Mr_B
Niko Kranjcar
all for goal-line technology but if you do more, its a slippery slope to the NFL, 3 hours to play a 1 hour game, no thank you
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Technology And Refereeing
- Thread starter COYS
- Start date
all for goal-line technology but if you do more, its a slippery slope to the NFL, 3 hours to play a 1 hour game, no thank you
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
The video review will take about the same time as it takes the ref to tell the United players to stop harassing him and go away.
1) I don't think slippery slop arguments are very convincing.
2) A 3hr NFL match without video replays would be 2hrs 55mins.
Kandi1977
Garth Crooks
What I'd want was to totally get rid of time wasting. And there is a very simple way of doing it; change to effective playing time, and stop the clock when the ball is not in play. In a normal 2x45 minutes game, the ball is on average not in play for 30-40 of those minutes! So in reality it could be 2x30 minutes effective play and it would be the same as today. Personally I'd want 2x40, so that stamina will play a bigger part.
A lot of incidents to review in that game.
K.D.D.D.D.Soc
Ian Walker
Don't be silly the FA put measures in place to stop that this year
there is time wasting and stopping the flow of the game - if you move to a "stop clock" the second also needs to be addressed. Not saying its a bad idea but just pointing out there is more reasons than time wasting to slow down the game.
I am dead set against getting more technology involved. Many reasons lots of them just personal but one that tends not to be mentioned is it is giving more power / influence to the TV companies, as I assume they still control the camera's / editing. no camera angle available to see the Ibra elbow but here are 5 of mings etc.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
If for arguments sake you take 2 points in which you use Technology to get the decisions right say Pens and offside add that to goal line tech then managers will move on to the next set of decisions to introduce tech and it will never end till the games flow for which is the man factor will be ruined.
The level of ref's and the decisions they make is simply unacceptable for the modern game.
This will not become an NFL style issue, you want a comparison, look at tennis. Simple to implement
- continue Goal line technology
- continue referee making first decision unassisted.
- give team captain 2 challenges per game, if the challenge is right, he keeps it, if challenge is false they lose it. If technology can't resolve issue in 20 seconds, default to ref decision.
Might add 3 minutes to total game time, but as earlier poster said, probably even out with the amount of time refs spend with protesting players now (think how much less time refs spend on did the ball cross the line arguments now, there is none).
This will not become an NFL style issue, you want a comparison, look at tennis. Simple to implement
- continue Goal line technology
- continue referee making first decision unassisted.
- give team captain 2 challenges per game, if the challenge is right, he keeps it, if challenge is false they lose it. If technology can't resolve issue in 20 seconds, default to ref decision.
Might add 3 minutes to total game time, but as earlier poster said, probably even out with the amount of time refs spend with protesting players now (think how much less time refs spend on did the ball cross the line arguments now, there is none).
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
I think all the refs decisions on game changers (goals, pens, sending offs) should be automatic review. Like @Raziel says, if you make a wrong appeal you lose a challenge, but also like @scaramanga's suggestion you give up a sub if wrong - make the team have something to lose from time wasting appeals.
Mr_B
Niko Kranjcar
1) baseball a couple of years ago introduced reviewing if a home run did indeed clear the stands, then they reviewed if runners were safe at first base and got to home plate, now the powers that be are trying to quicken the game up as its got noticeably slower.
2) You obviously haven't sat thru a complete throwball game in a while (not that I'd recommend it)
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Tennis and Baseball and Cricket and Rugby and American football all have regular natural break downs of play that allow reviews.
For me the decisions that affect the game have never made any major impact in the greater scheme of things.
For me other than how individual players act there is nothing I would change in the game personally.
For me the decisions that affect the game have never made any major impact in the greater scheme of things.
For me other than how individual players act there is nothing I would change in the game personally.
Lemonade Money
Les Medley
Doesn't the fact that they added more reviews suggest that the ones they had were working? More a ladder of success than a slippery slope in that case.
I watch at least one a week, all of them during the post season. I've been following the NFL for more than 30 years now and seen a fair few live matches too. Video replays really haven't added anything much to the length of the game but have made for a far better decision making process.
Grays_1890
Chris Jones
Both sports in which a team, in the case of Baseball change 9 times a game and the only action is in blasts and not a continuous action. Same as NFL, same as Cricket.
For a team in the NFL after each play they reset and in Cricket its the same after each ball, the bowler goes back to his mark, so Technology has no impact to the flow of the game, in fact they compliment.
In football you would notice it and it would make it glam for the sake of it
For a team in the NFL after each play they reset and in Cricket its the same after each ball, the bowler goes back to his mark, so Technology has no impact to the flow of the game, in fact they compliment.
In football you would notice it and it would make it glam for the sake of it
Kandi1977
Garth Crooks
Flow of the game won't change whether you stop the clock or not. It's just that the time won't count when the ball is out of play. You could even put a time limit of say 10 seconds to take a FK or throw in after the ref has signaled. This will get rid of blatant time wasting and controversy of goals scored in added time of added time, where no-one really knows how much time is left.
Robbo
Paul Walsh
There's no reason why the game can't continue when a decision has been contested, if say the video refs get f.ex. maximum 15 seconds to decide. If they can't surely say it was a wrong decision within the time limit, then perhaps it wasn't a very clear cut error after all. If they think it was a wrong decision and decide to overturn it, then you stop the play and go back awarding that free kick/penalty or whatever.
The issue here is time. You have to have a limit, and it can't be much more than 10-15 seconds. And obviously there would have to be limitations on how many decisions each team could contest per game.
The issue here is time. You have to have a limit, and it can't be much more than 10-15 seconds. And obviously there would have to be limitations on how many decisions each team could contest per game.
Spur of the moment
Frederic Kanoute
Not sure that would work. Players would be too distracted, especially if it's a key decision like was a goal offside or not.
Hotshot-Tottenham
Edgar Davids
But how do you fairly stop the game to make challenge? How quickly does the challenge have to be made?
How do you fairly restart the game if the challenge fails?
What stops using a challenge to break up a counter attack late in the game?
It's a minefield.