Dundee United v Rangers

Welcome to The Arab League, one of the longest established Dundee United Football forums, with many members from the old ArabFC forum.

New members are always welcomed, so to join the debate, just sign up - registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join The Arab League!

If you're already a member please log in:

Pages:
1
…
9
10
11
12
13

Dundee United v Rangers; Next match - Sat 10 Sep, 12:30
Tweet Topic Started: Sep 7 2011, 10:52 AM (7,787 Views)
The Eggman	Sep 15 2011, 12:20 PM Post #136
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,119 Group: Members Member #5 Joined: September 10, 2010	findus Sep 15 2011, 12:10 PM The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 12:00 PM findus Sep 15 2011, 11:57 AM A once in a lifetime scenario, so no. You asked why we want the correct decision. Wouldn't you want the correct decision in this case? Yes, but this once in a lifetime incident has nothing to do with whether video evidence would make football better as a whole. That's not where I was coming from. I was just trying to make clear that the best thing for football is for the correct decision to be made. When balls are fully over the line, the goal should stand, for instance. By the way, that incident is a nonce in a lifetime incident. Scotland, in the World Cup Final?



The Eggman	Sep 15 2011, 12:25 PM Post #137
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,119 Group: Members Member #5 Joined: September 10, 2010	Morvant's Finest Sep 15 2011, 12:12 PM I do think there is another fundamental change to the game that it would bring though, over and above slowing the game down, namely that it would completely erode the authority of the referee if every decision he makes can be challenged. It's often mentioned how Football would improved if the players gave the referee more respect like they do in Rugby. Surely taking away a referee's authority to make the final call on a decision would only erode that further? Every decision he makes is challenged now. All that happens is now is that his incorrect call stands (he doesn't have a chance to change his mind), and he's then berated after the match by all and sundry. Respect? Where was the respect for Anders Frisk? Or the many other refs continually slagged off by the media and fans. I don't suggest the ref having his final call removed. I suggest giving him the opportunity of a video replay, that allows him to see the incident again, from a variety of angles. He then determines, using his own eyes, and mind, what the decision should be. Video evidence is the best assistance he can get. If he sees the incident again and doesn't change his mind, or feel that it's helped, then he can stick with the original decision.



findus	Sep 15 2011, 12:37 PM Post #138
Jerry Kerr Posts: 4,444 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: September 10, 2010	The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 12:20 PM findus Sep 15 2011, 12:10 PM The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 12:00 PM findus Sep 15 2011, 11:57 AM A once in a lifetime scenario, so no. You asked why we want the correct decision. Wouldn't you want the correct decision in this case? Yes, but this once in a lifetime incident has nothing to do with whether video evidence would make football better as a whole. That's not where I was coming from. I was just trying to make clear that the best thing for football is for the correct decision to be made. When balls are fully over the line, the goal should stand, for instance. By the way, that incident is a nonce in a lifetime incident. Scotland, in the World Cup Final? I was coming from the direction that, in footballing terms, decisions are usually interpretations of a rule and therefore 'correct' isn't really a term we can easily use. And that 'principled' is a very strong word to use for a game. I love your typo, btw. In principle, a perfect description of your average Italian footballer! Edited by findus, Sep 15 2011, 12:38 PM.



Conan the Destroyer	Sep 15 2011, 12:42 PM Post #139
I prefer it when we're pish Posts: 3,265 Group: Members Member #6 Joined: September 10, 2010	whatsthatonyourback Sep 15 2011, 11:52 AM While heartily endorsing Chippy's tough tits, the problem with the challenges system is when the play hasn't stopped - such as Flampard's shot against Germany. Could England challenge the non-award of a goal while play continues? How long do they have to make a challenge? What if Germany had raced upfield and were about to score? Ok, er, how about you have to wait till the ball goes dead? In this example, Germany have scored. Then, England challenge and it is clear Frank the Wank's shot had crossed the line so, for you Fritz, the tits are tough - goal to England. If it turns out the ball hadn't crossed then the German goal stands and Johnny Rosbif loses a challenge. For findud and the rest of the feartie brigade, this is not going to be a silver bullet for all dodgy refereeing. All it can do is give the referee another, and possibly a better look at something contentious that he has to give a decision on.



Conan the Destroyer	Sep 15 2011, 12:50 PM Post #140
I prefer it when we're pish Posts: 3,265 Group: Members Member #6 Joined: September 10, 2010	Morvant's Finest Sep 15 2011, 12:12 PM Eggs, I do think there is another fundamental change to the game that it would bring though, over and above slowing the game down, namely that it would completely erode the authority of the referee if every decision he makes can be challenged. It's often mentioned how Football would improved if the players gave the referee more respect like they do in Rugby. Surely taking away a referee's authority to make the final call on a decision would only erode that further? Hmm, that is a reasonable point. However, there is no point hassling a referee if it is your own team's decision whether to challenge or not. Additionally, if it proved useful, you could always introduce a law similar to rugger, where anybody other than the team captain who talks to the ref is arbitrarily a massive c*nt, and is cautioned forthwith.



findus	Sep 15 2011, 12:58 PM Post #141
Jerry Kerr Posts: 4,444 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: September 10, 2010	Conan the Destroyer Sep 15 2011, 12:42 PM For findud and the rest of the feartie brigade, this is not going to be a silver bullet for all dodgy refereeing. All it can do is give the referee another, and possibly a better look at something contentious that he has to give a decision on. ...and for half of the stadium to be in uproar when "he's clearly made the wrong decision" even with the advantage of having a video replay. My guess is that video replays haven't been and continue not to be brought in to the biggest sport on the planet to cover for its very inexact, interpretable rules, and therefore to cover for fallible referees trying to enforce these inexact, interpretable rules.



The Eggman	Sep 15 2011, 01:13 PM Post #142
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,119 Group: Members Member #5 Joined: September 10, 2010	findus Sep 15 2011, 12:58 PM My guess is that video replays haven't been and continue not to be brought in to the biggest sport on the planet to cover for its very inexact, interpretable rules, and therefore to cover for fallible referees trying to enforce these inexact, interpretable rules. So instead we get refs slaughtered by the media and fans anyway, saying 'he should've seen that' or 'he should've been better positioned' or 'he clearly had a great angle, so he cheated' etc etc. And despite getting this slaughtering, refs keep coming back for more (apart from Frisk, who quit because of the abuse he got for a decision he wasn't given the chance to possibly correct) 'disrespect'. Meanwhile, teams get victories and defeats they shouldn't have got, because the ref is slower than the players and has one pair of eyes and gets only one view at one real time speed. Video evidence will come in, at least in a very basic form - probably the decisions on whether the ball crossed the line.



Morvant's Finest	Sep 15 2011, 01:18 PM Post #143
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,106 Group: Members Member #37 Joined: January 13, 2011	Conan the Destroyer Sep 15 2011, 12:50 PM Morvant's Finest Sep 15 2011, 12:12 PM Eggs, I do think there is another fundamental change to the game that it would bring though, over and above slowing the game down, namely that it would completely erode the authority of the referee if every decision he makes can be challenged. It's often mentioned how Football would improved if the players gave the referee more respect like they do in Rugby. Surely taking away a referee's authority to make the final call on a decision would only erode that further? Hmm, that is a reasonable point. However, there is no point hassling a referee if it is your own team's decision whether to challenge or not. Additionally, if it proved useful, you could always introduce a law similar to rugger, where anybody other than the team captain who talks to the ref is arbitrarily a massive c*nt, and is cautioned forthwith. Aha, I'm chipping away at your resolve Conan, you'll come round in the end! Just watched the Man City - Napoli highlights from last night and was struck again at how thrilling an end to end game of football can be. I still think having that unique aspect to it eroded in any way would be a very high price to pay. Even if you waited until the ball went out of play before viewing replays it would still have an affect, as currently when a teams behind late in the game they can restart play almost immediately and other than making a sub the opposition can do little to relieve the pressure. Stoppages in rugger are very different (and therefore the game lends itself to replays as Findus rightly said), mainly because the defending team needs to get all it's players onside and set plays involve lumbering forwards who can take as long as they like to wander back to get involved.



findus	Sep 15 2011, 01:23 PM Post #144
Jerry Kerr Posts: 4,444 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: September 10, 2010	The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 01:13 PM Meanwhile, teams get victories and defeats they shouldn't have got, because the ref is slower than the players and has one pair of eyes and gets only one view at one real time speed. And it all balanced out in the end, and there was much rejoicing. What we really need are referees to get bionic impants - zoom eyes on the end of long tentacle things doing a billion trillion yotta-calculations per second, massively sprung knee and ankle joints, and a cone-shaped blender attachment that quickly and messily disposes of footballers constantly moaning that "It's no fair!".



The Eggman	Sep 15 2011, 01:34 PM Post #145
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,119 Group: Members Member #5 Joined: September 10, 2010	findus Sep 15 2011, 01:23 PM The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 01:13 PM Meanwhile, teams get victories and defeats they shouldn't have got, because the ref is slower than the players and has one pair of eyes and gets only one view at one real time speed. And it all balanced out in the end, and there was much rejoicing. Yeah, of course it is. Just like in the 1987 Scottish Cup Final, when St Mirren unfairly got a good goal disallowed against United. That finished 0-0, right?



The Eggman	Sep 15 2011, 01:34 PM Post #146
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,119 Group: Members Member #5 Joined: September 10, 2010	findus Sep 15 2011, 01:23 PM What we really need are referees to get bionic impants - zoom eyes on the end of long tentacle things doing a billion trillion yotta-calculations per second, massively sprung knee and ankle joints, and a cone-shaped blender attachment that quickly and messily disposes of footballers constantly moaning that "It's no fair!". Or video evidence



findus	Sep 15 2011, 01:45 PM Post #147
Jerry Kerr Posts: 4,444 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: September 10, 2010	The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 01:34 PM findus Sep 15 2011, 01:23 PM What we really need are referees to get bionic impants - zoom eyes on the end of long tentacle things doing a billion trillion yotta-calculations per second, massively sprung knee and ankle joints, and a cone-shaped blender attachment that quickly and messily disposes of footballers constantly moaning that "It's no fair!". Or video evidence Since when can video evidence blend moaning players? I planted that there for you anyhow, just to test your predictability. Tricks, monkey, do tricks!



findus	Sep 15 2011, 01:48 PM Post #148
Jerry Kerr Posts: 4,444 Group: Members Member #2 Joined: September 10, 2010	The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 01:34 PM findus Sep 15 2011, 01:23 PM The Eggman Sep 15 2011, 01:13 PM Meanwhile, teams get victories and defeats they shouldn't have got, because the ref is slower than the players and has one pair of eyes and gets only one view at one real time speed. And it all balanced out in the end, and there was much rejoicing. Yeah, of course it is. Just like in the 1987 Scottish Cup Final, when St Mirren unfairly got a good goal disallowed against United. That finished 0-0, right? Rightly chopped off, in my view, not that you'd have not found me screaming at the TV back then. You'll not find many United supporters agreeing with me, but a tonne of St Mirren fans. Refs likely split over it too. Aaaaand we're back to the main problem.



The Eggman	Sep 15 2011, 01:48 PM Post #149
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,119 Group: Members Member #5 Joined: September 10, 2010	findus Sep 15 2011, 01:45 PM I planted that there for you anyhow, just to test your predictability. Tricks, monkey, do tricks! That's not nice. Nicest Poster: ~~Findus~~ Not that I voted for you, anyhow, bumface. With thanks to whatsthat



The Eggman	Sep 15 2011, 01:49 PM Post #150
Tommy McLean Posts: 2,119 Group: Members Member #5 Joined: September 10, 2010	findus Sep 15 2011, 01:48 PM Rightly chopped off, in my view, not that you'd have not found me screaming at the TV back then. You'll not find many United supporters agreeing with me, but a tonne of St Mirren fans. Refs likely split over it too. Aaaaand we're back to the main problem. Well, the ref could've had a second chance to get the right decision. If he then confirmed his initial decision, fair enough. What was the decision for, by the way?

Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Any Football · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
…
9
10
11
12
13