Is football corrupt?

[ManCitizens.]

Oh dear, you are getting worse not better. There is massive corruption in tennis & that doesn't include the drug cheating. On the subject of VR in tennis - there's a stop in play after every point - more than the NFL!

Just to make sure your aware, i am not suggesting football should duplicate another sport. Idiot. Parts can be taken to improve our sport, parts can also be avoided to prevent it becoming worse.

You come out with shite that because the NFL & Tennis have VR then it could be & should be introduced into football & call me the idiot?
Which parts from Tennis & the NFL are you suggesting that could make football better, oh wise one?

I am suggesting a manager should be able to question a referee's call x amount of times per game. Nothing more, nothing less. If the manager believes the decision is fair (even if it isn't) then nothing happens. If he disagrees then a challenge is made when the ball is out of play.

Earlier this season (when we played Southampton). Webb gave a goal kick based on the replays shown on our large screens. Play didn't stop but technically the referee saw the incident and overruled the linesman. There was no stoppage, hold up or delay etc. Just the correct decision.

 

[Golden Gordon]

The question was: "Is fooball corrupt?". It doesn't apply to any one team. It applies to the SPORT of football. Think about it....

 

[CBlue]

The way I see video tech working, is based on the fact we can replay any incident a few seconds after it happens. Keep the game as it is, give managers a set number of "challenges", say 2 each for the whole game. Ref makes decisions, 4th official verifies it, manager can challenge in real time. Would only work at the top level where it is all televised, one excuse for holding up this tech is that it won't work at grassroots...

Won't happen, but would like it to.

A ref makes a decision by not blowing his whistle for an incident - how does a manager then stop the game for a challenge? How long can he go back & appeal a decision? What happens if multiple incidents happen from the time the first incident happened? What happens to the time already played if you have to go back due to a succesful appeal? How far down the league structure will this apply - there are no franchises.

Simple stuff.

Game is played as it is now, if the ref plays on, play on. If a manager disagrees with a decision on a challenge, corner, throw-in, he can challenge it. The manager has 2 per game, would not fuck uo the flow of the match. Can be challenged immediately after the incident or not at all. The game continues as it is now.How far down is more difficult. It'd have to be top-down considering the tech, so only the top league of a country to begin with. Then work it down. But I wouldn't expect sunday leagues to ever pick it up if that is what you mean. There is too much at stake at higher levels to leave it all to chance.

Absolutely not - the game is massively changed. Currently only the ref can stop a game - you're suggesting that a manager has that ability as well. Does the ref stop the game as soon as a challenge is made (how is this communicated?)? Does he wait until the next "natural" stop in play? What does "immediately after the incident" mean? 3 Seconds? 5 seconds? a minute? 5 minutes? 10 minutes?

 

[Yaya_Tony]

A ref makes a decision by not blowing his whistle for an incident - how does a manager then stop the game for a challenge? How long can he go back & appeal a decision? What happens if multiple incidents happen from the time the first incident happened? What happens to the time already played if you have to go back due to a succesful appeal? How far down the league structure will this apply - there are no franchises.

Simple stuff.

Game is played as it is now, if the ref plays on, play on. If a manager disagrees with a decision on a challenge, corner, throw-in, he can challenge it. The manager has 2 per game, would not fuck uo the flow of the match. Can be challenged immediately after the incident or not at all. The game continues as it is now.How far down is more difficult. It'd have to be top-down considering the tech, so only the top league of a country to begin with. Then work it down. But I wouldn't expect sunday leagues to ever pick it up if that is what you mean. There is too much at stake at higher levels to leave it all to chance.

Absolutely not - the game is massively changed. Currently only the ref can stop a game - you're suggesting that a manager has that ability as well. Does the ref stop the game as soon as a challenge is made (how is this communicated?)? Does he wait until the next "natural" stop in play? What does "immediately after the incident" mean? 3 Seconds? 5 seconds? a minute? 5 minutes? 10 minutes?

Manager communicates the challenge through the 4th official. Bear in mind he only gets to do this twice in 90 mins, so won't use it flippantly. At most 30 seconds after, lets say.

 

[CBlue]

Just to make sure your aware, i am not suggesting football should duplicate another sport. Idiot. Parts can be taken to improve our sport, parts can also be avoided to prevent it becoming worse.

You come out with shite that because the NFL & Tennis have VR then it could be & should be introduced into football & call me the idiot?
Which parts from Tennis & the NFL are you suggesting that could make football better, oh wise one?

I am suggesting a manager should be able to question a referee's call x amount of times per game. Nothing more, nothing less. If the manager believes the decision is fair (even if it isn't) then nothing happens. If he disagrees then a challenge is made when the ball is out of play.
Earlier this season (when we played Southampton). Webb gave a goal kick based on the replays shown on our large screens. Play didn't stop but technically the referee saw the incident and overruled the linesman. There was no stoppage, hold up or delay etc. Just the correct decision.

What happens in the time between the incident taking place & the ball going out of play? It could be a while before that happens & any number of subsequent incidents could occur before play is naturally stopped - I said before, in theory you could play a full game with only 2 stoppages in play - half time & full time. If you continue to play for, say, 5 minutes after an incident & it is sucessfully reviewed do you add an additional 5 minutes back onto the playing time? If the natural stop in play was because the ref gave a foul & books/sends off a player but after reviewing the incident 5 minutes ago you have to go back - what happens to the booking/red card? What happens if the ball goes out of play very quickly & is returned to the field of play very quickly before an appeal can be made? Is the chance lost?

 

[Yaya_Tony]

In many circumstances the challenge would be to a decision already made, so no further break in play than has already occured. The manager is only likely to challenge a decision that has already resulted in a break in play, and in any case the ref can add this time to the match just like he does now via injury time.

 

[ManCitizens.]

You come out with shite that because the NFL & Tennis have VR then it could be & should be introduced into football & call me the idiot?
Which parts from Tennis & the NFL are you suggesting that could make football better, oh wise one?

I am suggesting a manager should be able to question a referee's call x amount of times per game. Nothing more, nothing less. If the manager believes the decision is fair (even if it isn't) then nothing happens. If he disagrees then a challenge is made when the ball is out of play.
Earlier this season (when we played Southampton). Webb gave a goal kick based on the replays shown on our large screens. Play didn't stop but technically the referee saw the incident and overruled the linesman. There was no stoppage, hold up or delay etc. Just the correct decision.

What happens in the time between the incident taking place & the ball going out of play? It could be a while before that happens & any number of subsequent incidents could occur before play is naturally stopped - I said before, in theory you could play a full game with only 2 stoppages in play - half time & full time. If you continue to play for, say, 5 minutes after an incident & it is sucessfully reviewed do you add an additional 5 minutes back onto the playing time? If the natural stop in play was because the ref gave a foul & books/sends off a player but after reviewing the incident 5 minutes ago you have to go back - what happens to the booking/red card? What happens if the ball goes out of play very quickly & is returned to the field of play very quickly before an appeal can be made? Is the chance lost?

My suggestion isn't perfected.

What happens now when a player goes down injured? It is the referee's decision to stop play? Yes it is. There is no reason why the same concept cannot be used in different scenario's. It would obviously need to be perfected but you need to acknowledge that in the past clubs weren't allowed subs. This sport needs to continuously improve. Maybe, just maybe your great grandad would have laughed at the suggestion of substitutions. When would subs be made, 5 minutes later, after a goal etc. THINK.

 

[CBlue]

Simple stuff.

Game is played as it is now, if the ref plays on, play on. If a manager disagrees with a decision on a challenge, corner, throw-in, he can challenge it. The manager has 2 per game, would not fuck uo the flow of the match. Can be challenged immediately after the incident or not at all. The game continues as it is now.How far down is more difficult. It'd have to be top-down considering the tech, so only the top league of a country to begin with. Then work it down. But I wouldn't expect sunday leagues to ever pick it up if that is what you mean. There is too much at stake at higher levels to leave it all to chance.

Absolutely not - the game is massively changed. Currently only the ref can stop a game - you're suggesting that a manager has that ability as well. Does the ref stop the game as soon as a challenge is made (how is this communicated?)? Does he wait until the next "natural" stop in play? What does "immediately after the incident" mean? 3 Seconds? 5 seconds? a minute? 5 minutes? 10 minutes?

Manager communicates the challenge through the 4th official. Bear in mind he only gets to do this twice in 90 mins, so won't use it flippantly. At most 30 seconds after, lets say.

How does the ref know that 30 seconds have elapsed - he doesn't know what the appeal is for? How do you stop the game to conduct the review? Who conducts the review? Who determines which cameras/views the ref can have? Intersting to see how this can work in Europe with, say, a Russian 4th official & a German manager!<br /><br />-- Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:37 pm --<br /><br />

In many circumstances the challenge would be to a decision already made, so no further break in play than has already occured. The manager is only likely to challenge a decision that has already resulted in a break in play, and in any case the ref can add this time to the match just like he does now via injury time.

That's total nonsense - Mancini would have appealed Yaya's penalty decision in today's game - how would he have done so? You can't change the laws of the game based on "many circumstances", they have to cover "all circumstances".

 

[Yaya_Tony]

You come out with shite that because the NFL & Tennis have VR then it could be & should be introduced into football & call me the idiot?
Which parts from Tennis & the NFL are you suggesting that could make football better, oh wise one?

I am suggesting a manager should be able to question a referee's call x amount of times per game. Nothing more, nothing less. If the manager believes the decision is fair (even if it isn't) then nothing happens. If he disagrees then a challenge is made when the ball is out of play.
Earlier this season (when we played Southampton). Webb gave a goal kick based on the replays shown on our large screens. Play didn't stop but technically the referee saw the incident and overruled the linesman. There was no stoppage, hold up or delay etc. Just the correct decision.

What happens in the time between the incident taking place & the ball going out of play? It could be a while before that happens & any number of subsequent incidents could occur before play is naturally stopped - I said before, in theory you could play a full game with only 2 stoppages in play - half time & full time. If you continue to play for, say, 5 minutes after an incident & it is sucessfully reviewed do you add an additional 5 minutes back onto the playing time? If the natural stop in play was because the ref gave a foul & books/sends off a player but after reviewing the incident 5 minutes ago you have to go back - what happens to the booking/red card? What happens if the ball goes out of play very quickly & is returned to the field of play very quickly before an appeal can be made? Is the chance lost?

Sky TV cameras don't need 5 mins to get replays together. I don't think the previous guy was suggesting stewards investigations like in F1, which is what you describe sounds like.

The "what happens if this..." argument fails if things are dealt with promptly or left as they are.

 

[Yaya_Tony]

Absolutely not - the game is massively changed. Currently only the ref can stop a game - you're suggesting that a manager has that ability as well. Does the ref stop the game as soon as a challenge is made (how is this communicated?)? Does he wait until the next "natural" stop in play? What does "immediately after the incident" mean? 3 Seconds? 5 seconds? a minute? 5 minutes? 10 minutes?

Manager communicates the challenge through the 4th official. Bear in mind he only gets to do this twice in 90 mins, so won't use it flippantly. At most 30 seconds after, lets say.

How does the ref know that 30 seconds have elapsed - he doesn't know what the appeal is for? How do you stop the game to conduct the review? Who conducts the review? Who determines which cameras/views the ref can have? Intersting to see how this can work in Europe with, say, a Russian 4th official & a German manager!

-- Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:37 pm --

In many circumstances the challenge would be to a decision already made, so no further break in play than has already occured. The manager is only likely to challenge a decision that has already resulted in a break in play, and in any case the ref can add this time to the match just like he does now via injury time.

That's total nonsense - Mancini would have appealed Yaya's penalty decision in today's game - how would he have done so? You can't change the laws of the game based on "many circumstances", they have to cover "all circumstances".

With regards to 30 secs, the ref has a watch for a reason. I never set that in concrete either, 30 secs, lets say, I said.

The 4th official, and he has access to all TV cameras.

Today, the game played on so no "challenge" could have been given for Yaya. Mancini couldn't have appealed it, ref played on.

I never said it was perfect. Video tech can be made to work when issues like this are ironed out.