Man CitHEHEHE

[No Fixed Abode]

There are no rules in football.

And it doesn't happen repeatedly in most games, as you a) well know and b) have no idea about given you don't watch most games

[stealthpapes]

There are no rules in football.

And it doesn't happen repeatedly in most games, as you a) well know and b) have no idea about given you don't watch most games

So that's a no then.

[stealthpapes]

If you're going to do this, at least find an example where the rule of thumb referenced clearly hasn't worked. It shouldn't be too hard.

Try doing the referees course, if you do it with the Reading RA they have some excellent slides illustrating ball in and out of play issues. They never refer to a rule of thumb involving looking for a strip of grass. It might be an option if you are viewing the situation from directly above but from pitch level it's simply irrelevant and as you yourself admitted the usual TV angles are so misleading that second guessing situations from poor positions is a waste of time.
Am I right you are an Oxbridge academic type ?

What are you on about now?

[stealthpapes]

There are no rules in football.

And it doesn't happen repeatedly in most games, as you a) well know and b) have no idea about given you don't watch most games

hat-trick rofl.

[Wizard]

Suggestion in the pub was that managers get a video ref call. One per game, where footage can possibly be reviewed.

Looks fine in principle, probably full of holes.

They've started doing this in NHL this season. Whilst I do agree that decisions are called correctly, it does make scoring a goal feel a bit flat as you're not sure if it's ever going to stand.

For example, a few days ago Jyrki Jokipakka (green #2) scored his second ever goal for Dallas against Edmonton (skip to 1.35): http://www.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/m_game ... 2015020700

However, Edmonton challenged the call that Ales Hemsky (green #83) was offside when Jokipakka entered the offensive zone. The call was upheld because neither of Hemsky's skates were touching the blue line when Jokipakka entered the zone. Despite the fact Hemsky had nothing to do with the play, the goal was disallowed retrospectively.



To the laws of the game, the call (after review) was correct, but it has an effect on ruining the 'spirit' of the game. I'd worry about similar goals in football being disallowed due to technicalities.

And how far back can you challenge? All the way back through the previous passage of play since the ball was last dead? That could be 10 minutes. But if you allow challenges whilst the game is being played, you risk ruining the natural flow for a potentially wrong call.
I prefer it the way it is now.

[Nameless]

There are no rules in football.

And it doesn't happen repeatedly in most games, as you a) well know and b) have no idea about given you don't watch most games

So that's a no then.

stealthpapes in posting baffling irrelevancy shock.....

[Nameless]

If you're going to do this, at least find an example where the rule of thumb referenced clearly hasn't worked. It shouldn't be too hard.

Try doing the referees course, if you do it with the Reading RA they have some excellent slides illustrating ball in and out of play issues. They never refer to a rule of thumb involving looking for a strip of grass. It might be an option if you are viewing the situation from directly above but from pitch level it's simply irrelevant and as you yourself admitted the usual TV angles are so misleading that second guessing situations from poor positions is a waste of time.
Am I right you are an Oxbridge academic type ?

What are you on about now?

You'll never know, given that you clearly never read anyone else's posts , but just keep churning out the snide witticisms anyway

[Handsome Man]

Suggestion in the pub was that managers get a video ref call. One per game, where footage can possibly be reviewed.

Looks fine in principle, probably full of holes.

They've started doing this in NHL this season. Whilst I do agree that decisions are called correctly, it does make scoring a goal feel a bit flat as you're not sure if it's ever going to stand.

For example, a few days ago Jyrki Jokipakka (green #2) scored his second ever goal for Dallas against Edmonton (skip to 1.35): http://www.nhl.com/gamecenter/en/m_game ... 2015020700

However, Edmonton challenged the call that Ales Hemsky (green #83) was offside when Jokipakka entered the offensive zone. The call was upheld because neither of Hemsky's skates were touching the blue line when Jokipakka entered the zone. Despite the fact Hemsky had nothing to do with the play, the goal was disallowed retrospectively.



To the laws of the game, the call (after review) was correct, but it has an effect on ruining the 'spirit' of the game. I'd worry about similar goals in football being disallowed due to technicalities.

And how far back can you challenge? All the way back through the previous passage of play since the ball was last dead? That could be 10 minutes. But if you allow challenges whilst the game is being played, you risk ruining the natural flow for a potentially wrong call.
I prefer it the way it is now.

Good post. I hadn't really thought of when the video referral would operate and what it would look back over - waiting minutes for decisions would be rubbish.

My main reason for thinking this type of referral system might not work is that so few decisions in football are black and white. Whether somebody has a direct goal-scoring opportunity, has used excessive force in a tackle, or handballs is so often a grey area that having TV replays would just muddy the issue. At the moment, the ref makes the decisions as he sees them.

[Nameless]

Absolutely, in many goals you could find a reason why a decision might have been made differently. You'd have teams of analysts constantly scrutinising play to have appeals ready. There would never be a goal scored from a corner again ! Although how you would work out the appeals from corners I have no idea as you'd have multiple claims for free kicks for both teams.
Just let the officials do their job, football refereeing is more art than science....

[Sanguine]

They've started doing this in NHL this season. Whilst I do agree that decisions are called correctly, it does make scoring a goal feel a bit flat as you're not sure if it's ever going to stand.

That's been an unwelcome addition to Test cricket of the review system, where pretty much any feathered catch or lbw decision for the final wicket of the match leads to a review, however obvious the nick or straight the lbw shout. Rather ruins the spectacle of the winning wicket.

[stealthpapes]

There are no rules in football.

And it doesn't happen repeatedly in most games, as you a) well know and b) have no idea about given you don't watch most games

So that's a no then.

stealthpapes in posting baffling irrelevancy shock.....

So that's a no then.

[Nameless]

So that's a no then.

stealthpapes in posting baffling irrelevancy shock.....

So that's a no then.

Is it Groundhog Day again already ?
Asking if it 'is a no' when no question has been asked requiring a yes or no and you've not been involved in the discussion you are chipping in on suggests either you've gone barking mad or you've got the quote wrong.
Want to try again ?
Feel free not to if you've realised you're not making progress.

[stealthpapes]

Good post. I hadn't really thought of when the video referral would operate and what it would look back over - waiting minutes for decisions would be rubbish.

My main reason for thinking this type of referral system might not work is that so few decisions in football are black and white. Whether somebody has a direct goal-scoring opportunity, has used excessive force in a tackle, or handballs is so often a grey area that having TV replays would just muddy the issue. At the moment, the ref makes the decisions as he sees them.

I liked Wiz's post as well.

Handball boils down to "does the referee think it was deliberate", so there's inherently a bit of interpretation in there. Almost every handball is a grey area.

I think having a limited number might help - but you'd want to see it in action. There's always loopholes and perverse incentives with these things.

I do agree on the general point that:

Absolutely, in many goals you could find a reason why a decision might have been made differently.

I find some of the claims on here that something *should* have been given to be so tedious. But in some, clear, cases where the ball has gone out of play or crossed a line - offside maybe - where parallax and angles work against you, then why not use the tools at your disposal.

Given that TV will analyse and cross-analyse it, it's a bit of a no-brainer.

[stealthpapes]

stealthpapes in posting baffling irrelevancy shock.....

So that's a no then.

Is it Groundhog Day again already ?
Asking if it 'is a no' when no question has been asked requiring a yes or no and you've not been involved in the discussion you are chipping in on suggests either you've gone barking mad or you've got the quote wrong.
Want to try again ?
Feel free not to if you've realised you're not making progress.

So that's a no then.

[Nameless]

So that's a no then.

Is it Groundhog Day again already ?
Asking if it 'is a no' when no question has been asked requiring a yes or no and you've not been involved in the discussion you are chipping in on suggests either you've gone barking mad or you've got the quote wrong.
Want to try again ?
Feel free not to if you've realised you're not making progress.

So that's a no then.

It's either a yes or a no depending on which question I decide to answer.
Although as you are wrong it probably doesn't matter which it is.
Glad we've sorted it,

[stealthpapes]

Is it Groundhog Day again already ?
Asking if it 'is a no' when no question has been asked requiring a yes or no and you've not been involved in the discussion you are chipping in on suggests either you've gone barking mad or you've got the quote wrong.
Want to try again ?
Feel free not to if you've realised you're not making progress.

So that's a no then.

It's either a yes or a no depending on which question I decide to answer.
Although as you are wrong it probably doesn't matter which it is.
Glad we've sorted it,

So that's a no then.

[Winston Smith]

3 points from a possible 21 against top 6 teams

[Victor Meldrew]

Interesting figures there.
They are still IMHO very much in the title race especially if they (ever?) get Kompany playing again.
There is some stat (can't remember what exactly which shows how well they do whenever he plays-a bit obvious really as he is probably the best centre-back in our game.

[AthleticoSpizz]

Bloo-hoo moon.....why are you leaving so soon?

Just watching the sky blue seats appearing as the game progresses on motd

[No Fixed Abode]

Bloo-hoo moon.....why are you leaving so soon?

Just watching the sky blue seats appearing as the game progresses on motd

Plenty of empty seats right at the start of the game too.