Jump to content
IGNORED

Video referee to be used for England v Germany


Never to the dark side

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Having two tired rules for a game that does not require them for what is the top 1% of football is a valid argument not to do something.

VAR has already highlighted that football is not like other sports football because football rules frequently are subjective, and do not all deal in complete certainty - Baseball and cricket rules are not subjective - Out or in. 

The Confederation cup was a shambles using VAR because of that subjectivity.

Goals ruled out incorrectly are not given because of VAR!! 

His ban for racism, being a former fraudster, a prisoner ...

I’m guessing the scope and application of video technology will change dramatically if and when it’s use becomes more widespread. 

The more human error that can be eliminated from the job of officiating, the better. Not saying that in its current guise it’s good or bad, my argument is simply that ‘I don’t want the game to change because it’s different to what I know’ isn’t a valid excuse to refuse to embrace technology. 

I think everyone would agree that goal line technology is a roaring success. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Distortia said:

It's all opinions, but for the life of me, I can't understand why people want there to be a chance of incorrect decisions occurring. It's bizarre.

Do you want there to be a chance of a striker missing an easy chance or a goalkeeper throwing the ball into their own net?

The game would be "better" if there wasn't any chance of that, but would it be more fun to watch?

Referees are part of the game, as much as the players, and there are good and bad ones, popular and unpopular ones. Remove that and you've removed a dimension of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

I’m guessing the scope and application of video technology will change dramatically if and when it’s use becomes more widespread. 

The more human error that can be eliminated from the job of officiating, the better. Not saying that in its current guise it’s good or bad, my argument is simply that ‘I don’t want the game to change because it’s different to what I know’ isn’t a valid excuse to refuse to embrace technology. 

I think everyone would agree that goal line technology is a roaring success. 

Completely altering the structure (rules) of football for the very few is a valid reason not to do something. It is not a luddite argument. Football has rules that are universal. This is the game, not two games. Nobody has explained why changing this will be of benefit for football as a whole.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, BCFC_Dan said:

Do you want there to be a chance of a striker missing an easy chance or a goalkeeper throwing the ball into their own net?

The game would be "better" if there wasn't any chance of that, but would it be more fun to watch?

Referees are part of the game, as much as the players, and there are good and bad ones, popular and unpopular ones. Remove that and you've removed a dimension of the game.

There are rules such as the offside rule that exist in black and white. IMO they should be obeyed to the maximum possible level of accuracy, whether that includes the use of technology or not. As they are completely binary I really don't see how you can compare them to striker missing chances, etc. They exist for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, I dont know tbh.

The only way I'd accept having a VAR is for moments when the ref goes up to one of the linesman and has a little chat to debate over what has just happened, and then only calling for the VAR if both of them are unsure. Leave the rest of the decisions to the ref on the field.

But I dont think it will change the way goals are given/disallowed because I thought that was what goal line technology was for? (Introduced to the Championship for the 2017/2018 season so we are in its first year)

Having said that however, will all fouls inside the penalty spot now await VAR to determine if it was a foul or a dive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Completely altering the structure (rules) of football for the very few is a valid reason not to do something. It is not a luddite argument. Football has rules that are universal. This is the game, not two games. Nobody has explained why changing this will be of benefit for football as a whole.

 

 

I don’t understand any of this. I think I’ve missed something.

At a fundamental level, ignoring the current scope/applications, video technology that can reduce human error can only be a good thing.

To dismiss it on the grounds of ‘it’s not the game I know’ (as some do) seems short sighted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

Completely altering the structure (rules) of football for the very few is a valid reason not to do something. It is not a luddite argument. Football has rules that are universal. This is the game, not two games. Nobody has explained why changing this will be of benefit for football as a whole.

I wholeheartedly agree that the rules of football should be the same regardless of level.

However, I’m not sure that VAR would do anything to change that.

The rules (e.g. the offside rule) remain exactly the same but, at the top level, their ability to enforce these rules will be increased.

The rules are not changed by the fact that top clubs can employ full time staff to maintain the pitch, while grassroots teams play on bobbly quagmires. The rules are not changed by the balls being of much better quality (to the point that, according to Guardiola at least*, even our second domestic cup has awful balls). More pertinently, the rules are not changed by the very referees tasked with enforcing them being more experienced, better trained, and much fitter than those you might see on a Sunday morning in the park.

They are already able to make better decisions than at grassroots level. This merely makes their decision making n% better again.

Goalline technology isn’t installed at every pitch in the country - it’s only just in our second tier - yet the rule of “over the line = goal” hasn’t changed.

Speaking of which, I know people who, before goalline technology was introduced, weren’t aware of how much a ball could look over the line when in fact it wasn’t, due to the curvature. In terms of benefit for football as a whole, this means they now debate and argue with refs far less than they did, because they understand the job they have to do far more comprehensively.

If at the highest levels - the televised levels, remember - we can further this education, so as to highlight the difficult nature of fractional offside decisions, or point out how the referee can’t see everything, and those things they do see happen in the blink of an eye, with the ability to help them and thus avoid the barrage of criticism they face week in, week out, well... then, perhaps, the players in the park leagues might take a bit more notice, may threaten the referees (doing it for “fun”, essentially) a bit less, which may in turn reduce the number of refs (particularly young refs) packing it in, meaning those park leagues don’t have a shortage of officials, leading to the matches being able to be officiated at a better standard.... I could go on.

Any opportunity to improve the standard of decision making is an opportunity it would be foolish to ignore. Is it going to work perfectly, immediately? Of course not. In cricket, they’re still debating DRS every bleeding Test series the world over and it’s been used for nigh on 10 years. Is VAR going to be the best version? Who knows? It’s the first. We have to start somewhere.

And in terms of those saying “the referee (and their mistakes) is part of the game”, I’ll just have to fundamentally disagree, really. You can have a game of football without a referee. If everyone was honest, they could referee themselves. Human nature dictates, however, that this is foolishly idealistic, and thus a referee is required to enable the game, but nowhere in the rules does it say “a goal is scored when the ball completely crosses the goal line, between the two posts and beneath bar, unless the referee doesn’t see it in which case all that is achieved is that you have something to talk about afterwards”.

 

Anyway, I wrote more than I was intending. I’ll go back to watching YouTube videos of Kieran Agard.

 

 

*obviously I’m using Guardiola’s little tantrum with my tongue firmly in my cheek. He’s talking codswallop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Distortia said:

There are rules such as the offside rule that exist in black and white. IMO they should be obeyed to the maximum possible level of accuracy, whether that includes the use of technology or not. As they are completely binary I really don't see how you can compare them to striker missing chances, etc. They exist for a reason.

Offside might be binary (though it's a lot more complex than it used to be) but it still relies on a judgement by a person and that person is part of the game and can make mistakes that cause a goal to be scored or not, just as a player can.

In the case of a VAR, rather than removing a human it would add another human, with more time to make their decision. That might improve the quality of the decision but it does not improve the game, nor the narrative.

A complete technology-based solution, were one to exist, would remove the responsibility entirely from the referees and that might get more decisions "right" but it would reduce the depth of the game by removing an element of chance.

I watch football to be entertained. I want everyone doing their best to do their jobs correctly but I won't get upset if they make a mistake, no matter what the consequences. It's more important that the game is interesting than that it is "right".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Occasionally the ref will go to one side and speak with his assistants to check something. If it takes the same amount of time to consult to the video ref, then I don't see a problem.

Bear in mind that there will be a camera following ball, any decision being watched on a screen should be fairly quick I would imagine. The only delay would be if they have to go back for an off the ball incident, which to be fair the ref will spend time consulting with his assistants if he didn't see it anyway, so it should just be an extra pair of eyes to check  especially if they can rewind and see it. The pitchside officials won't have that luxury.

If it's gets to stopping every couple of minutes, then it will become a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, RedYoshi said:

I wholeheartedly agree that the rules of football should be the same regardless of level.

However, I’m not sure that VAR would do anything to change that.

The rules (e.g. the offside rule) remain exactly the same but, at the top level, their ability to enforce these rules will be increased.

The rules are not changed by the fact that top clubs can employ full time staff to maintain the pitch, while grassroots teams play on bobbly quagmires. The rules are not changed by the balls being of much better quality (to the point that, according to Guardiola at least*, even our second domestic cup has awful balls). More pertinently, the rules are not changed by the very referees tasked with enforcing them being more experienced, better trained, and much fitter than those you might see on a Sunday morning in the park.

They are already able to make better decisions than at grassroots level. This merely makes their decision making n% better again.

Goalline technology isn’t installed at every pitch in the country - it’s only just in our second tier - yet the rule of “over the line = goal” hasn’t changed.

Speaking of which, I know people who, before goalline technology was introduced, weren’t aware of how much a ball could look over the line when in fact it wasn’t, due to the curvature. In terms of benefit for football as a whole, this means they now debate and argue with refs far less than they did, because they understand the job they have to do far more comprehensively.

If at the highest levels - the televised levels, remember - we can further this education, so as to highlight the difficult nature of fractional offside decisions, or point out how the referee can’t see everything, and those things they do see happen in the blink of an eye, with the ability to help them and thus avoid the barrage of criticism they face week in, week out, well... then, perhaps, the players in the park leagues might take a bit more notice, may threaten the referees (doing it for “fun”, essentially) a bit less, which may in turn reduce the number of refs (particularly young refs) packing it in, meaning those park leagues don’t have a shortage of officials, leading to the matches being able to be officiated at a better standard.... I could go on.

Any opportunity to improve the standard of decision making is an opportunity it would be foolish to ignore. Is it going to work perfectly, immediately? Of course not. In cricket, they’re still debating DRS every bleeding Test series the world over and it’s been used for nigh on 10 years. Is VAR going to be the best version? Who knows? It’s the first. We have to start somewhere.

And in terms of those saying “the referee (and their mistakes) is part of the game”, I’ll just have to fundamentally disagree, really. You can have a game of football without a referee. If everyone was honest, they could referee themselves. Human nature dictates, however, that this is foolishly idealistic, and thus a referee is required to enable the game, but nowhere in the rules does it say “a goal is scored when the ball completely crosses the goal line, between the two posts and beneath bar, unless the referee doesn’t see it in which case all that is achieved is that you have something to talk about afterwards”.

 

Anyway, I wrote more than I was intending. I’ll go back to watching YouTube videos of Kieran Agard.

 

 

*obviously I’m using Guardiola’s little tantrum with my tongue firmly in my cheek. He’s talking codswallop.

The rules of football will change to accommodate VAR. At the Con Fed cup the rules were altered to allow refs to look at objectivity. A protocol had to be put in place to use it. It affected the game. It was a different game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/11/2017 at 12:11, ooRya said:

The beginning of the end.......................

I think we are in the minority, but I tend to agree with you.

 

Penalties, offsides, throw-ins, corners, fouls, violent conduct, simulation, handball, time-wasting, deflections etc etc   There is no end to the types of decisions that footballers and managers will contest. Once stopping the game for the so-called game changing decisions is allowed,  there will will always be someone who wants it used for the next thing. NOT for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/11/2017 at 14:27, ooRya said:

Of football. For me anyway.

If I ever see a referee stand and make a "TV" sign and wait for a response, that will be the last time I ever attend a football match.

I fully understand when people argue for decisions to be given correctly, and share the frustrations of having terrible referees lately, but for me good/bad decisions by referees are all part and parcel of the game, and one of the things that helps make football the spectacle that it is.

Over 50 years ago, Geoff Hurst "scored" a goal that never should have stood and this is still talked about today 50 years later! Do we really want to lose that from the game? Or the Palace goal that wasn't given?

How many times have we been sat enduring a dour 0-0 game, when suddenly the ref makes a howler and the game/atmosphere immediately springs to life?

Players make mistakes, managers make mistakes, IMO referees should also be allowed to make mistakes.

I also think that the rules for a game of football should be the same for every game, whether a World cup final, or a Downs league game.

I do see where you're coming from, it can create an atmosphere out of nothing.

However, I think with the amount of money in football these days a wrong decision can cost millions. I completely understand why the video ref is required.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎08‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 14:27, ooRya said:

 

If I ever see a referee stand and make a "TV" sign and wait for a response, that will be the last time I ever attend a football match.

I think you`re much more likely to see a bunch of players in the ref`s face making `TV` signs TBH and once a referee gives in to it that will be the beginning of the end IMO.

Still, it will give Colin yet another signal to do on the touchline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/11/2017 at 15:57, wendyredredrobin said:

As holding and shirt pulling goes on at eveey corner, will every goal scored from a corner now be disallowed?

They should be. Maybe then people won't pull shirts . Like they don't in most other team sports like basketball, hockey etc. 

Not difficult. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...