Video reffing approved for France-Spain tomorrow

shemnel said:
i can see your point, honestly i can, i'm definitely not going to be standing in the streets saying "bring back shonky offsides!" bcos i can see how ridiculous it seems for a sport to be intertwined with incorrect decisions, it seems bonkers at the very least.

but then it just feels we're driving the sport further away from what i recognise. The demand for everything to be right, we should have 2 more pts etc, bcos ultimately it means we might miss out on top4 etc which in the end is cash and prestige. The bottom line is the financial burden of the game is completely incongruous with 'you win some you lose some' on the decisions front. For me that's a shame.
Click to expand...
I share your concerns pal, but for slightly different reasons. Football is the game we love because at its best it flows so beautifully. The City, Liverpool game being a perfect case in point. My overriding worry about this form of technological change to the game is it being something that irreversibly changes that. I didn't watch the game last night, but it would seem from some of the posts that those concerns could be, to some extent, ameliorated.

One area of technology that I believe must be within current technological capabilities that, like goal line technology, shouldn't interrupt the flow of a game, is offsides. It cannot be beyond the wit of man to devise a system where every player and the ball are chipped to determine whether a particular player was in an offside position when the ball was played forward, following which the lino can interpret accordingly. I would have thought that was fairly straightforward.
 
Xiphos said:
I wondered what Millington was on about when i heard that last night, i think he was refering to fouls on Mario and an attempted hack on Sergio, don't know why he used that as an example though apart from saying it was the stand out moment in Prem history, the plastic rag in the studio nearly choked
Click to expand...
I expect he may have been talking about the 'foul' on SWP before the throw in that led up to the goal.
 
Typical that a lot of the rags are looking at it with the point of view of "what if a last minute winner is scored, leading to and celebrations and then ruled out a minute later'. Well rags, what about the other teams fans who would head home feeling cheated by wrong decisions. The right decisions can only be good for football - and that means bad news for the rags as they, without doubt, get too many go their way.
I expect most rag pundits (like Ince) to come out against video refs, but it will be futile. The evidence after one game is overwhelming - without the video it would have been 1-1 instead of 0-2. This can not be ignored. I think this will be a real game changer and one for the better.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I share your concerns pal, but for slightly different reasons. Football is the game we love because at its best it flows so beautifully. The City, Liverpool game being a perfect case in point. My overriding worry about this form of technological change to the game is it being something that irreversibly changes that. I didn't watch the game last night, but it would seem from some of the posts that those concerns could be, to some extent, ameliorated.

One area of technology that I believe must be within current technological capabilities that, like goal line technology, shouldn't interrupt the flow of a game, is offsides. It cannot be beyond the wit of man to devise a system where every player and the ball are chipped to determine whether a particular player was in an offside position when the ball was played forward, following which the lino can interpret accordingly. I would have thought that was fairly straightforward.
Click to expand...

It will flow just fine, the problem I see is that every crying banshee will be approaching the ref for a second opinion, especially rags, it pretty much undermines the ref in real time and any reversed decision will have the ref seized upon thereafter...

The premise should be that the 'eye in the sky' has the ability to call 'foul play', not the referee...
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
It suits some people to have the possibility of 'wrong' decisions being part and parcel of the game because they have historically benefited whilst others have been on the receiving end of the shite from refs. You only have to listen to the ex-pro pundits, particularly the world-renowned coach, Ince, to see how much the game is crying out for decisions to be correct, and that EVERY result clearly indicates what went on during the game. Video reffing at The Lane last season? That could have been three points for us. There are still some questions to be raised re the use of video. We still have the likes of Rojo escaping lengthy bans for tackles which three 'experts' have viewed and still let the player off!
Click to expand...
Not quite with Rojo. The ref gave him a yellow both times so it wasn't even referred to the panel.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I share your concerns pal, but for slightly different reasons. Football is the game we love because at its best it flows so beautifully. The City, Liverpool game being a perfect case in point. My overriding worry about this form of technological change to the game is it being something that irreversibly changes that. I didn't watch the game last night, but it would seem from some of the posts that those concerns could be, to some extent, ameliorated.

One area of technology that I believe must be within current technological capabilities that, like goal line technology, shouldn't interrupt the flow of a game, is offsides. It cannot be beyond the wit of man to devise a system where every player and the ball are chipped to determine whether a particular player was in an offside position when the ball was played forward, following which the lino can interpret accordingly. I would have thought that was fairly straightforward.
Click to expand...
One decision took under 40 seconds. The second around ten seconds.

Or to put it another way, both decision combined took less time than the Monaco player took to walk off when subbed after 90 mins in the second leg (not that any additional time was added on to the 3 minutes shown anyway).
 
shemnel said:
i think with time and practice this could be reasonably slick. It wasn't bad but the 1st France 'goal' was a bit slow.

I'm a big fan of emotionally driven sport, incorrect decisions are all part and parcel of footy for me, but then i can see how that opinion isn't really practical in the modern game anymore, which will become a little more sterilized.
Click to expand...

I could not disagree more
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.