It would be if that is what I was postulating. I'm saying there has to be a balance between the pursuit of correct decision making and the flow of the game. I don't believe the former should override the latter at all costs. Do you think it should?So unless there is a 100% reduction then nothing should be done to reduce incorrect decisions where possible?
That's a rather strange premise.
It's not like that at all. Where have I used a definitive word like "will" or "never" in the sentence to which you refer. I made a statement of opinion (the words "speaking personally" should have provided a clue) rather than an assertion of absolute truth.You'd be better placed to comment had you watched the game yesterday.
Two correct calls. 50 seconds combined. Totally changes the game from 1-1 to the correct score 2-0.
And your sentence is bunkum. It's like saying "We will never stop all fatalities on the road so there's no point having speed limits or seat belts."
I could not disagree more
Of course you're speaking personally. That's a given. You'd rather not implement technology for three reasons; you don't wish to break up the flow of a game (which is funny as substations take longer), you don't believe it will stop ALL incorrect decisions and you're an old Luddite with regards the subject.It's not like that at all. Where have I used a definitive word like "will" or "never" in the sentence to which you refer. I made a statement of opinion (the words "speaking personally" should have provided a clue) rather than an assertion of absolute truth.
You'll have to do better than that, sweet cheeks.
and that's fine.
The introduction of video reffing to the premier league is as certain as day follows night and that is the fact that fans with my sort of romanticised opinion of the game have to accept.
Where my opinion has been challenged, and undermined, is the goal line tech which is very fast and unobtrusive and straightens out something which is game changing - a goal. So why should i be happy for offsides/penalties etc to remain in the realms of on-pitch subjectivity (let's not forget video refs are still subjective but with more time and scrutiny) and yet happily accept goal line tech.
That's where anti-tech supporters such as myself dont have any concrete arguments as such, beyond romantic notions of the game from a year that has, frankly, gone. But i'll stick to my vision of a game that is played with a fluidity in both actions and decisions.
The one thing I think all parties need to consider is how to stop willful disruption of a game. E.g. player gets 'fouled' in box (was clearly not) and team break at lightning speed. Manager decides to challenge missed penalty call as other team are romping towards the other end with a 5 on 2 situation. How do you pick out cynical decisions? or do you only employ video tech when there's a stoppage? this is a tricky situation.
Not quite with Rojo. The ref gave him a yellow both times so it wasn't even referred to the panel.
My argument is that I'm an old Luddite?Of course you're speaking personally. That's a given. You'd rather not implement technology for three reasons; you don't wish to break up the flow of a game (which is funny as substations take longer), you don't believe it will stop ALL incorrect decisions and you're an old Luddite with regards the subject.
You can try and play on semantics and the like all you wish but the above summarises your argument.
Absolutely. They would have had a minimum of three more players sent off than the one they've currently had. And lost a shit load of goals. What's not to love?But the beauty of the video ref would be that it would be looked at AGAIN, in slo-mo, and then decided upon, rather than the ref having a quick shufty at the crest on the shirt and matching it with the same colour card, rather than the card that matches the shirt! No cards issued before the video is given - IS THERE ANY REASON WHY I SHOULDN'T SEND OFF THIS RAG BASTARD? Video reffing will become a thing of the utmost wonder! We'll be forever wondering why we haven't had it for twenty years.