Is football corrupt?

[CBlue]

I would envisage the referee would have the ability to call for a second opinion/review if he is uncertain for a major call.
With players going down in the area under a challenge usually it is either a dive/simulation (free kick/yellow card?) or a foul (penalty). In some circumstances he may decide to play on?
Perhaps a team manager or captain could also challenge a "match changing decision"?
I am not suggesting VR would create a "perfect world" without any corruption or mistakes but I am convinced it would lead to more fairer decisions/ match outcomes.
I can think of a number of penalties/goal decisions given against us recently that would likely have been over ruled on review.

How would they do that? Would the ref have to stop play as soon as a challenge is made? If not, when does he stop play to review the challenge? If play continues before the first challenge is reviewed are you allowed additional challenges? How long after an incident can a challenge be made?

Off the top of my head, there is usually once in a match when a football manager jumps up and vehemently remonstrates with the fourth official over a perceived "unjust" decision. Perhaps each manager is allowed to appeal say once for a match changing decision. On that occasion, (say a penalty appeal?), the game is stopped and the incident is reviewed. Restart would be either penalty, free kick or if no offense perhaps a bounce ball. If the managers appeal is successful he might retain his right to appeal once more. I would say I would envisage the VR being primarily used by match referees themselves, say to confirm whether a goal was in fact onside or a player had not handballed to control when scoring or to confirm whether a player had been attacked off the ball.
Since the reviews are usually viewed by the public I really cant see the VR being an excuse for further corruption.
(Edit: When Zidane got sent off for his headbutt in the WC final this was such a system in practice!)

How do you stop the game - that's the important part. Does the ref stop the game because a manager wants him to? If so, they could do it if the opposition go down the other end & have a one v one with the keeper. Is it only when the ball goes out of play for a natural stoppage? What happens if the opposition take a quick restart? Can it happen at any point? Is there a time limit after an incident that a review has to take place? What happens if you want a review & play continues & you score before the review takes place - do you cancel the original review?

 

[CBlue]

If you do find one perhaps you could go away & educate yourself as to who can actually change the laws of the game - UEFA aren't even in the picture.
If you want to have a go at the level of cheating argument you could put forward a plan that would allow VT without it increasing the opportunity for gamesmanship & cheating. I think your best bet is to go back to sticking your head up your arse though.

Are you in the fraud squad? You seem very focused on this

No mate.
He's in the 'I'm such an utter fucking clown that even my fellow co-conspirators have disowned me and my mad views and won't even touch me with a very shitty stick anymore,because I need sectioning' camp.

Blah, blah, blah...nothing to contribute other than attacking the messenger.

You found the will to live once more? Are you going to use it to educate yourself so "an utter fucking clown" doesn't highlight your ignorance?<br /><br />-- Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:04 am --<br /><br />

If someone happens to find a spare will to live lying around,could they please pm it to me,as I have just lost mine reading the above post.

If you do find one perhaps you could go away & educate yourself as to who can actually change the laws of the game - UEFA aren't even in the picture.
If you want to have a go at the level of cheating argument you could put forward a plan that would allow VT without it increasing the opportunity for gamesmanship & cheating. I think your best bet is to go back to sticking your head up your arse though.

Are you in the fraud squad? You seem very focused on this

No, I'm just pointing out the folly that introducing VT will eliminate the undoubted corruption in our game.

 

[CBlue]

I think referees aren't as bent as we make out, I just think a lot of the have no bottle in terms of giving controversial decision, even of they are correct, such as the penalty incident the other night, he wasn't 100% sure, his assistant had no bottle so the easy option was to let the game finish 2-2.

The ways FIFA is corrupt however, factors such as FFP is a very pathetic idea to enforce. It makes it incredibly hard for small teams, let's say Wigan, to ever achieve anything more than relegation battlers ever year! Whereas united who benefitted from the sky take over of the premier league who have the biggest fan bases to maintain there position at the top of the league because they are more financially secure. Makes sense?

No.

United are still millions in debt, what they earn in a season like last year couldn't pay off there debt, however they can still spend £100m a year because that's what they take in?
City have no debt, we have an owner who will never be in debt and can spend £100m like it was a penny. But because we don't bring in as much turnover as united we can't spend it? Surely it would make more sense to enforce a transfer embargo on clubs like united until debt is paid off?

The reason FIFA have elected not to do this is because the big clubs I.e. bayern, united, Madrid, barcalona etc are the clubs that attract the big audiences meaning FIFA earn more in advertising. If FIFA can crush any attempt at smaller clubs winning things they will keep the masses interested and continue there corruption.


Anyone who thinks they aren't corrupt is blind, look at the world cup bids? Two oil rich countries with billionaires in there hundreds who will slip a few million to the committee members who vote for them?


Rant over!

FIFA have nothing to do with FFP - it's a UEFA initiative & is only a sanction for teams entering UEFA competitions. It has no effect on the Premier League nor any team that doesn't want to enter UEFA competitions.

 

[andyhinch]

I think referees aren't as bent as we make out, I just think a lot of the have no bottle in terms of giving controversial decision, even of they are correct, such as the penalty incident the other night, he wasn't 100% sure, his assistant had no bottle so the easy option was to let the game finish 2-2.

The ways FIFA is corrupt however, factors such as FFP is a very pathetic idea to enforce. It makes it incredibly hard for small teams, let's say Wigan, to ever achieve anything more than relegation battlers ever year! Whereas united who benefitted from the sky take over of the premier league who have the biggest fan bases to maintain there position at the top of the league because they are more financially secure. Makes sense?

No.

United are still millions in debt, what they earn in a season like last year couldn't pay off there debt, however they can still spend £100m a year because that's what they take in?
City have no debt, we have an owner who will never be in debt and can spend £100m like it was a penny. But because we don't bring in as much turnover as united we can't spend it? Surely it would make more sense to enforce a transfer embargo on clubs like united until debt is paid off?

The reason FIFA have elected not to do this is because the big clubs I.e. bayern, united, Madrid, barcalona etc are the clubs that attract the big audiences meaning FIFA earn more in advertising. If FIFA can crush any attempt at smaller clubs winning things they will keep the masses interested and continue there corruption.


Anyone who thinks they aren't corrupt is blind, look at the world cup bids? Two oil rich countries with billionaires in there hundreds who will slip a few million to the committee members who vote for them?


Rant over!

FIFA have nothing to do with FFP - it's a UEFA initiative & is only a sanction for teams entering UEFA competitions. It has no effect on the Premier League nor any team that doesn't want to enter UEFA competitions.

Should I bin my sc and ask for a refund for Ajax away as I have clearly been duped, I assume I can use all posts as evidence to help me claim all monies back

 

[Plain Speaking]

How would they do that? Would the ref have to stop play as soon as a challenge is made? If not, when does he stop play to review the challenge? If play continues before the first challenge is reviewed are you allowed additional challenges? How long after an incident can a challenge be made?

Off the top of my head, there is usually once in a match when a football manager jumps up and vehemently remonstrates with the fourth official over a perceived "unjust" decision. Perhaps each manager is allowed to appeal say once for a match changing decision. On that occasion, (say a penalty appeal?), the game is stopped and the incident is reviewed. Restart would be either penalty, free kick or if no offense perhaps a bounce ball. If the managers appeal is successful he might retain his right to appeal once more. I would say I would envisage the VR being primarily used by match referees themselves, say to confirm whether a goal was in fact onside or a player had not handballed to control when scoring or to confirm whether a player had been attacked off the ball.
Since the reviews are usually viewed by the public I really cant see the VR being an excuse for further corruption.
(Edit: When Zidane got sent off for his headbutt in the WC final this was such a system in practice!)

How do you stop the game - that's the important part. Does the ref stop the game because a manager wants him to? If so, they could do it if the opposition go down the other end & have a one v one with the keeper. Is it only when the ball goes out of play for a natural stoppage? What happens if the opposition take a quick restart? Can it happen at any point? Is there a time limit after an incident that a review has to take place? What happens if you want a review & play continues & you score before the review takes place - do you cancel the original review?

I would imagine it should only be allowed for certain category of decisions, (say penalties, goals and sendings off), and there would be some sort of penalty introduced for a "frivolous managers appeal".
I would also imagine the stoppage would have to be done pretty much straight away, say within 20 seconds of the incident, with say the manager communicating to the fourth official, who would inform the referee to stop the play.
If the match continues and a goal is scored before the ref stops play, the outcome would depend on the findings on the actual Video review.
I know there will be reluctance to introduce any change from some quarters in football but VR works very successfully in other sports and improves them.
The public suspects the game is riddled with corruption.
If the football authorities want more fairness and less corruption IMO VR should be introduced.

 

[CBlue]

I think referees aren't as bent as we make out, I just think a lot of the have no bottle in terms of giving controversial decision, even of they are correct, such as the penalty incident the other night, he wasn't 100% sure, his assistant had no bottle so the easy option was to let the game finish 2-2.

The ways FIFA is corrupt however, factors such as FFP is a very pathetic idea to enforce. It makes it incredibly hard for small teams, let's say Wigan, to ever achieve anything more than relegation battlers ever year! Whereas united who benefitted from the sky take over of the premier league who have the biggest fan bases to maintain there position at the top of the league because they are more financially secure. Makes sense?

No.

United are still millions in debt, what they earn in a season like last year couldn't pay off there debt, however they can still spend £100m a year because that's what they take in?
City have no debt, we have an owner who will never be in debt and can spend £100m like it was a penny. But because we don't bring in as much turnover as united we can't spend it? Surely it would make more sense to enforce a transfer embargo on clubs like united until debt is paid off?

The reason FIFA have elected not to do this is because the big clubs I.e. bayern, united, Madrid, barcalona etc are the clubs that attract the big audiences meaning FIFA earn more in advertising. If FIFA can crush any attempt at smaller clubs winning things they will keep the masses interested and continue there corruption.


Anyone who thinks they aren't corrupt is blind, look at the world cup bids? Two oil rich countries with billionaires in there hundreds who will slip a few million to the committee members who vote for them?


Rant over!

FIFA have nothing to do with FFP - it's a UEFA initiative & is only a sanction for teams entering UEFA competitions. It has no effect on the Premier League nor any team that doesn't want to enter UEFA competitions.

Should I bin my sc and ask for a refund for Ajax away as I have clearly been duped, I assume I can use all posts as evidence to help me claim all monies back

You can do what you want with them. The ticket you bought was for the ability to attend a game of football - what happens/ed at the game isn't guaranteed. I wouldn't waste my money but then, fortunately, I'm not you. Not sure of the relevance of the question though?

 

[andyhinch]

FIFA have nothing to do with FFP - it's a UEFA initiative & is only a sanction for teams entering UEFA competitions. It has no effect on the Premier League nor any team that doesn't want to enter UEFA competitions.

Should I bin my sc and ask for a refund for Ajax away as I have clearly been duped, I assume I can use all posts as evidence to help me claim all monies back

You can do what you want with them. The ticket you bought was for the ability to attend a game of football - what happens/ed at the game isn't guaranteed. I wouldn't waste my money but then, fortunately, I'm not you. Not sure of the relevance of the question though?

Thought you'd been saying it was make your fucking mind up

 

[CBlue]

Off the top of my head, there is usually once in a match when a football manager jumps up and vehemently remonstrates with the fourth official over a perceived "unjust" decision. Perhaps each manager is allowed to appeal say once for a match changing decision. On that occasion, (say a penalty appeal?), the game is stopped and the incident is reviewed. Restart would be either penalty, free kick or if no offense perhaps a bounce ball. If the managers appeal is successful he might retain his right to appeal once more. I would say I would envisage the VR being primarily used by match referees themselves, say to confirm whether a goal was in fact onside or a player had not handballed to control when scoring or to confirm whether a player had been attacked off the ball.
Since the reviews are usually viewed by the public I really cant see the VR being an excuse for further corruption.
(Edit: When Zidane got sent off for his headbutt in the WC final this was such a system in practice!)

How do you stop the game - that's the important part. Does the ref stop the game because a manager wants him to? If so, they could do it if the opposition go down the other end & have a one v one with the keeper. Is it only when the ball goes out of play for a natural stoppage? What happens if the opposition take a quick restart? Can it happen at any point? Is there a time limit after an incident that a review has to take place? What happens if you want a review & play continues & you score before the review takes place - do you cancel the original review?

I would imagine it should only be allowed for certain category of decisions, (say penalties, goals and sendings off), and there would be some sort of penalty introduced for a "frivolous managers appeal".
I would also imagine the stoppage would have to be done pretty much straight away, say within 20 seconds of the incident, with say the manager communicating to the fourth official, who would inform the referee to stop the play.
If the match continues and a goal is scored before the ref stops play, the outcome would depend on the findings on the actual Video review.
I know there will be reluctance to introduce any change from some quarters in football but VR works very successfully in other sports and improves them.
The public suspects the game is riddled with corruption.
If the football authorities want more fairness and less corruption IMO VR should be introduced.

What's a "frivolous managers appeal"?
Would the ref have to stop the game straight away?
What if it's your team requesting the review & subsequently scoring the goal? What if the original review was deemed "frivolous"? Does the goal still stand?
VR isn't available in any other sports that don't have a natural stop in play for the review to take place.
As already mentioned, & when the questions I've just posed are answered, hopefully you will see that it won't stop corruption - it will add to it.<br /><br />-- Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:46 am --<br /><br />

Should I bin my sc and ask for a refund for Ajax away as I have clearly been duped, I assume I can use all posts as evidence to help me claim all monies back

You can do what you want with them. The ticket you bought was for the ability to attend a game of football - what happens/ed at the game isn't guaranteed. I wouldn't waste my money but then, fortunately, I'm not you. Not sure of the relevance of the question though?

Thought you'd been saying it was make your fucking mind up

Punctuation is overrated.
If I'm reading your post correctly, you are advocating that anyone attending a WWE event should ask for their money back?

 

[Plain Speaking]

How do you stop the game - that's the important part. Does the ref stop the game because a manager wants him to? If so, they could do it if the opposition go down the other end & have a one v one with the keeper. Is it only when the ball goes out of play for a natural stoppage? What happens if the opposition take a quick restart? Can it happen at any point? Is there a time limit after an incident that a review has to take place? What happens if you want a review & play continues & you score before the review takes place - do you cancel the original review?

I would imagine it should only be allowed for certain category of decisions, (say penalties, goals and sendings off), and there would be some sort of penalty introduced for a "frivolous managers appeal".
I would also imagine the stoppage would have to be done pretty much straight away, say within 20 seconds of the incident, with say the manager communicating to the fourth official, who would inform the referee to stop the play.
If the match continues and a goal is scored before the ref stops play, the outcome would depend on the findings on the actual Video review.
I know there will be reluctance to introduce any change from some quarters in football but VR works very successfully in other sports and improves them.
The public suspects the game is riddled with corruption.
If the football authorities want more fairness and less corruption IMO VR should be introduced.

What's a "frivolous managers appeal"?
Would the ref have to stop the game straight away?
What if it's your team requesting the review & subsequently scoring the goal? What if the original review was deemed "frivolous"? Does the goal still stand?
VR isn't available in any other sports that don't have a natural stop in play for the review to take place.
As already mentioned, & when the questions I've just posed are answered, hopefully you will see that it won't stop corruption - it will add to it.

You're getting bogged down with minor technicalities. Rules would be carefully drafted and introduced with guidance and safegaurds to avoid abuse. Rugby is very similar to football in its flow and stoppages. The FA have rules and penalties already for "frivolous appeals" on suspensions etc. the concept is already in the system.
As I said earlier I think VR would primarily be used by the referee to confirm "uncertain key decisions".

 

[andyhinch]

How do you stop the game - that's the important part. Does the ref stop the game because a manager wants him to? If so, they could do it if the opposition go down the other end & have a one v one with the keeper. Is it only when the ball goes out of play for a natural stoppage? What happens if the opposition take a quick restart? Can it happen at any point? Is there a time limit after an incident that a review has to take place? What happens if you want a review & play continues & you score before the review takes place - do you cancel the original review?

I would imagine it should only be allowed for certain category of decisions, (say penalties, goals and sendings off), and there would be some sort of penalty introduced for a "frivolous managers appeal".
I would also imagine the stoppage would have to be done pretty much straight away, say within 20 seconds of the incident, with say the manager communicating to the fourth official, who would inform the referee to stop the play.
If the match continues and a goal is scored before the ref stops play, the outcome would depend on the findings on the actual Video review.
I know there will be reluctance to introduce any change from some quarters in football but VR works very successfully in other sports and improves them.
The public suspects the game is riddled with corruption.
If the football authorities want more fairness and less corruption IMO VR should be introduced.

What's a "frivolous managers appeal"?
Would the ref have to stop the game straight away?
What if it's your team requesting the review & subsequently scoring the goal? What if the original review was deemed "frivolous"? Does the goal still stand?
VR isn't available in any other sports that don't have a natural stop in play for the review to take place.
As already mentioned, & when the questions I've just posed are answered, hopefully you will see that it won't stop corruption - it will add to it.

-- Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:46 am --

You can do what you want with them. The ticket you bought was for the ability to attend a game of football - what happens/ed at the game isn't guaranteed. I wouldn't waste my money but then, fortunately, I'm not you. Not sure of the relevance of the question though?

Thought you'd been saying it was make your fucking mind up

Punctuation is overrated.
If I'm reading your post correctly, you are advocating that anyone attending a WWE event should ask for their money back?

Why are you asking that?