Dr Venkman Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 About time. It's important though that people realise that there will always be an element of interpretation and thus subjectivity involved in making calls, but at least things like obvious diving, stonewall penalties etc. should be a thing of the past. I think the (professional) game will be much better for it. Where do you draw the line though? Get rid of obvious errors and naturally the focus will then move to less obvious ones. The stakes are so high that we could end up with anything being deemed a 'game changer'. Give each team a number of challenges. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 I don't really believe in challenges, if the point is to get decisions correct it shouldn't be up to the managers/players to decide. It's a line in the sand though, and stops everything getting reviewed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Is goal line technology used in the FA Cup yet? As in, at every ground etc? Not sure how this would work logistically, if they can't apply the same refereeing standards to Morecambe vs Bristol City as Man Utd vs Watford. They would be better off doing it in the PL IMO, if this is the direction they want to go in. Offsides and goal-line technology are the only ones which I can see as being empirically measurable beyond doubt. Also, mistaken identity I suppose. Everything else is and always will be subjective. Even so-called 'stonewall penalties'. I'd much prefer if retrospective subjectively-assessed punishments were handed out for diving*, everything else is just intrinsically part of the game. * - even that is tricky, because at present only something which a broadcaster highlights would be up for review by the panel responsible for deciding whether a player dived. As we all know, Sky and the BBC have biased idiot pundits. It sounds silly, but having non-media staff whose job it was to search for simulation would be better. They'd then submit each case to the 'diving' panel for adjudication and sentencing. At present, every single refereeing decision made is subjective. It shouldn't be about removing subjectivity, it should be about affording the referee the benefits of modern technology in order to make a better informed decision. The entire refereeing structure in this country is built upon the notion that the referee can't be wrong, it's thinking like this which has us in the mess we're in. People get things wrong, that's fine, but give them a better chance to get things right and the game will be better for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 About time. It's important though that people realise that there will always be an element of interpretation and thus subjectivity involved in making calls, but at least things like obvious diving, stonewall penalties etc. should be a thing of the past. I think the (professional) game will be much better for it. Where do you draw the line though? Get rid of obvious errors and naturally the focus will then move to less obvious ones. The stakes are so high that we could end up with anything being deemed a 'game changer'. Give each team a number of challenges. then managers start moaning about not having enough challenges and we would have won if we could challenge x y and z thing at the end of the game. Also I can easily see the likes of Pulis and Allerdyce making frivolous challenges to disrupt opposition momentum and or waste time Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 About time. It's important though that people realise that there will always be an element of interpretation and thus subjectivity involved in making calls, but at least things like obvious diving, stonewall penalties etc. should be a thing of the past. I think the (professional) game will be much better for it. Where do you draw the line though? Get rid of obvious errors and naturally the focus will then move to less obvious ones. The stakes are so high that we could end up with anything being deemed a 'game changer'. Give each team a number of challenges. then managers start moaning about not having enough challenges and we would have won if we could challenge x y and z thing at the end of the game. Also I can easily see the likes of Pulis and Allerdyce making frivolous challenges to disrupt opposition momentum and or waste time So the net result is managers moaning? 1) They do that anyway. 2) So? Fairness is more important Yes, they may well make frivolous challenges, that would be their prerogative. I think the net gains out weigh the losses. Challenges might not ultimately be the answer, but we have to be doing something to address unfair decisions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Is goal line technology used in the FA Cup yet? As in, at every ground etc? Not sure how this would work logistically, if they can't apply the same refereeing standards to Morecambe vs Bristol City as Man Utd vs Watford. They would be better off doing it in the PL IMO, if this is the direction they want to go in. Offsides and goal-line technology are the only ones which I can see as being empirically measurable beyond doubt. Also, mistaken identity I suppose. Everything else is and always will be subjective. Even so-called 'stonewall penalties'. I'd much prefer if retrospective subjectively-assessed punishments were handed out for diving*, everything else is just intrinsically part of the game. * - even that is tricky, because at present only something which a broadcaster highlights would be up for review by the panel responsible for deciding whether a player dived. As we all know, Sky and the BBC have biased idiot pundits. It sounds silly, but having non-media staff whose job it was to search for simulation would be better. They'd then submit each case to the 'diving' panel for adjudication and sentencing. At present, every single refereeing decision made is subjective. It shouldn't be about removing subjectivity, it should be about affording the referee the benefits of modern technology in order to make a better informed decision. The entire refereeing structure in this country is built upon the notion that the referee can't be wrong, it's thinking like this which has us in the mess we're in. People get things wrong, that's fine, but give them a better chance to get things right and the game will be better for it. Just book managers for frivilous challenges. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 I don't think the theory is the referee can't be 'wrong', it's that the referee's decision should be final by virtue of his position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 How do they make money out of this? "Looks like the referee is going to send this one up to the Nike™ VidRef, brought to you by booking.com - you got it bookin' right" Followed by camera trained on a screen like this http://i.imgur.com/PGybjgX.png Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 I don't think the theory is the referee can't be 'wrong', it's that the referee's decision should be final by virtue of his position. With respect, Ian, semantics. The net result is the same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 I don't think the theory is the referee can't be 'wrong', it's that the referee's decision should be final by virtue of his position. With respect, Ian, semantics. The net result is the same. Well yeah, but I can see why people follow it because it's how the game runs smoothly. Like in Rugby, I know the referee is 'wrong' technically but I would never question him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 It'll be used as another advertising vehicle, it'll leave us nothing to talk about. There's a reason no-one likes American sport or rugby. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEEJ Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 As has been said already, I'd have no problem with a video official sitting with access to TV monitors and replays being allowed to alert the ref to any obvious decision they've ballsed up. Making a big drama out of the whole thing though is wholly unnecessary and reeks of Americanisation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistle17 Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Totally against it. Soon there will be no talking points in professional football as everything will be 'corrected' by technology. All because it's now 'a business' and the potential to 'lose millions' is at stake. Just accept that the errors will be made and that the controversy is part of the games beauty. Also, it will just open the path for- as stated above- additional advertisement. Not for the purist, no thanks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistle17 Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 As has been said already, I'd have no problem with a video official sitting with access to TV monitors and replays being allowed to alert the ref to any obvious decision they've ballsed up. Making a big drama out of the whole thing though is wholly unnecessary and reeks of Americanisation. Very good point. Just think of Sky's drama of it all....fucking hell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Jerusalem Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 When the TV refs will end up being total bellends like Howard Webb, I don't think we'll be seeing the end of controversial decisions, just 'better' decisions for the top teams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Fair point, I think any TV official would need to be someone unknown to the players and public really. How do they handle that in other sports? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Any decision where a referee has to judge human intent (fouls & subsequent yellow/red card, diving, etc) should be left to humans. Things with more concrete yes/no answers (goals, offsides, ball being out of play, etc) being left up to tech or a 4th official with video review is fine. In this respect I don't know that I see a slippery slope of everything going to review. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Things with more concrete yes/no answers (goals, offsides, ball being out of play, etc) being left up to tech or a 4th official with video review is fine. Tiote's disallowed goal against Man City saw some pundits and ex-refs being smart-arses and explaining why due to the different phases of play it was the correct decision, then Man City (or some similar cunts) scored exactly the same goal, no offside was given and no-one even mentioned the possibility it was offside. I think with video refs it would be the same outcome, ours would be referred to the video ref and disallowed, a big team's wouldn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Things with more concrete yes/no answers (goals, offsides, ball being out of play, etc) being left up to tech or a 4th official with video review is fine. Tiote's disallowed goal against Man City saw a load of pundits and ex-refs being smart-arses and explaining why due to the different phases of play it was the correct decision, then Man City (or some similar cunts) scored exactly the same goal, no offside was given and no-one even mentioned the possibility it was offside. I think with video refs it would be the same outcome, ours would be referred to the video ref and disallowed, a big team's wouldn't. Isn't the problem there the subjective interpretation of 'interfering with play' call? There's still loads of fucked normal offside calls where that wouldn't apply and be a problem that could be corrected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 As I said recently I'm up for this now. Fed up with refereeing decisions being the main source of debate and the fact that there's blatantly a bias towards the top sides. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Can easily see a situation where a decision doesn't get referred to a video ref or replay but is subsequently shown as being incorrect resulting in a team suing the FA. If its brought in then it needs to (a) be used for every decision and (b) be foolproof. Take our game against Everton - Lukaku had the last touch before the corner which led to the winner, an incorrect corner could result in us being relegated (from a lawyers eyes you'd disrgard the other 37 games and 89 minutes and focus on that one incorrect decision). The powers that be would be stupid to bring something in that opens them up to this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sixx Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Totally against it. Soon there will be no talking points in professional football as everything will be 'corrected' by technology. All because it's now 'a business' and the potential to 'lose millions' is at stake. Just accept that the errors will be made and that the controversy is part of the games beauty. Also, it will just open the path for- as stated above- additional advertisement. Not for the purist, no thanks. This for me as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Me too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 As I said recently I'm up for this now. Fed up with refereeing decisions being the main source of debate and the fact that there's blatantly a bias towards the top sides. I really don't think this will end though, unless you're only talking about factual decisions like the goal line. Someone still has to assess the footage and make a call. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Interpolic Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 As I said recently I'm up for this now. Fed up with refereeing decisions being the main source of debate and the fact that there's blatantly a bias towards the top sides. I really don't think this will end though, unless you're only talking about factual decisions like the goal line. Someone still has to assess the footage and make a call. Aye but they're immediately more accountable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now