention just a couple. video replays are just a bad idea. they're not a silver bullet which will suddenly remedy all the errors made in a game and they undermine the authority of the most important person on the pitch - the referee.

Dont think things need to change as stevie as stated if down to human error ok.

But i do think in the big games maybe the top ref's around europe could be used.

agree with this though, the standard of refereeing seems to be going downhill at a rate of knots. think a lot of refs nowadays get carried away with being the centre of attention when they should simply be professional and do their jobs.

[carmine]

Stevie reminds me of the guy on his death bed refusing treatment because back in the day - that's how it was done.

not at all james, some of the modern changes to the game have been very much for the better - the backpass rule and the ban on the tackle from behind to mention just a couple. video replays are just a bad idea. they're not a silver bullet which will suddenly remedy all the errors made in a game and they undermine the authority of the most important person on the pitch - the referee.

Dont think things need to change as stevie as stated if down to human error ok.

But i do think in the big games maybe the top ref's around europe could be used.

agree with this though, the standard of refereeing seems to be going downhill at a rate of knots. think a lot of refs nowadays get carried away with being the centre of attention when they should simply be professional and do their jobs.

One line of thought is to say it will undermine the referee, the other is that it will make his job much easier. I am convinced it would

[mrbojangles]

One line of thought is to say it will undermine the referee, the other is that it will make his job much easier. I am convinced it would

Nail on the head Carmine

I would imagine most refs don't like to make mistakes and when they look back at their errors, realise what a total prat they looked like and wished they had been given some form of aid (remember Graham Poll who gave a player 3 yellow cards). I would think they would embrace it, Umpires in Cricket use it as a tool to do thier job as effectively as possible.

[StevieH]

One line of thought is to say it will undermine the referee, the other is that it will make his job much easier. I am convinced it would

it wouldn't though would it? it would slow the game down, give players more leeway to question the referee's judgement (something which happens far too much already) and then naturally progress into a media-driven campaign for every little decision right down to throw-ins being adjudicated by TV replay. would utterly ruin the game.

[oldgit]

I think that the time has come to grab the bull by the horns and DO something about it. The law makers have been fannying around for too long. Why not test the technology in,say, a dozen games in the Premier League,not some obscure league in Outer Mongolia. Make it a real acid test. Hawk-Eye has been seen to be successful in rugby and cricket so that seems the logical next step rather than having a micro chip in a ball.Imagine the wear and tear that would have in a game involving Stoke or Bolton! If it is unsuccessful then at least we'll KNOW and it will stop all those armchair judges in the T.V studios from using the referee as a whipping boy for decisions he has to make in a split second but which takes them 10 minutes to analyse from all angles. I can't stand it when they collectively come to a decision and start patting each other on the back for their lack of foresight. It should stop managers and coaches from slagging off referees and acknowledge what a difficult job they have.

If it IS successful then it will remove any doubt and reduce the pressure on the man in the middle, as is the case in Rugby Union.

[smokie36]

Maybe the Irish and Welsh FA's simply can't afford the expense. Do they even have cameras at the grounds already?

[carmine]

One line of thought is to say it will undermine the referee, the other is that it will make his job much easier. I am convinced it would

it wouldn't though would it? it would slow the game down, give players more leeway to question the referee's judgement (something which happens far too much already) and then naturally progress into a media-driven campaign for every little decision right down to throw-ins being adjudicated by TV replay. would utterly ruin the game.

Fair enough what you are saying but its success is all about how it is used. Done properly the game will be slowed down only marginally. In other aspects it will quicken up.. Players might not try and cheat the ref so much, cut out SOME of the diving! This will automatically allow for more free flowing football

[StevieH]

One line of thought is to say it will undermine the referee, the other is that it will make his job much easier. I am convinced it would

it wouldn't though would it? it would slow the game down, give players more leeway to question the referee's judgement (something which happens far too much already) and then naturally progress into a media-driven campaign for every little decision right down to throw-ins being adjudicated by TV replay. would utterly ruin the game.

Fair enough what you are saying but its success is all about how it is used. Done properly the game will be slowed down only marginally. In other aspects it will quicken up.. Players might not try and cheat the ref so much, cut out SOME of the diving! This will automatically allow for more free flowing football

you actually want to use video replays for diving? are you serious?

[bkkjames]

One line of thought is to say it will undermine the referee, the other is that it will make his job much easier. I am convinced it would

it wouldn't though would it? it would slow the game down, give players more leeway to question the referee's judgement (something which happens far too much already) and then naturally progress into a media-driven campaign for every little decision right down to throw-ins being adjudicated by TV replay. would utterly ruin the game.

Fair enough what you are saying but its success is all about how it is used. Done properly the game will be slowed down only marginally. In other aspects it will quicken up.. Players might not try and cheat the ref so much, cut out SOME of the diving! This will automatically allow for more free flowing football

you actually want to use video replays for diving? are you serious?

I like the use of video to punish afterward. Gerrard and Torres won't like it but who really cares. JK

[StevieH]

I like the use of video to punish afterward. Gerrard and Torres won't like it but who really cares. JK

think judging players after the fact for something which you can usually not prove definitively is opening a massive, massive can of worms.

oh, and when does torres dive you cheeky get?

[carmine]

One line of thought is to say it will undermine the referee, the other is that it will make his job much easier. I am convinced it would

it wouldn't though would it? it would slow the game down, give players more leeway to question the referee's judgement (something which happens far too much already) and then naturally progress into a media-driven campaign for every little decision right down to throw-ins being adjudicated by TV replay. would utterly ruin the game.

Fair enough what you are saying but its success is all about how it is used. Done properly the game will be slowed down only marginally. In other aspects it will quicken up.. Players might not try and cheat the ref so much, cut out SOME of the diving! This will automatically allow for more free flowing football

you actually want to use video replays for diving? are you serious?

I did,nt say that. There are always however going to be certain instances, be it very very few, where the ref could get confirmation

[StevieH]

I did,nt say that. There are always however going to be certain instances, be it very very few, where the ref could get confirmation

fair enough. you know that the minute they use video replays for one incident then managers and players are going to call for it for every tiny little thing? besides which it's really hard to 'prove' diving or theatrics because they always look so much worse in slo-mo replay. i'd rather see harsher punishments for blatant cheating rather than trial by video.