Football 2010-2011

[Benj]

And...as a response to the Michel Gondy esuqe parallel universe type stuff

What happens after a review is called? Who knows. This is what happens after a controversial decision is made-

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/626349-epl-the-eight-refereeing-decisions-that-changed-the-course-of-the-title-race

[eFestivals]

I do, its the one who has seen it many times, at differing speeds

You're not getting what I'm saying.

The ref might have seen no less clearly than the reviewer - yet they can still end up with different opinions. You could have two refs doing the reviewing, and them have different opinions.

There is no black and white for many of the incidents that happen within a football match.

I agree, over the line and offside are easy enough though, whilst the judging of fouls, handballs etc, can be more accurately judged on multiple viewings

Handball - deliberate and gaining an advantage, or not? Opinion.

Fouls - opinion.

And as I've said with offside, while you can get the right decision from a review, you can't get the play back to where it was - so it doesn't work as a way of redressing the unfairness of a decision.

Again I agree but do not think reviews will make it complex. Perhaps I am over estimating the intellect of the average football fan.

It's nothing to do with fan's intelligence.

Extra rules - which is what a review system would be - makes things more complex. That's a simple and indisputable fact.

A huge part of the beauty and appeal of football is its logical simplicity. That changes with the introduction of another layer of rules for the purposes of reviewing things.

Its a disgrace that no proper goal line technology has been allowed to be properly trialled like Hawkeye was in Cricket and tennis before it was introduced as a review measure.

different things suit different games. It works in those sports - but slowly - because they're slow games that also come to a natural stop in much less than a minute for every bit of play.

Such systems simply don't fit with football anywhere near as easily.

I agree, which is why proposals should be seriously discussed and properly trialled. FIFA have continually just discounted it out of hand.

someone has to come up with a decent proposal first. No one has, because the likes of what you're putting forwards are not decent proposals for football. The world of football is in about total agreement about that, even if you and worm aren't.

There are loads of pros and cons, as we've seen on here, its obviously just down to opinion as to whether the correct result or 'the show' is of people's preference

but as has been pointed out with the suggestions made here, they don't get 'the correct result' any more than the current system does. The suggestions here have been systems which have built into them the full acceptance of errors.

Only a system which reviewed everything removes all the errors to the best possible extent. But such a system would mean an exceedingly slow game that would bore current fans rigid.

I'm happy with the current system, its clear many aren't though both in the game itself and fans ....

that's simply not true. Both fans and players are very happy when the current system works for them - that much is exceedingly clear from the viewpoints of the fans who post here.

and that a review system should be properly trialled in a proper league (the MLS is the obvious choice)

ahhh, right - so you're saying it's a great idea, but not great enough to risk on our own football. PMSL.

You've just proven everything I've been saying with those words.

[eFestivals]

Kolo Toure failed a drug test...

according to Wenger he failed this drugs test cos he's a fat bastard.

Wenger has said it's been caused because he took "his wife's slimming aid".

[Benj]

You're not getting what I'm saying.

The ref might have seen no less clearly than the reviewer - yet they can still end up with different opinions. You could have two refs doing the reviewing, and them have different opinions.

There is no black and white for many of the incidents that happen within a football match.

Handball - deliberate and gaining an advantage, or not? Opinion.

Fouls - opinion.

And as I've said with offside, while you can get the right decision from a review, you can't get the play back to where it was - so it doesn't work as a way of redressing the unfairness of a decision.

Edited March 4, 2011 by Benj

[eFestivals]

Yes, I get it, what you don't seem to get is that a ref gets a split second to make a decision, the reviewer has more time, more angles and can see the action at a slower speed.

In a court of law, what evidence is likely to be stronger. Amazingly detailed CC footage, or an eye witness from 20 yards away?

Off all your arguments this is by far the maddest. The whole reason for reviews are that they are made by someone who has more evidence to make the decision

I'm not trying to say that the reviewer very probably won't have a better view of an incident - I'm saying that two refs looking at the same incident in the same depth can have different views on it.

There is no definitive indisputable decision that can be made for the likes of most fouls. The seriousness of fouls (or if it's a foul at all) and so the appropriate punishment for it is an opinion of the viewer, it's not something that is always clear-cut.

Remove offside then, that will make it simpler.

It would. But then you have the paradox of a review system designed to remove errors that is formally saying that errors are acceptable.

Now compare that with what we have, where a ref is making calls that he always believes (in theory, at least) to be right - which has the utmost integrity towards the playing of sport fairly (the errors are something outside of that). A review system which is designed to remove errors while accepting errors has no such integrity, as it is formally agreeing to unfairness within the game.

This factor alone is enough to completely turn me off the idea. It's the sell-out of principles for practicality, and while I recognise that some people would chose the practical, I don't think that's appropriate for what is meant to be sport.

They'r eperfectly fine proposals that make perfect sense. FIFA does not want to propose them due to the cost. Look at the recent news re goal line tech (a simple google news search will bring it up) FIFA are spouting on and on about the cost and refusing to pay for stuff until people meet their unreasonable criteria.

ahhh, well, there you go. They don't want the likes of you to have to pay significantly more than you already do to watch a game - yet another factor against the idea, and one that even the most fervent supporter of decision reviews should recognise as a very valid one for just about all people.

I don't see why you keep brining this up, no one is expecting to, or indeed trying to remove every error, simply trying to reduce the majority of big ones. One less mistake is an improvement.

see my integrity thing above.

No thats not what I suggested at all. [Your often used tactic of trying to twist arguments really is amazingly transparent and does your side in an argument no favours at all by the way, it just makes you look weak, don't think that people don't notice]

As, I am at least hope you're fully aware, although I can't be sure by some of what you write and you seem to fly in the face of logic; I suggest the MLS as- it is a relatively new league, in a nation of fans who are used more complex sports, regular rule changes, reviews and technology. There is also only one tier and less fixtures.

It's still the case that you don't feel the idea is good enough to risk in our own domestic game, because you've chosen to recommend somewhere else before it. If it's a good enough idea it's good enough to try anywhere.

That aside, the reasons you give for it actually make it poor place to test, almost to the point of invalidity - the fact that it is a different type of audience is of huge importance, because their opinions about it might differ hugely to a more normal football audience. Without the fans, there is no game.

[Benj]

I'm not trying to say that the reviewer very probably won't have a better view of an incident - I'm saying that two refs looking at the same incident in the same depth can have different views on it.

There is no definitive indisputable decision that can be made for the likes of most fouls. The seriousness of fouls (or if it's a foul at all) and so the appropriate punishment for it is an opinion of the viewer, it's not something that is always clear-cut.

[worm]

yes, it is.

Edited March 4, 2011 by worm

[Benj]

Having watched MOTD for the first time with this review thing in mind,, loads of cases for reviews, Arsenal will certainly be peeved if they lose the league by a point

On another note, how much of a shithouse is Clattenburg, looking to give a pen as he was two scared to make a proper call. Thank god he's not allowed to ref Everton any more, he's a walking talking reason for reviews

Edited March 6, 2011 by Benj

[worm]

Having watched MOTD for the first time with this review thing in mind,, loads of cases for reviews, Arsenal will certainly be peeved if they lose the league by a point

[Paul ™]

What about off-side decisions on review? How could you rectify them? Could we give a penalty for this or do you think something along the lines of Hockey, where you have a free run at goal?

[worm]

I think the opposing managers should be given free access to this thread to discuss their views and then a poll could be run to decide the points once the panel of eFest experts have given their views

[TheGayTent]

Another good performance and a decent defensive display against a team we usually struggle to defend against. Bookies must have taken a bashing with Ba scoring...

On a separate matter, for the first time in decades Man Utd have returned some of their allocation for the upcoming league fixture. I'm amazed.

Anyway, looking forward to another solid display next week - same scoreline would be nice

[worm]

Another good performance and a decent defensive display against a team we usually struggle to defend against. Bookies must have taken a bashing with Ba scoring...

[TheGayTent]

In the last 15 years the demographic in the part of the ground that I stand in has almost completely changed. But the numbers are still virtually identical. Some people have disappeared, but those that have, have been replaced with others with a higher level of disposable income.

[worm]

In the last 15 years the demographic in the part of the ground that I stand in has almost completely changed. But the numbers are still virtually identical. Some people have disappeared, but those that have, have been replaced with others with a higher level of disposable income.

[Benj]

What about off-side decisions on review? How could you rectify them? Could we give a penalty for this or do you think something along the lines of Hockey, where you have a free run at goal?

[Benj]

Who are less likely to be loyal, as they view football attendance low down on their priority list. Its a luxury, not an imperative.

[worm]

haha, imagine what the tradionalists would say to that!

Edited March 6, 2011 by worm

[Benj]

f**k them.

Hmm. I think Neil's point about deferring their decision would apply here, thus undermining the referral system. Surely he has to make a decision and then a review can be made at a later stage? With this method, you've got a situation whereby you can give a set-piece award. The problem is players fishing for off-side awards so that they can get set-pieces. Tricky.

Can we get technology like the eye from Tennis I wonder. It would have to be more sophisticated.

Edited March 6, 2011 by Benj

[The Nal]

Good game today in Anfield. Well deserved win too. Suarez looks a player! Utd we're awful though away from home though. Again.

I think Carrick was playing a game of "lets see how much ball I can give away". Just shit.

Cracking game at Wolves at the moment!

[TheGayTent]

Tottenham very lucky to get away with a draw.

[TheGayTent]

Double post

Edited March 6, 2011 by TheGayTent

[strummer77]

Tottenham very lucky to get away with a draw.

[worm]

Could be a problem, the decision would be made though, he's called it offside, the review can start instantly, the game is only stopped, if the offside team get a benefit (goal, free kick, courner etc), shouldn't take more than 5-10 seconds for 95% of occasions.

Tech would be good but would be hugely complex

[VCK]

So......who does everyone support?

Me - Leeds United