I totally disagree with having bad decisions as part of the game. I want the game to improve and bad calls are ruining the game for me. It ends up making the game a waste of time. If a decision is 100% wrong - just like the Frank Lampard goal against Germany in the last world cup - what's the point of a referee being there ? Tradition is more often than not the enemy of progression. Should we still have footballs with huge laces in them that weigh as much as a canonball when they get wet, or play in shorts that are almost ankle length. Whilst we are at it lets go back to allowing the keeper to pick up a back pass. Luddites. hmph.
Agree totally. In years to come tech will gradually erase these types of injustices. We live in hope.
I think it all depends on how you do it and what you do it for. If it is just goal line technology then it is quick and no long stopages to the game. But where does it stop. Offsides, penalties, handballs, foul throws, back passes to goalkeepers. They all could have a possible say in what a result could be. Jees if we looked at everything a game would last for 3 hrs. will there be need for refs in the future or could it be done from a screen. Rugby is getting ridiculous now where refs seem to make no desicions without checking first. I for one dont want football to go that way.
I feel a bit awkward when he's surrounded by top-level ex-pro's such as Cannavaro and Vieira and he's ranting and raving like an amateur who knows nothing about the game. Vieira at one point even said something like "We actually played the game so we know what was going on". The man's a waste of oxygen. I much prefer the way Lineker presents it, he'll put a question out there and let the pundits discuss instead of screaming and shouting. Agree with the OP, and I too usually quite like Jonathan Pearce as a commentator (Robot Wars ftw!) but he completely lost the plot for that goal line debacle. The players on the pitch were equally dull though, shouting at the ref when they saw it on the big screen. Goal line technology works, just have to trust it.
Some interesting debate going on... My responses would be: 1. I hate Adrian Chiles too. He's just an armchair supporter hosting massive football matches. He doesn't provide the right dynamic for the show. You'd expect to hear his style down the local pub, not on the TV. 2. I don't think football needs anything more than goalline technology. We can talk about throw-ins, corners, offsides, handballs etc, but 99 times out of one hundred, the defence or goalkeeper still have an opportunity to do something after those decisions. It's still usually their own fault that they've conceded. However, we're talking about a goal here. When you take a shot, score a goal, and it's not given. That is crazy, and we can't go without Goalline Technology now that we have a fully tested system! 3. Robot Wars ftw indeed!
I detest Blatter but there's one suggestion he's looking at right now and that's bringing in a limited number of challenges for coaches (one or two per half?) that can be looked at by a video ref. I actually think that's a fantastic idea because it'll ensure the speed of the game is maintained by stopping frivolous challenges whilst eliminating injustices. It would be a crying shame if teams went out at big competitions because of foolish errors by officials. Can you imagine Wales managing to qualify (we can dream), getting all that way and then going out to a pen where the attacking player dived? So much for bad refereeing being an 'enjoyable part of the game that gives us something to talk about'
Cheating is a problem I agree but the problem is poor decisions costing teams games and points. I'm not talking about whether a throw goes one way or the other. In fairness to the officials the speed of the game is at a record high and most make honest mistakes because they don't get interminable super slow-mo replays. If employed correctly in a limited way tech can help eliminate injustices in the game. I've never bought the argument that mistakes by refs are a welcome part of the game because it gives us something to talk about. There are enough good things about football to talk about without that.
Retrospective action for cheating would solve most of the problems and bad calls. The refs make mistakes, but the players need to be accountable for cheating, whether it be diving, play acting, or whatever. Bring in a system where the opposing team can put in a complaint, then a panel reviews the replay, and decides whether it was not "in the spirit of the game" and give them match bans and what not. Wouldn't be long before all the **** stopped then. But they also need to open up a better system for refs explaining their decisions, as some players go to ground because unless they do, the ref seems to let play go on, even though a foul was committed, Brazil yesterday had a good example, foul 5 yards outside the box, the ref played on, no advantage was gained, yet no free kick was forthcoming, really pisses me off that. Which is why what happened to Cardiff, the pen against sunderland, was what needs to happen.
football use to be gentleman's game and played in the spirit of fair play. Today its all about winning at all cost and players are told to cheat if they have to to get a penalty or get a player sent off....There is only one reason why the game has become like this and that is MONEY...The refs job today is much harder than it was years ago and some decisions reflect this and as far as im concerned we don't need any gadgets in football we need to give refs more power to stamp out the cheating in the game that is ruining a fair and just game. There should be an automatic 5 match ban for anyone who tries to cheat and the club fined £100,000 for every incident and perhaps we can get back playing the game in the true spirit that has been the case for many years before there was any money in the game...
I've toyed in my mind with the idea of a challenge system too - it's proven to work very effectively in American Football and Tennis and could definitely be used in football (but it could only work during a stoppage - i.e. if play has naturally stopped for a free-kick, corner, penalty, goal-kick or throw-in. It would not be good to have a challenge asking for a penalty to be given as this would then mean that it's the challenge that's stopped the game). I agree that 1 challenge per half or 2 challenges to use at any point during the whole game would be fine. Too many and unnecessary stoppages would occur. But we'd still have a situation where, once the challenges have been used, incorrect decisions could then affect the game again. So maybe it's not the absolute answer. I love the idea of retrospective banning for diving. A severe punishment of between 3 and 10 games depending on the incident. The punishment must be harsh or it will never be stamped out. Throw yourself down for a penalty in the last 5 minutes of a big game? 10 game ban. Miss over a quarter of the season. They'll think twice about diving then. Roll around holding your face because an opponent has lightly touched your face? 5 game ban. It would be so easy and would actually speed up the game considerably in the long run. And they need to scrap this ridiculous rule where if the referee has seen an incident, they can't retrospectively review it, regardless of whether the referee got it wrong. It has to be the most stupid rule I've heard of. Sometimes I feel like football creates a rod for its own back.
It speaks volumes about a sport that you are semi rewarded for diving and rolling around like you've been shot when on many occasions you haven't been touched or when players are taught to throw they're hand in the air to try to influence a linesman's call .
TLF, I think we're singing from the same hymnsheet! I was saying it would produce too many stoppages myself. But by having limited amounts of challenges, that would stop teams needlessly challenging. Additionally, being able to go back and challenge would be ludicrous. If the play has continued, teams would just have to take the referee's decision as final. I would see the challenge system as more of a reaction to a decision already given. For example, if a goal kick, penalty, free kick or corner has been given against you, only then should you be able to challenge that decision. It would be wrong to have a challenge system that stops the game and awards a decision that wasn't given. If we did have to have a challenge system, then I feel it should only be used to dispute already given decisions. But as I said previously, it's not a system that I feel is the answer.
Why not? No need to have it for just about everything. Limit the challenges and what they can me made for. Simple really.
I agree with Swanselona - retrospective action on diving and feigning injury would certainly help. Imagine a player goes down without being touched and wins a penalty. After the game said player is found guilty and receives a 3 match ban. That sounds fine to me although not perfect. Once a game is over the result stands doesn't it. So a player can still cheat to get a winning penalty in the World Cup final and he wouldn't give a toss about a 3 match ban - his country will have won the world cup by then. So it's not perfect but still a step in the right direction and would get my vote. A question to some of the 'traditionalists' on here - what are your feelings on the referee spraying the line on the pitch to stop the wall encroaching on a free kick. Personally I think it's perfect but I'm sure some may have issues with it because it wasn't done in 'their day'....
A question to some of the 'traditionalists' on here - what are your feelings on the referee spraying the line on the pitch to stop the wall encroaching on a free kick. Personally I think it's perfect but I'm sure some may have issues with it because it wasn't done in 'their day'.... Nothing wrong with this at all. It has been done before and it don't effect the pitch as it soon goes as players run over it...Im not sure but i think its some sort of chalk substance they use.
As long as the white line isn't put on by a video machine ,I' m good with it . I'm not against man made change ( extra linesmen on the touch line to give immediate call for goal or not ) , just against stopping the game to have a re look on video for anything .
