Ireland Internationals

[Guest firetotheworks]

Plus do you really want the game stopped all the time for "video" replays? I certainly don't.

 

Why would it need to be stopped all the time?  How many times do they use the video in rugby?

 

In rugby league it's all the f***ing time.

 

We would end up having football games that take as long as American Football games with all the whinging foreigners and Man U players questioning every blooming decision that went their way.

 

f***ing hell, you've excelled yourself.

 

Give over. The likes of Drogba etc need to man up. Bloody wimps.

 

Yeah, all the foreigners. You wouldn't catch us hard British being girls. Such notable players include Joe Cole, Robbie Savage, Ashley Young, David Dunn and SWP.

 

[Shak]

Challenges are absolutely rubbish in the NfL, and I'm convinced they'd be terrible in football.

 

Think the challenge system works very well in the NFL personally.

[Guest toonlass]

Plus do you really want the game stopped all the time for "video" replays? I certainly don't.

 

Why would it need to be stopped all the time?  How many times do they use the video in rugby?

 

In rugby league it's all the f***ing time.

 

We would end up having football games that take as long as American Football games with all the whinging foreigners and Man U players questioning every blooming decision that went their way.

 

f***ing hell, you've excelled yourself.

 

Give over. The likes of Drogba etc need to man up. Bloody wimps.

 

Yeah, all the foreigners. You wouldn't catch us hard British being girls. Such notable players include Joe Cole, Robbie Savage, Ashley Young, David Dunn and SWP.

 

 

[Coco]

Challenges are absolutely rubbish in the NfL, and I'm convinced they'd be terrible in football.

 

 

No they're not. You regularly see vital decisions being corrected where a receiver has or hasn't got his feet in the end zone (for example) which can have a big impact on the final result.

[Coco]

Plus do you really want the game stopped all the time for "video" replays? I certainly don't.

 

Why would it need to be stopped all the time?  How many times do they use the video in rugby?

 

In rugby league it's all the f***ing time.

 

We would end up having football games that take as long as American Football games with all the whinging foreigners and Man U players questioning every blooming decision that went their way.

 

f***ing hell, you've excelled yourself.

 

Give over. The likes of Drogba etc need to man up. Bloody wimps.

 

Yeah, all the foreigners. You wouldn't catch us hard British being girls. Such notable players include Joe Cole, Robbie Savage, Ashley Young, David Dunn and SWP.

 

 

 

Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney...

[Guest firetotheworks]

This 'we need to find a way to stop it slowing the game down' and 'how many times should they be able to appeal?' thing is pissing me right off.

 

 

 

HAVE AN OFFICIAL WATCHING THE TV AND ALLOW THEM TO BE CONSULTED WHEN THE REFEREE IS UNSURE, OR SAID OFFICIAL IS CERTAIN THE REFEREE HAS MADE A MISTAKE!

[Guest toonlass]

Plus do you really want the game stopped all the time for "video" replays? I certainly don't.

 

Why would it need to be stopped all the time?  How many times do they use the video in rugby?

 

In rugby league it's all the f***ing time.

 

We would end up having football games that take as long as American Football games with all the whinging foreigners and Man U players questioning every blooming decision that went their way.

 

f***ing hell, you've excelled yourself.

 

Give over. The likes of Drogba etc need to man up. Bloody wimps.

 

Yeah, all the foreigners. You wouldn't catch us hard British being girls. Such notable players include Joe Cole, Robbie Savage, Ashley Young, David Dunn and SWP.

 

 

 

Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney...

 

 

[Guest firetotheworks]

Ignore her, she's still devastated by Michael Jackson's death and obviously deliriously blind with grief.

[Segun Oluwaniyi]

Challenges are absolutely rubbish in the NfL, and I'm convinced they'd be terrible in football.

 

Think the challenge system works very well in the NFL personally.

American football is already a slow, slow sport and it seems like every challenge takes at least five or six minutes. Half the time they conference for five minutes than realise that the play was actually not reviewable in the first place. Not to mention, that they still get it wrong half the time.

[Coco]

People cry that "it'll be like american football", without having probably ever watched an NFL game. It's the ridiculous advertising that slows down the pace of an NFL game, not the fucking video booth. Rugby Union works just fine with the video ref, and has minimal stoppages. So far nobody can put forward a logical reason against using video technology in some fashion...

[Guest toonlass]

Ignore her, she's still devastated by Michael Jackson's death and obviously deliriously blind with grief.

 

 

 

[Guest firetotheworks]

 

You're all a fucking waste of time. Christ.

[Shak]

Challenges are absolutely rubbish in the NfL, and I'm convinced they'd be terrible in football.

 

Think the challenge system works very well in the NFL personally.

American football is already a slow, slow sport and it seems like every challenge takes at least five or six minutes. Half the time they conference for five minutes than realise that the play was actually not reviewable in the first place. Not to mention, that they still get it wrong half the time.

 

That happened once man.

 

You very rarely see them get a call wrong on review either. They leave the ones open for debate as called on the field, which is the fairest way to do it as far as I can see.

[Village Idiot]

Challenges do stop the flow of gridiron, but since they are just sitting on their arses 75% of the time it doesn't really make a difference. That said, I don't think incidents like Henry's hand are that common that it would make that much of a difference in a game. It should only be applied to key incidents, not every time somebody moans for a yellow card.

 

 

(I enjoy gridiron when the ball's actually in play)

[Guest toonlass]

People cry that "it'll be like american football", without having probably ever watched an NFL game. It's the ridiculous advertising that slows down the pace of an NFL game, not the fucking video booth. Rugby Union works just fine with the video ref, and has minimal stoppages. So far nobody can put forward a logical reason against using video technology in some fashion...

 

Where do you draw the line. That is the logical reason. As someone else already said, you will get all the players surrounding the ref clammering for a video replay because unlike the rugby codes the footballers have no respect for the ref.

[Mike]

Challenges are absolutely rubbish in the NfL, and I'm convinced they'd be terrible in football.

 

Think the challenge system works very well in the NFL personally.

 

It's outstanding. Challenges would be the way to go, but it'll never happen.

 

 

TV timeouts kills football, not the refs checking the play.

 

Punt, catch, ad.

[Mike]

Challenges for goals, or disallowed goals. Manager has to point out what he thinks went wrong i.e a handball, offsides, etc. If he's right, then they move on from there.

[Guest toonlass]

Challenges for goals, or disallowed goals. Manager has to point out what he thinks went wrong i.e a handball, offsides, etc. If he's right, then they move on from there.

 

And would you limit it to 1 per team? What if there was 1 more seriously dodgy incident then challenges allowed? The argument would start all over again wouldn't it?

[Shak]

People cry that "it'll be like american football", without having probably ever watched an NFL game. It's the ridiculous advertising that slows down the pace of an NFL game, not the fucking video booth. Rugby Union works just fine with the video ref, and has minimal stoppages. So far nobody can put forward a logical reason against using video technology in some fashion...

 

Where do you draw the line. That is the logical reason. As someone else already said, you will get all the players surrounding the ref clammering for a video replay because unlike the rugby codes the footballers have no respect for the ref.

 

It should be down to the manager to make a challenge/review, not the ref.

 

If the players are convinced the ref has got ot wrong, they tell their manager and he can make a challenge.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Anyone care to comment on this painfully obvious solution to the debate on how many times it should be used in a match, or if it'll slow down the match? Anyone? Anyone at all? I'll give you 10 dollars for a verbal response.

 

 

This 'we need to find a way to stop it slowing the game down' and 'how many times should they be able to appeal?' thing is pissing me right off.

 

 

 

HAVE AN OFFICIAL WATCHING THE TV AND ALLOW THEM TO BE CONSULTED WHEN THE REFEREE IS UNSURE, OR SAID OFFICIAL IS CERTAIN THE REFEREE HAS MADE A MISTAKE!

[Mike]

Challenges for goals, or disallowed goals. Manager has to point out what he thinks went wrong i.e a handball, offsides, etc. If he's right, then they move on from there.

 

And would you limit it to 1 per team? What if there was 1 more seriously dodgy incident then challenges allowed? The argument would start all over again wouldn't it?

 

Using the NFL as a reference, most people put the blame on the manager. "These are the moments you save your challenges for!" and stuff like that.

 

1 or 2 challenges per team. Goals only.

[Guest toonlass]

People cry that "it'll be like american football", without having probably ever watched an NFL game. It's the ridiculous advertising that slows down the pace of an NFL game, not the fucking video booth. Rugby Union works just fine with the video ref, and has minimal stoppages. So far nobody can put forward a logical reason against using video technology in some fashion...

 

Where do you draw the line. That is the logical reason. As someone else already said, you will get all the players surrounding the ref clammering for a video replay because unlike the rugby codes the footballers have no respect for the ref.

 

It should be down to the manager to make a challenge/review, not the ref.

 

If the players are convinced the ref has got ot wrong, they tell their manager and he can make a challenge.

 

Totally agree with you there.

 

But it won't happen will it? The players are not supposed to go shouting at the ref now, but they still do. Until ref's get tough with the players and stop them doing this then nothing will change.

[Mike]

Anyone care to comment on this painfully obvious solution to the debate on how many times it should be used in a match, or if it'll slow down the match? Anyone? Anyone at all? I'll give you 10 dollars for a verbal response.

 

 

This 'we need to find a way to stop it slowing the game down' and 'how many times should they be able to appeal?' thing is pissing me right off.

 

 

 

HAVE AN OFFICIAL WATCHING THE TV AND ALLOW THEM TO BE CONSULTED WHEN THE REFEREE IS UNSURE, OR SAID OFFICIAL IS CERTAIN THE REFEREE HAS MADE A MISTAKE!

 

Which ref would actually admit that they're unsure, though?

 

You could even do it the way they do challenges in Hockey. Have a team of people watching all the games in another location, and when something dodgy happens, the phone rings and it gets sorted out. Refs on the ice aren't really involved, to the best of my knowledge.

[Guest toonlass]

Anyone care to comment on this painfully obvious solution to the debate on how many times it should be used in a match, or if it'll slow down the match? Anyone? Anyone at all? I'll give you 10 dollars for a verbal response.

 

 

This 'we need to find a way to stop it slowing the game down' and 'how many times should they be able to appeal?' thing is pissing me right off.

 

 

 

HAVE AN OFFICIAL WATCHING THE TV AND ALLOW THEM TO BE CONSULTED WHEN THE REFEREE IS UNSURE, OR SAID OFFICIAL IS CERTAIN THE REFEREE HAS MADE A MISTAKE!

 

So would the ref have to stop the game while the video ref is watching the incident again?

[Shak]

Challenges for goals, or disallowed goals. Manager has to point out what he thinks went wrong i.e a handball, offsides, etc. If he's right, then they move on from there.

 

And would you limit it to 1 per team? What if there was 1 more seriously dodgy incident then challenges allowed? The argument would start all over again wouldn't it?

 

As soon as a manager has an unsuccesful appeal, he has no further right to challenge.

 

This way managers will be very careful about appealing something, knowing that getting it wrong could cost them huge later on in the game.

 

Also, only certain things would be reviewable. Balls over the line for a goal, penalties, sendings off. Only the major decisions that change the course of a game dramatically.