Beckford Appeal Successful

[Jeff]

Red cards spoil games

Red cards can also improve games.

The red cards spoil games cliche is one that's mainly used by former players having a go at refs, but as a fan I like to see how teams react to losing a player, the way tactics change and the way teams try to exploit the extra man.

 

[SwedeFox]

Red cards spoil games and should be reserved for the worst incidents as they are more often that not in Rugby. Not that it would ever happen, but a sin bin would much fairer for most of the sendings off you see now days.

I agree with that. Same thing with the last man sending offs, where the team is often punished twice (red card + penalty). I'm all for the idea of a penalty box, I'd even sign a petition if there was one.

 

[Jeff]

Same thing with the last man sending offs, where the team is often punished twice (red card + penalty).

There's an easy way to change that, which I've suggested several times before. If a player deliberately denies a goalscoring chance by fouling or handling the ball, the goal should be awarded. Like they do with penalty tries in rugby. I'd give a goal for offences inside the penalty area, and a penalty for offences outside the area. Then give the offending player a yellow card.

It would be much fairer than the current system because the punishment fits the crime.
At the moment a player will quite happily commit an offence if his team is a goal up with a minute to go in the play-off final. His one match ban won't be any consolation to the team he cheated out of a goal.

 

[indierich06]

What if the sending off was for two yellow cards? You could still get incorrect sending offs that wouldn't get picked up on. And you'd still be left with games like Boro where people were raging about the officials performances and there was no technology that could have helped.

Red cards spoil games and should be reserved for the worst incidents as they are more often that not in Rugby. Not that it would ever happen, but a sin bin would much fairer for most of the sendings off you see now days.

I don't think you should use them for double-yellow offences, the technology should be used sparingly rather than to spot check every incident. If a player is on a yellow card, whether it was fair or harsh, the onus is on him to ensure he doesn't do anything to warrant a second yellow and his manager to manage the situation, whether it be substituting him or issuing different instructions. If the ref was giving a second yellow, he could always check the video footage before giving a red - again, it would take only a couple of minutes.

It might be that occasionally the first yellow card was given unfairly, but there has to be some point where you let go and concede the fact that refs are human, they will make mistakes and while technology is a good thing, we can't let it completely take over our game.

 

[indierich06]

His one match ban won't be any consolation to the team he cheated out of a goal.

That's the whole point though, the outcome is denied so we'd never know if it was a goal or not. The player could have gone one on one with the keeper and fluffed it, mishit it, hit the post, tripped over his bootlace... it's unfair in the extreme for a player to deny that chance, but it's equally unfair to award the opposing team a goal because they had an opportunity to score one. You'd then see a rise in a different kind of cheating - imagine if Leicester were in the playoff final and were winning 1-0 in the 90th minute, an opposing player goes through on goal, a Leicester player puts in a great tackle but the opposing player dives and his team is awarded a goal or a penalty. How is that fair?

 

[Babylon]

Red cards can also improve games.

The red cards spoil games cliche is one that's mainly used by former players having a go at refs, but as a fan I like to see how teams react to losing a player, the way tactics change and the way teams try to exploit the extra man.

And you would still get to see that if we had a sin bin, or reds were used just for the most serious of offences.

I'd rather see two teams with 11 man on the pitch battle it out. When you see people getting sent off for two soft yellows, or for nothing at all in Beckfords case it's frustrating. With a bin at least if the officials make a mistake it's only for part of a game and not permanent.

As I said, I doubt it will ever happen though.

 

[Jeff]

That's the whole point though, the outcome is denied so we'd never know if it was a goal or not.

What if the player handled the ball to stop it going over the line?
What if he was clean through with no keeper in the goal, five yards out, and was about to shoot when he was rugby tackled from behind?


Anyway, ideas is to make sure we WILL know the outcome.

If a player knows a foul will result in a goal, he's not going to make the foul, and we'll see what the real outcome will be, with less chance of the cheats prospering.


Maybe you're not old enough to remember, but the reason the red card for denying a scoring opportunity was brought in is because players were regularly cynically bringing players down just outside the area, knowing a free kick and yellow card was better than the goal that was likely to have resulted. As a result of the law change, the number of those offences being committed went down dramatically. If we change the laws again it will go back to how it was.
It's far better to make the punishment fit the crime.

imagine if Leicester were in the playoff final and were winning 1-0 in the 90th minute, an opposing player goes through on goal, a Leicester player puts in a great tackle but the opposing player dives and his team is awarded a goal or a penalty. How is that fair?

That kind of thing already happens. Refs should learn to know the difference between a dive and a genuine foul. This is the kind of offence where I would welcome video replays.

 

[Redditch Fox]

I'm glad I got the chances of a successsful appeal completely wrong.

There are far too many sendings off these days which is the result of the English game being internationalised through the influx of play acting and namby pamby European and other overseas players and participation in European/ international competitions where refs and the authorities have changed the game to a non-contact sport. We've reached the point now where home bred players and the FA are just as bad.

We've had excellent players at LCFC e.g. Chopper Chalmers, Arthur Rowley and more latterly Steve Walsh who would rarely complete a game if they played their way these days.

Sadly nothing can be done and I dare say the introduction of more new technology would be largely used to get more people punished.

 

[bocadillo]

What about removing television cameras from football grounds and forgetting all about the possibility of running a video back in slow motion to check a referee's decision? How about accepting the opinion of the referee, which after all is the 'burden of proof' that the Laws of the Game require?

Of course that would mean that there could be no more televising of games and no Sky-money, inflating player's wages and transfer fees. Money, promotion to the Premier League and playing in Europe would no longer be all-important. No more bench-warmers driving about in flash sports cars. No more Robbie Savage.

How about football being a game, rather than big business? How about getting back to the basics?

 

[Babylon]

What about removing television cameras from football grounds and forgetting all about the possibility of running a video back in slow motion to check a referee's decision? How about accepting the opinion of the referee, which after all is the 'burden of proof' that the Laws of the Game require?

Of course that would mean that there could be no more televising of games and no Sky-money, inflating player's wages and transfer fees. Money, promotion to the Premier League and playing in Europe would no longer be all-important. No more bench-warmers driving about in flash sports cars. No more Robbie Savage.

How about football being a game, rather than big business? How about getting back to the basics?

Jumpers for goal posts.

 

[indierich06]

How about football being a game, rather than big business? How about getting back to the basics?

You've got more chance of getting a blowjob from the pope.

 

[RHYDAL]

I have quite strong views on replays and like to take a lead from the way the yanks do it. In the NFL each head coach gets a red flag which he throws if he wishes to challenge a decision. If the original call is upheld, then he loses a time out which in the latter stages of a game can prove very costly. Translating this to football, I would allow managers to issue a challenge, which, if unsuccessful would remove the right to challenge for the rest of the game. The right to challenge would only be available in the case of red cards, penalties or goals. And would also be available in the case of decisions not given too. My caveate would be that once the ball has crossed the halfway line, or play has restarted after a stoppage, the right is lost. And, as in the NFL, it would have to be a clearly incorrect call to be reversed.

As for the red card for goal scoring opportunities, I'd do away with the penalty area and the red card for the offence. Instead, the ref decides whether the offence warrants a penalty based on the likelyhood of a goal being scored. How can it be right that a player on the deadball line running away from goal gets a penalty when brought down, yet a player clean through in front of goal just outside the box doesn't get one when brought down from behind (Vaughan v Cardiff).

 

[bocadillo]

Jumpers for goal posts.

That would be silly.

 

[artic fox]

Do any of you think this might be the FA feeling somewhat imbarrassed about the Ref storming into the dressing room while Nigel was given a half time speech last Week ,Thus sending him off for telling the Official to "go forth and mulitply" as he was well within his rights to do.I also think the evidence against Beckford wouldn't hold up to scrunity.So the FA admit their wrong within their own circle and release a "NOT GUILTY" to the rest of us? Just my humble opinion

 

[artic fox]

You've got more chance of getting a blowjob from the pope.

I like his odds then

 

[Redditch Fox]

What about removing television cameras from football grounds and forgetting all about the possibility of running a video back in slow motion to check a referee's decision? How about accepting the opinion of the referee, which after all is the 'burden of proof' that the Laws of the Game require?

Of course that would mean that there could be no more televising of games and no Sky-money, inflating player's wages and transfer fees. Money, promotion to the Premier League and playing in Europe would no longer be all-important. No more bench-warmers driving about in flash sports cars. No more Robbie Savage.

How about football being a game, rather than big business? How about getting back to the basics?

With one proviso - I think that the BBC Radio Light Programme should be allowed to broadcast the second half of one League match on Saturday afternoons. The details of the game not to be declared until 3.45 pm to prevent any effect on attendances at that particular game. The only game to be televised live to be the FA Cup Final - on the BBC only. ITV to be allowed no football coverage because they are crap anyway and BBC MOTD to show only highlights with the pundits made redundant.

 

[bocadillo]

With one proviso - I think that the BBC Radio Light Programme should be allowed to broadcast the second half of one League match on Saturday afternoons. The details of the game not to be declared until 3.45 pm to prevent any effect on attendances at that particular game. The only game to be televised live to be the FA Cup Final - on the BBC only. ITV to be allowed no football coverage because they are crap anyway and BBC MOTD to show only highlights with the pundits made redundant.

Mars bar for 6d at half-time.

 

[FryattFox]

I have quite strong views on replays and like to take a lead from the way the yanks do it. In the NFL each head coach gets a red flag which he throws if he wishes to challenge a decision. If the original call is upheld, then he loses a time out which in the latter stages of a game can prove very costly. Translating this to football, I would allow managers to issue a challenge, which, if unsuccessful would remove the right to challenge for the rest of the game. The right to challenge would only be available in the case of red cards, penalties or goals. And would also be available in the case of decisions not given too. My caveate would be that once the ball has crossed the halfway line, or play has restarted after a stoppage, the right is lost. And, as in the NFL, it would have to be a clearly incorrect call to be reversed.

As for the red card for goal scoring opportunities, I'd do away with the penalty area and the red card for the offence. Instead, the ref decides whether the offence warrants a penalty based on the likelyhood of a goal being scored. How can it be right that a player on the deadball line running away from goal gets a penalty when brought down, yet a player clean through in front of goal just outside the box doesn't get one when brought down from behind (Vaughan v Cardiff).

Completely agree with all of this. Except you need the areas for goalkeepers. And the penalty itself. So maybe just give the referee the ability to award a penalty anywhere on the pitch, or a direct freekick inside the area.

As mentioned previously, I also think Rugby-esque sin-bins would be interesting, as there is too much distance between a red and a yellow imo.

 

[gregs_y2k]

I'm not a big fan of video evidence as it may stop start the game and even now with all the camera's it isn't always conclusive. A cheaper, easier and quicker solution is to have extra officials on the goal post to see the ball over the goal line. Frees up the lineo to concentrate on offside and not to have run to the goal line (Although don't get me started on offside - a ridiculous and flawed law to officiate on!) It would give newly promoted officials the chance to to get some experience in bigger games too without having too much responsibility.

Are you joking? Who cares about a 30 second halt to the game if it means a goal is correctly awarded or disallowed. The extra officials argument is also completely flawed, the trials they had with that were the most unsuccessful idea I've seen in modern football. I don't remember them giving one single decision and there was huge confusion about what their jobs actually were. They had excellent vantage points for plenty of penalty claims and they never got involved. How is it cheaper anyway to employ 2 extra officials when you only need 1 in a room watching a monitor of different angles. All the games in the premier league have enough cameras at grounds to cover the angles. If it's inconclusive, then it's simple, you don't give the goal.

Football should employ a tennis and cricket systems to the use of hawkeye or replays, where they only have 3 unsuccessful appeals a game, if you're appeal is wrong then you lose an appeal, if it's correct then you retain it. It's simple and would only add perhaps an extra 5-10 minutes to the length of a match max.

 

[Redditch Fox]

Mars bar for 6d at half-time.

Ok - but I will be bringing my flask and crisp sandwiches.