|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2009 17:30:57 GMT
I'm sure we'll soon have technology to allow the ref to know (by a beep) if/when the ball crosses the goal line. I don't see how anyone can object to that. Beyond that, most incidents would require a stoppage of play to allow the technology to be used during the game and I wouldn't welcome that. Obviously it would be tempting to use technology for offside decisions but so long as the rules let the ref decide if the player was "active" I don't see how technology could usefully be used. To be honest I preferred the original offside rule - at least it was understood by the officials. What I would like to see is the system used in rugby where a team can "cite" an opponent after the game so a video panel could consider things like violent conduct or diving which was missed by the ref. Perhaps each team could be confined to no more than three challenges after a game. For all blatant diving I'd like to see a retrospective red card and where a goal (free kick or penalty) resulted from the dive then the ban should be for 6 matches . I honestly believe that diving is ruining the game and that includes Ricci Fuller on occasions. Unless the authorities clamp down on it hard the game is going to go downhill fast. I'm fairly sure that we already use video evidence post game for things the ref missed and retro red and yellow cards are given (unless it's an incident the ref has already "dealt with"). Anyway you can't ban players for diving, Fergie would constantly be whinging about not being able to field a full team! Also we have to remember that if we have video evidence for some things then that may be the start of phasing out referees altogether and then who would Neil Warnock, Martin O'Neil, Sam Allardyce etc. have to blame every time they lost a game?
|
|
|
Post by ronvelig on Feb 19, 2009 17:49:36 GMT
I'm against it for the following two reasons:
I like the fact that Football is the same from 22 mates playing in a park to the World Cup Final. Essentially nothing is different between the two.
And secondly where do you stop introducing it? Lots of clubs couldn't afford the technology, so the FA/League would have to pay for it which could lead to divisions between which leagues use it and which don't. How far down the pyramid do you decide that the games don't matter?
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Feb 19, 2009 18:15:03 GMT
I'm against it for the following two reasons: I like the fact that Football is the same from 22 mates playing in a park to the World Cup Final. Essentially nothing is different between the two. And secondly where do you stop introducing it? Lots of clubs couldn't afford the technology, so the FA/League would have to pay for it which could lead to divisions between which leagues use it and which don't. How far down the pyramid do you decide that the games don't matter? So you play in the park with posts and nets and three of your mates to act as officials? It's posh up your way mate!
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Feb 19, 2009 18:46:05 GMT
Any older stokies remember home FA Cup 3rd round tie against Walsall in 60s. Think we lost 2-0 but one of their "goals" was a shot that came in through gap in side netting.
|
|