Football Video Referee !!!!

[Mike]

Originally Posted by gazzae

Interesting, but who would monitor the possession? What if it was 50-50. What about shots on target? Team with the most shots on target wins?
Or just keep playing till someone wins?

That said, I don't see anything really wrong with penalties, the game has to be decided some way.

Shots on target maybe difficult to judge..............TV always showing statistcs on prossesion and thought this maybe a fairer way. People often say a team was crap...got lucky and won on penalties. This could stop that !

Personally I'd go for a shoot-out.

Line up the 2 full teams 20 meters apart, give everyone a pistol with one shot. At the agreed signal everyone shoots, and the team with the most people standing wins. Sorta discourages teams to play badly as well.

[iadom]

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

So you think England can never get a decision given for them because everyone is out to get England.

Now I cant remember how may yellow cards where given last night, but I think it was 4 or 5. With a pretty even split as to which teams got the cards. But the game last night flowed more than any previous game in the tournament.

Put the persecution complex away mate, it wont do you any favours on there.

You misunderstand me. I don't have a complex. I was trying to convey the fact that I am not really in favour of video refs for decisions that are open to interpretation. It is different to using them for line/ offside calls. If a ball has crossed a line or a player is not offside, 99% of us can make an accurate decision using modern technology. This is not the case with fouls. As a long time retired fullback, it makes me weep to see perfectly timed and executed tackles, called as fouls under current interpretation of the rules.

Originally Posted by iadom

You misunderstand me. I don't have a complex. I was trying to convey the fact that I am not really in favour of video refs for decisions that are open to interpretation. It is different to using them for line/ offside calls. If a ball has crossed a line or a player is not offside, 99% of us can make an accurate decision using modern technology. This is not the case with fouls. As a long time retired fullback, it makes me weep to see perfectly timed and executed tackles, called as fouls under current interpretation of the rules.

Sorry. My bad.

But in the same vein (sp), how many times have action-replays shown in this compitition that a player has taken a dive, rather than stepped over an out-thrust leg. Unfortunately this seems to be endemic in the game at the moment. Commentators call football the beautiful game, its not. Its a game that has been hijacked by professional cheaters, and why I've given up watching, bar the big competitions.

[ian@huth]

Originally Posted by Earl of Bronze

Couldnt agree more.

The camera behind the goal clearly showed Terry with his left arm on the goalie's left shoulder. It is also clear that the goalie trying to jump and contest the ball in the air but was unable to (possibly due to Terry using him as a 'jumping aid', then add in Sol Campbell climbing up Treey's back and you have a recipie for a disallowed goal).

Yes I believe there is a good case for a video ref, and if one had been in use last night, I think the goal would have been disallowed.

The thing is that the referee was not behind the goal in the same position as the camera. From where he was he could not see that an offence was being commited, if one was commited. The problem these days is that any contact between players seems to result in a foul being given, particularly if one of them is a goalkeeper. A cute goalkeeper doesn't need to make half the saves that he should have to, just has to learn how to jump into attackers and fall to the ground.

Originally Posted by ianathuth

The thing is that the referee was not behind the goal in the same position as the camera. From where he was he could not see that an offence was being commited, if one was commited. The problem these days is that any contact between players seems to result in a foul being given, particularly if one of them is a goalkeeper. A cute goalkeeper doesn't need to make half the saves that he should have to, just has to learn how to jump into attackers and fall to the ground.

I agree, there is possibly too much protection for goalies, but last night, the decision was correct. Terry was stopping the Goalie from Jumping therefore no goal.

This is slightly off topic, but only slightly. Can someone clear something up for me, i thought that when taking a penalty it was classed as 'ungentlemanly Contuct' to stop and start before taking it, like Ronaldo did, therefore the pen should be taken again. I seem to remeber something about this, but i'm not sure

Originally Posted by ianathuth

The thing is that the referee was not behind the goal in the same position as the camera. From where he was he could not see that an offence was being commited, if one was commited. The problem these days is that any contact between players seems to result in a foul being given, particularly if one of them is a goalkeeper. A cute goalkeeper doesn't need to make half the saves that he should have to, just has to learn how to jump into attackers and fall to the ground.

Very true, the ref wasnt behind the goal. and to be honest I was able to see him in any of the replays. Though I do think he was in the area of the top right corner of the 18 yard box (as seen from the position of the camera). So may have had a pretty good view of the goal-mouth action. IF there had been a 'video ref', IMHO the goal wouldnt have stood. Not with the behind goal view. But I found it strange that the after match comments by Gary Liniker et all, totally dismissed this camera angle.

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by col d

I agree, there is possibly too much protection for goalies, but last night, the decision was correct. Terry was stopping the Goalie from Jumping therefore no goal.

This is slightly off topic, but only slightly. Can someone clear something up for me, i thought that when taking a penalty it was classed as 'ungentlemanly Contuct' to stop and start before taking it, like Ronaldo did, therefore the pen should be taken again. I seem to remeber something about this, but i'm not sure

Not sure mate, the rule relating to Pen's (Law 14) mentions nothing about the run-up

[gazzae]

Found this on the Fifa site...

So it appears its up to the ref to decide.

If a player taking a penalty-kick feints, what action should the referee take?
The referee should allow play to continue, unless he deems the action to be ungentlemanly conduct, in which case the player shall be cautioned and the kick, if already taken, shall be retaken if a goal is scored.

Originally Posted by gazzae

Found this on the Fifa site...

So it appears its up to the ref to decide.

cheers Gazzae. I wonder how far it would go until its classed as ungentlemanly Contuct

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by col d

cheers Gazzae. I wonder how far it would go until its classed as ungentlemanly Contuct

No idea, any refs on this site?

[MadGamer]

What he should have done was looked at the fouth offical. Instead he just disallowed the goal and as a result we went out!

[Caspar]

Originally Posted by WNA

What he should have done was looked at the fouth offical. Instead he just disallowed the goal and as a result we went out!

I think the 4th official is only trained to check studs and that's about it!!

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by WNA

What he should have done was looked at the fouth offical. Instead he just disallowed the goal and as a result we went out!

Fourth offical? He would have been further away than the ref.

Do you mean the linesman? Oh sorry assistant ref

[iadom]

According to a report on 5 Live, the referee has since stated that he blew for a foul committed by Campbell before he went up for the header.