CBlue said:
mancity1 said:
CBlue said:
The CBLUE's of the world are reducing in number at a rapid rate but he is entitled to his opinion.
He is big on opinions and everybody has one.
In saying that let the Premier league the most watched league in the world trial it and see if any of CBlue's concerns and the concerns of others carry much weight in its operation.
AFL is one of the fastest games using a ball with more than two players going around.
The introduction of VR this season has been an outstanding success.
Those dead against it will soon come around but it will never be perfect and its naive to think it will but at least we shall see Lampard's strike against Germany in the WC given a goal and Young the diva given a yellow and a retro match ban and the decision to award the penalty for Manure reversed.
All good stuff all things that even Cblue would be happy with I hope.
If he isnt then there is no hope for him I am afraid and he can go and watch Texas Holdem instead ( oh wait they even replay the key moves in that as well ).
Trial what? vr
What's your suggestion? Just get a load of camera's installed around the pitch - grab a guy from the street & tell him he's today's Video Ref? You would never make it in comedy Cblue.
What are the rules around its use? When can it be applied? How do you stop the game to review incidents? Who decides? Read above.
You're talking in broad terms without having any clue on the specifics. Your argument so far is that it is used in other sports & has to be used in the Premier League. I have no argument on vr Cblue , its introduction into football will make a great game even better ( its an opinion that is shared by the vast majority of people who watch the game and make a living from it ). Specifics you say, I couldn't be more specific but for you again here it is , Young dives , ref points to the spot , video ref tells ref he wants to review , reviews , tells ref its not a penalty , free kick given to Clark.
Lampard strikes the post play continues , closest England player to the goal line asks for review , ref blows whistle goal given after vr review or for those who don't like the appeal process from players substitute video ref for player.
There are lots of OPINIONS that the Young dive was a penalty but his reaction (subsequent dive) was the issue.
Every sport that VR has been introduced has every major stakeholder on mass saying it has improved the game , viewing , educating both experienced spectators and introducing new viewers/spectators to the game ensuring the correct decision is made more often than not etc.
There are always those against the introduction of any form of video technology to aid referees in sport but why should Football be the exception to the rule.
Putting your personal preferences aside player and country wise Cblue do you think that Lampard's shot that crossed the goal line against Germany that in the opinion of the ref did not cross the line should not be reversed then and there irrespective of whether goal line technology or video replay would have ensured it was given a goal?
You say that you have no no doubt the game of football is corrupt and that VR will make a corrupt game more so.
I totally disagree with the last part of that statement and challenge you to demonstrate that vr will increase the level of corruption in the game.
One would have to conclude that in your opinion that the game of cricket is more corrupt than it was before as a result of the introduction of vr into the game and in fact every sport that has introduced vr is now more corrupt.
Watch a game of AFL Cblue when you get a chance and tell me why the game is more corrupt than it was before because of the introduction of vr.
I'm not sure whether you're being disingenuous or whether you're just a bit thick.
What are the rules around its use? When can it be applied? How do you stop the game to review incidents? Who decides? Read above.
I have done & there is absolutely nothing that remotely comes close to answering the questions.
What you are doing is screaming like a little kid that you want an x-box game & your parents keep saying No. You keep screamimg & screaming I need the x-box game, it's really really important that you have the x-box game. Your parents keep saying no & every adult knows the reason why - you don't have a fucking x-box console to play the game on. Now go away & think about buying the x-box console before buying the game i.e. think about the laws of football & which ones will need to change BEFORE you can introduce VR. You can't just say we will trial VR - fundamental changes to the laws of the game need to be agreed upon before anything happens. At this moment in time the referee is the only person making decisions - he gets help from his AR's but he still blows the whistle to make a decision. Think about how that dynamic changes when you have another person making the decisions based upon his opinion (not advising like the AR's).
You keep confusing VR & goal line technology - they are 2 different technologies & completely separate. Goal line technology, if the technology can guarantee 100% success, should be introduced. If it can't then it shouldn't. Why replace a system that doesn't work with another system that doesn't work but works a little better - you can't work on the principle of "nearly pregnant".
Re the closest player to the goaline appeals - does this constitute an appeal to VR? Everytime the ball goes out of play players appeal - should the ref defer to the VR to ensure the throw/goalkick/corner is awarded correctly? If not then WHAT ARE THE RULES FOR A VR TO TAKE PLACE? You can't just play on & bring the game back if a ref in a VR booth notices something - he may need to look again from different angles - what happens to the game that is progressing in the mean time & what happens if he misses something while he is reviewing a previous incident? Should we have VR refs reviewing other VR refs?
Don't be a smart ass Cblue you are much better than that but you keep going off on meaningless tangents to try and justify a point that just doesn't need justifying.
I have never confused goal line technology with video technology.
Goal line technology is a poor substitute for using video replay to see whether the ball has crossed the line or not.
I am not a fan of goal line technology because it will only add to the controversy when in certain instances vr shows the goal line technology to be flawed.
Nothing will ever be 100 per cent Cblue but again I ask you (are you reading this Cblue ) DO YOU WANT the Lampard goal not given as a goal to be overuled at the time, yes or no can you in your next post answer that with a simple yes or no or are you incapable in your responses answering simple questions with a simple yes or no?
If vr proves inconclusive the original decision stands how more simple can it be.
If you had bothered to read my comments on what incidents vr should be used for you wouldn't have needed to bother writing the drivel than ensued in your last post on the matter.
BTW as is always the case with you , you never bother to answer or properly address
the questions raised with you certainly in my case anyway.
In fact you are the only bluemooner to date I have come across on this topic that does so.
At least every other bluemooner that is not a fan of the intro of vr into football addresses the questions raised and does their best to answer them or at least demonstrates their view on why they hold this view with a degree of clarity irrespective of whether someone in the other camp agrees with the premise on which the question is based on or not.
Instead you soap box that fundemental changes will need to occur , we cannot trial vr etc etc.
Of course you trial vr , it can be trialled at our next game if need be.
Do you honestly believe the game of AFL or any other sport wherever has been introduced has changed in any meaningful way to accommodate it?
If you think so , you are deluding yourself Cblue and football will be no different.
It's as if football by some decree according to Cblue ( and pretty much your a one man band Cblue ) is so different / so unique from any other sport on this planet that a decision like what occurred in the semi final between Chelsea and Spurs cannot go to video without the whole game changing fundamentally as you put it.
What a load of tripe.
Look what ensued after the ref signalled to the players the ball in his view crossed the line.
In the meantime the vr signals to the ref its to be reviewed and either the decision stands or it is reversed.
Yes but the few Cblues in the world maintain that the game of football as we know it will have to change forever and presumably for the worse if preytell such a review were to occur and found that the ref made an error for example in his original decision or video showed that a penalty originally given upon review was not a penalty and Villa were awarded possession of the ball as a consequence.
FFS Cblue even my 14 year old sees the merit in that and the game won't change as a result.
As I have said on numerous occasions I used to be in your camp but for different reasons and I was fairly strongly against vr being used in AFL a game that only stops when a goal /point is scored or the ball crosses the boundary line.
Having seen vr used in many other sports and now in AFL I am more convinced than ever that it will be a raging success if used in football and no Cblue the game will not have to change fundamentally ( whatever that means ) to accommodate it.
You should stream a few games of AFL Cblue to see how effective it is.
Managers want it , Stakeholders want it , Referees want it , the vast majority of supporters want it even Craig Burley (LOL) wants it and yes it is mainly due to the fact that television and television rights along with product and quality of players is the driving force behind the premier leagues global appeal that ensures that the subject of its introduction into football never will go away whether you like it or not Cblue.
