And, we're off.....2016/17

[Deleted member 16999]

Im fully in this camp. Retro punishment, absolutely. But once we agree to replays for one thing, say penalties, people will want offside, fouls, corners.

Cricket lasts a day, the extension is minimal, rugby I can't comment on really as don't watch enough. But IMO games would end up being nearer 2hours minimum with replays.

To me it should be all or nothing, it's ok saying goal or no goal but what if that decision follows on from an incorrectly awarded throw-in, corner
or offside.

 

[Slime]

The sooner football embraces the further use of technology the better the sport will be

I think it really is that simple :thup:.

 

[MegaSteve]

The sooner football embraces the further use of technology the better the sport will be

Yep, It will make a real difference to those playing the game on the 'marshes'...

 

[Liverbirdie]

I think also if the ref has seen it and dealt with it (rightly or wrongly ) if you then change that you are under mining the refs authority on the pitch, if the ref didn't see it then it's fair game.

Maybe if the're arrogant enough to think they are always right.

I would love to see rugby refs and cricket umpires (who have spanned the before and after of video refereeing), to see what their views were, before and after it came in. It would be interesting reading.

The difference shouldnt be 1 yellow or 5 games out, just cos a ref misses it, or bottles a decision as happened at least twice over the weekend.

I cant believe Fabregas and Ibrahimovich havent been looked into.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Yes Pete rank defending.Overall once again we were better than the opposition but failed to get a 2nd,I for one don't understand why we are failing to kill teams off I really thought we were turning a corner.I still believe 4th is there and am more worried of Spurs than Liverpool no surprise there.Apart from when Liverpool came 2nd for the last 10 years they have been miles behind and their main problem has always been weaker teams.Long way to go but a run is on its way.

All fair points, though I think we'll finish above Spurs. Although I think Spurs have a better balanced team in some ways, our firepower is a big advantage, as think that after Kane and Alli, there isnt a lot of other goals in the side. I think we'll lose more than spurs, but will have more wins and less draws, compared to them.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

To me it should be all or nothing, it's ok saying goal or no goal but what if that decision follows on from an incorrectly awarded throw-in, corner
or offside.

Because football is like life; it will never be perfect and the sooner the armchair fans get their head round that the better it will be.

Strikers will miss open goals, goalkeepers will chuck it in their own net and so on. Indded if players made as few mistakes as refs it would be a better game.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Paul woeful game yes but up until your goal I never felt we were going to lose,once you scored yes the crowd woke up and you pressed but once we had 1 I would have liked to c Mate and Rashford and go for a 2nd as appossed to Fellaini as a more defence minded player.Onwards and upwards hopefully.

I think thats the difference between Fergie and Mourinho. Mourinho will happiliy defend a 1-0 with 10 minutes to go, whereas Fergie will be going for 2,3 and 4.

Mourinho has had some good defences at Chelsea (twice) and Inter, but cant say that at the moment.Great keeper, Valencia doing a good job, not so much after that.

 

[Liverbirdie]

TV cameras don't offer perfection but I bet Michael Oilver wishes he could have seen that tackle again in slow motion and from three different angles. He doesn't get that luxury which is why I have not criticised him at all, just the system that allows the offender to escape. The refs assessor will have seen it and reported it, that's for sure.

Come on though, do you think that that challenge needed super slo-mo, or alternate angles.

There was no other players in the icinity, Rojo jumped in 2 footed from a few feet away, and it was the linesman's side.

He must have seen it to give the yellow - he must have just bottled it.

 

[Papas1982]

To me it should be all or nothing, it's ok saying goal or no goal but what if that decision follows on from an incorrectly awarded throw-in, corner
or offside.

But the goal takes no time from the game whatsoever. And is 100% factual. All over decisions can on occasion be inconclusive.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Because football is like life; it will never be perfect and the sooner the armchair fans get their head round that the better it will be.

Strikers will miss open goals, goalkeepers will chuck it in their own net and so on. Indded if players made as few mistakes as refs it would be a better game.

What's with the armchair fans comment? Is there a set number of games over a certain period you'd like to lay down so we know if we are worthy of an opinion.
If you'd like to know my attendance record please ask!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

But the goal takes no time from the game whatsoever. And is 100% factual. All over decisions can on occasion be inconclusive.

Agreed, however, ball in or out of play is also 100% factual.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Come on though, do you think that that challenge needed super slo-mo, or alternate angles.

There was no other players in the icinity, Rojo jumped in 2 footed from a few feet away, and it was the linesman's side.

He must have seen it to give the yellow - he must have just bottled it.

Exactly, so what would be the answer.

Retrospective action would only mean Rojo would not be available for three games against other sides. No advantage to the side against whom he committed the foul.

I admit I would be interested to know what the ref saw (or thought he saw) as, in real time on TV, it looked a straight red. But the use of technology would not change that.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

What's with the armchair fans comment? Is there a set number of games over a certain period you'd like to lay down so we know if we are worthy of an opinion.
If you'd like to know my attendance record please ask!

What a touchy little soul you are!

The reference to armchair fans is aimed at the demand for TV involvement in decision making which I have never heard voiced by fans at matches as they tend to be far too wrapped up in the game.

The call seems to be from those who have the benefit of numerous replays and to use them would, in my opinion, change the game forever and not for the better.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Exactly, so what would be the answer.

Retrospective action would only mean Rojo would not be available for three games against other sides. No advantage to the side against whom he committed the foul.

I admit I would be interested to know what the ref saw (or thought he saw) as, in real time on TV, it looked a straight red. But the use of technology would not change that.

Well getting the correct amount of game punishemebt afterwards would be a start so his team rightly suffers for the players discretion

And as for in game issues - in the time it took the other player to got treatment a video ref could have look at that incident within seconds and told the ref it was a jumping two footed tackle - whole issue sorted with no extra delay.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Other sports have breaks in play facilitating the use of replays, football does not. Crowds are not going to be happy waiting on the result of a TV replay that is, after all, only being used to satisfy the demands of those not attending the match.

So TV replays would not benefit the game for those at the game.

And if you seriously think that the possible use of retrospective replays will somehow stop or deter players from diving or making dangerous tackles you clearly have not played the game. These sort of actions are instinctive not premeditated and the use of replays has not stopped them yet, nor will it.

As for sport being massive and huge in financial terms; so what?

Refs, like players, make mistakes that affect the outcome of games, that is part of SPORT.

I would be happy at the match to wait for a critical decision to go "upstairs", as long as there is a limit to how many appeals you can have.

I dont want this to all be harsh on the refs though, and players also have to take their share of the blame by the amount of cheating that goes on.

Maybe all penalties and red cards are looked at on a Monday, and if anyone blatantly dives, like Alli at the weekend, he is fined 3 weeks wages, and is banned for 3 matches. It wont cure it fully, but will go a long way to solving it.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

I would be happy at the match to wait for a critical decision to go "upstairs", as long as there is a limit to how many appeals you can have.

I dont want this to all be harsh on the refs though, and players also have to take their share of the blame by the amount of cheating that goes on.

Maybe all penalties and red cards are looked at on a Monday, and if anyone blatantly dives, like Alli at the weekend, he is fined 3 weeks wages, and is banned for 3 matches. It wont cure it fully, but will go a long way to solving it.

There we must differ as I would not want the delay, fine in Rojo's case as that should have been instantly visible but many contentious decisions would require much more of a delay. And if you restrict the number of appeals there will be a further delay as the captain or manager decides if he is going to use up one of his quota.

As for deterring diving all I will say is nearly 50 years ago I played with a guy who was very adept at clipping his own heels at just the right time. He was so good at it even the opposition ended up convinced it was a penalty!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

What a touchy little soul you are!

The reference to armchair fans is aimed at the demand for TV involvement in decision making which I have never heard voiced by fans at matches as they tend to be far too wrapped up in the game.

The call seems to be from those who have the benefit of numerous replays and to use them would, in my opinion, change the game forever and not for the better.

When you mention it 2-3 times to make your point and you've made us fully aware on numerous occassions the level you played at, it comes across as condescending, as I've stated I'm not in agreement per say for trial by tv, it's either all or nothing, half hearted piss poor attempts will do nothing but damage to the game, again like Rugby, one man in a booth speaking to the Ref.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Exactly, so what would be the answer.

Retrospective action would only mean Rojo would not be available for three games against other sides. No advantage to the side against whom he committed the foul.

I admit I would be interested to know what the ref saw (or thought he saw) as, in real time on TV, it looked a straight red. But the use of technology would not change that.

If there was video technology, Everton would have gained on the day, instead of Man U's next few opponents, although with Rojo being out, they may have more chance of getting beat with him out of the side. :whoo:

Mickie, I was a fervent anti-video refereeing guy for 15 yera, regularly arguing with one mate on the way back from away matches, all up until about 5 years ago.

Whether it is increased athleticism, diet and all of the other things, but refereeing is now dire in the prem possibly due to the increased speed and fitness.

A common thing 20 years ago was, out a winger on in the last 20 to run at the tiring full back. That full back is now still sprinting full out in the 90th minute. They are athletes now, and I think the game needs to change with it. I'm a luddite in most things in life, but this has to change IMHO.

I can understand some of the other arguments against, but until it is trialled, it shouldnt be written off. The pro argument also know that 100% of decisions wont be write, but a lot more will be.

It isnt a right or wrong argument, but I'm sure cricket and rugby fans were having the same arguments 20 years ago, wonder what they think now?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

There we must differ as I would not want the delay, fine in Rojo's case as that should have been instantly visible but many contentious decisions would require much more of a delay. And if you restrict the number of appeals there will be a further delay as the captain or manager decides if he is going to use up one of his quota.

As for deterring diving all I will say is nearly 50 years ago I played with a guy who was very adept at clipping his own heels at just the right time. He was so good at it even the opposition ended up convinced it was a penalty!

You wouldn't accept cheating in Golf, what makes it acceptable in Football, it might take generations to sort it, but surely somewhere someone has to make a stand?

 

[Liverbirdie]

There we must differ as I would not want the delay, fine in Rojo's case as that should have been instantly visible but many contentious decisions would require much more of a delay. And if you restrict the number of appeals there will be a further delay as the captain or manager decides if he is going to use up one of his quota.

As for deterring diving all I will say is nearly 50 years ago I played with a guy who was very adept at clipping his own heels at just the right time. He was so good at it even the opposition ended up convinced it was a penalty!

If only Pathe news would have had video replay......................:whoo:

Give the captain only 30 seconds (like in the cricket) to decide, and no help from the technical area, in case they watch a very quick replay on dead fast, super-ready, slow-mo.