loosing interest in the game.

[ConnectionNotGuaranteed]

make my observation even more valid.or don't you see that?

Saying that people who oppose your view "ain't that bright" and calling them "idiots" damages any credibility people may have of your views, rather than making them seem more valid.

FWIW. I am in mixed feelings about the use of technology and how far it should go so that it is effective in getting the right decisions made but in the same breath, not ruining the game. I suppose we won't know until they trial it (and maybe tweak it a bit) or trial it and throw it into the failed ideas bin.

[StevieH]

more sponsorship real estate to sell, more sponsored replays on TV, even bet on the outcome of the decision query in-game with bet365 and their mates. more revenues for the 'product'.

basically i think anyone who wants to undermine referees and have matches refereed by sky sports or robbie <deleted> savage from a tv studio is a bloody idiot really.

How is it undermining referees?

There will be an official in the stand doing the reviews who will also be a referee ...really dont know where you pulled Sky Sports and Robbie Savage from starting to sound like a tabloid with your imagination.Keep to the facts.

it by definition undermines the referee. because the final decision should be his and his alone. if you're going to start officiating from the stand you'll end up not needing one on the pitch. they get 95% of decisions correct. if only players scored as highly.

All other sports that use technology still have the ref/umpire on the pitch and I have never heard of them feeling undermined, why would football be any different? The ref would still be required to officiate the game and technology only used to assist the referees in making the right decision.

Try as I might, I can't find that 95% statistic anywhere

because, again, those sports have natural delays, planned stoppages and are less spontaneous than football by default. tennis has sit-down breaks every other game and natural pauses between serves. cricket has pauses between balls of an over, between overs and has tea and lunch and more. rugby has those ludicrous scrums and lineouts, all stoppage periods in the play itself. football doesn't. football has time limits on how long the goalkeeper can hold the ball and how long a player can take to take a throw-in. it's a naturally more continuous game.

and they're PGMOL stats, boj:

"Research has shown that Premier referees get 95% of their decisions correct, 98% when it comes to penalties and assistant referees give 99% of offside decisions correctly. It is of course that 5% that they get wrong that is highlighted with slow motion and from innumerable angles." : http://www.readingrefs.org.uk/referees-need-help-not-constant-criticism/

[MrRed]

You have nailed it there the 5% is why they are going to trial it,most decisions are quite easy and straightforward but that 5% is where we are at with bad and wrong decisions made.

I think it also should be mainly aimed at the players cheating,diving,feigning injury,time wasting and back chatting to the ref all the time so to put it all into prospective it is the players that have caused this to happen and not the refs 5% of wrong decisions.

[StevieH]

mental. pointless and mental. as every other sport has proven, even with technology there are still incorrect calls.

and since when was time-wasting against the rules?

[Chicog]

mental. pointless and mental. as every other sport has proven, even with technology there are still incorrect calls.

and since when was time-wasting against the rules?

Laws, Stevie, Laws!

[StevieH]

mental. pointless and mental. as every other sport has proven, even with technology there are still incorrect calls.

and since when was time-wasting against the rules?

Laws, Stevie, Laws!

haha. law 56 subclause 6d: when winning a match against a supposedly superior opponent, thou shalt not attempt to 'run the clock down' by keeping possession of the football and forcing the opposing team to attempt to win it back. though this is literally a normal part of the sport, this tactic is considered unsportsmanlike and therefore illegal. but only when it happens in the last three minutes of a match, not at any other time. just because.

[MrRed]

mental. pointless and mental. as every other sport has proven, even with technology there are still incorrect calls.

and since when was time-wasting against the rules?

Players get booked for time wasting Stevie regularly.... goalies...throw ins

[Chicog]

The booking of Swiss player Paulo Diogo for timewasting following a goal celebration was considered controversial. Diogo had caught his wedding ring on the metal perimeter fence of the ground while celebrating his goal for Servette, which led to him tearing off his finger - the delay was caused by Diogo and the match stewards searching for his finger.

[StevieH]

mental. pointless and mental. as every other sport has proven, even with technology there are still incorrect calls.

and since when was time-wasting against the rules?

Players get booked for time wasting Stevie regularly.... goalies...throw ins

oh that kind of time-wasting, thought you meant keeping the ball in the corner near the final whistle.

so if as you say goalies and players get booked regularly for that kind of thing, why do you need technology to change that?

[rijit]

^^^ because the pundits have told them so

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[MrRed]

mental. pointless and mental. as every other sport has proven, even with technology there are still incorrect calls.

and since when was time-wasting against the rules?

Players get booked for time wasting Stevie regularly.... goalies...throw ins

oh that kind of time-wasting, thought you meant keeping the ball in the corner near the final whistle.

so if as you say goalies and players get booked regularly for that kind of thing, why do you need technology to change that?

Your being pedantic now picking holes in one thing......did you not know about the other time wasting? and i dont say!..... it happens or have you not seen it? maybe technology is needed if you dont see it.

opinions are like &lt;deleted&gt; arnt they.

[mrbojangles]

I'm confused how time wasting crept into this discussion. I think I will have to use my internet, smartphone, tablet and laptop technology to review the infringement.

Maybe the other guys want to use a pen and paper

[rijit]

mental. pointless and mental. as every other sport has proven, even with technology there are still incorrect calls.

and since when was time-wasting against the rules?

Players get booked for time wasting Stevie regularly.... goalies...throw ins

oh that kind of time-wasting, thought you meant keeping the ball in the corner near the final whistle.

so if as you say goalies and players get booked regularly for that kind of thing, why do you need technology to change that?

Your being pedantic now picking holes in one thing......did you not know about the other time wasting? and i dont say!..... it happens or have you not seen it? maybe technology is needed if you dont see it.

opinions are like <deleted> arnt they.

'pedantically picking',, really,,, looks more like breaking for points down and proving them weak or just basically wrong

just face it when it comes down to it the argument for more technology in football just isn't that good

as has been pointed out many times before this is media led and mainly benefits them

just a shame you cant see that.

[meatboy]

well mr.meatboy we have called together some fans and club reps.to discuss the implamenting the tmo.

your case mr.meatboy.

last night mr.chairman i watched villareal vs liverpool good game with chances for both teams,but fair with no bad decisions.

that was till the 75minute when liverpool broke away with a clear way to the goal,an apposeing player gave chase but he darent gring him down as he would have been sent off. even then as he entered the box there was a good chance of a goal or getting a penalty.

OH NO THE WISTLE HAS GONE FOR OFFSIDE.

a 10second replay clearly showed he was onside. 10seconds it takes longer for a throw in.

how precious would an away goal for liverpool had been.

thats all mr.chaiman and i rest my case.

any objections please show,mr STEVIE.

mortion carried.

[Bredbury Blue]

Those who are anti-video ref talk about the game being slowed down, being ruined, but come on, in an average game how many times is the ref going to have to use this option - nit noi - and how long is it going to take to review and make a decision - again nit noi. It will help get the 5% wrong decisions correctly decided and result in correct results.

[mrbojangles]

Several posts and replies removed. Let's keep it civil please.

It's supposed to be a debate. Surely we can debate and have different views without getting personal

[rijit]

Those who are anti-video ref talk about the game being slowed down, being ruined, but come on, in an average game how many times is the ref going to have to use this option - nit noi - and how long is it going to take to review and make a decision - again nit noi. It will help get the 5% wrong decisions correctly decided and result in correct results.

Not one pro argument has been strong enough to convince me it benefits football, that i suppose could be down to perspective. For me Football is more and bigger than just the prem or the champions lge

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited April 29, 2016 by rijit

[mrbojangles]

Those who are anti-video ref talk about the game being slowed down, being ruined, but come on, in an average game how many times is the ref going to have to use this option - nit noi - and how long is it going to take to review and make a decision - again nit noi. It will help get the 5% wrong decisions correctly decided and result in correct results.

Not one pro argument has been strong enough to convince me it benefits football, that i suppose could be down to perspective. For me Football is more and bigger than just the prem or the champions lge

Do you think the introduction of goal line technology has been a success?

[rijit]

For football in general or just the prem?

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited April 29, 2016 by rijit

[mrbojangles]

You can split your answer if you like

[Chicog]

Those who are anti-video ref talk about the game being slowed down, being ruined, but come on, in an average game how many times is the ref going to have to use this option - nit noi - and how long is it going to take to review and make a decision - again nit noi. It will help get the 5% wrong decisions correctly decided and result in correct results.

Not one pro argument has been strong enough to convince me it benefits football, that i suppose could be down to perspective. For me Football is more and bigger than just the prem or the champions lge

Do you think the introduction of goal line technology has been a success?

Yes, but that has nothing to do with video replays, other than that they show you a pretty one after the decision is made.

[mrbojangles]

Those who are anti-video ref talk about the game being slowed down, being ruined, but come on, in an average game how many times is the ref going to have to use this option - nit noi - and how long is it going to take to review and make a decision - again nit noi. It will help get the 5% wrong decisions correctly decided and result in correct results.

Not one pro argument has been strong enough to convince me it benefits football, that i suppose could be down to perspective. For me Football is more and bigger than just the prem or the champions lge

Do you think the introduction of goal line technology has been a success?

Yes, but that has nothing to do with video replays, other than that they show you a pretty one after the decision is made.

Thanks for the straight answer.

Agreed that it doesn't involve video replays but it shows that technology can be used effectively and without holding up the game. In fact, it has aided in the flow of the game as now players don't stop and argue as to whether the ball went over the line or not and they carry on playing to the whistle.

I don't think any of us fully know what they have lined up to test in the trials but you never know, it could end up contributing to more actual playing time due to players not diving or arguing with the ref etc over controversial decisions.

[Bredbury Blue]

Those who are anti-video ref talk about the game being slowed down, being ruined, but come on, in an average game how many times is the ref going to have to use this option - nit noi - and how long is it going to take to review and make a decision - again nit noi. It will help get the 5% wrong decisions correctly decided and result in correct results.

Not one pro argument has been strong enough to convince me it benefits football, that i suppose could be down to perspective. For me Football is more and bigger than just the prem or the champions lge

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

First thing. Nothing the no's or yeah's say on here will sway those of the opposing view, think we can all agree on that.

"For me Football is more and bigger than just the prem or the champions lge". That I think is a valid point and why technology has been so slowly introduced in to one of the world's richest sports at the top level; I feel that the footballing administration bodies wanted for a very long time that the football laws be the same at park level as in the world cup final, and they now try to minimise the differences in the laws between such levels of football.

[Chicog]

Thanks for the straight answer.

Agreed that it doesn't involve video replays but it shows that technology can be used effectively and without holding up the game. In fact, it has aided in the flow of the game as now players don't stop and argue as to whether the ball went over the line or not and they carry on playing to the whistle.

I don't think any of us fully know what they have lined up to test in the trials but you never know, it could end up contributing to more actual playing time due to players not diving or arguing with the ref etc over controversial decisions.

It shows that automated technology can be used in black and white decisions.

Nothing more.

So it has nowt to do with video reviews.

[MrRed]

Yes it does

[rijit]

Thanks for the straight answer.

Agreed that it doesn't involve video replays but it shows that technology can be used effectively and without holding up the game. In fact, it has aided in the flow of the game as now players don't stop and argue as to whether the ball went over the line or not and they carry on playing to the whistle.

I don't think any of us fully know what they have lined up to test in the trials but you never know, it could end up contributing to more actual playing time due to players not diving or arguing with the ref etc over controversial decisions.

It shows that automated technology can be used in black and white decisions.

Nothing more.

So it has nowt to do with video reviews.

Yep. Can't escape that Its Just another 'aid' for tv to extend its coverage.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[puukao]

if loosing interest...

well...

TIGHTEN UP

[meatboy]

well after what we all saw this morning [first half] real madrid v athletico madrid will be my last game, untill this INCOMPETANCE,OR BLATENT CORUPTION BY OFFICAILS is put to bed then thats another 6inch nail in the coffin.

this wasnt dubious tackles,cheating, or 50-50 decisions,a clear 100% not seen or should i say didnt want toooooooooooooo.

as for the game that is best left to NO COMMENT.

[Chicog]

INCOMPETANCE? CORUPTION? SPILL CHUCKER?

Mind you I agree, there was one clear pen for handball if you ask me.

But Liverpool were such pants in the second half I doubt it would have made a difference.

[rijit]

INCOMPETANCE? CORUPTION? SPILL CHUCKER?

Mind you I agree, there was one clear pen for handball if you ask me.

But Liverpool were such pants in the second half I doubt it would have made a difference.

Ball to hand i thought. As did the English comentators

Shows it Still boils down to an 'opinion '

Video replay won't change that

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app