Beckford Appeal Successful

[gregs_y2k]

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.

Best example of this was Luis Suarrez at the World Cup handling on the line in stoppage time, getting sent off and then Ghana missing the penalty and then losing in the subsequent penalty shoot out.

 

[gregs_y2k]

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.

That's why you should get 3 per game, it would prevent this type of use anyway.

 

[gregs_y2k]

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.





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.

I think diving, particularly in the box should become a red card offence personally. The one part of the game we really need to stamp out. If the ref misses it, then they should get the ban after the game

 

[give_us_a_wave]

...The only game to be televised live to be the FA Cup Final ...and BBC MOTD to show only highlights with the pundits made redundant.

Sounds uncannily like I remember football in my youth.How did we ever manage eh? 100% agree.Would probably mean being able to watch a game for about 8 quid too.

 

[pork pie fox]

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.

I'm a big NFL fan and have been saying this for a while now. Once again, I agree with the Cardiff fan

 

[FryattFox]

I think diving, particularly in the box should become a red card offence personally. The one part of the game we really need to stamp out. If the ref misses it, then they should get the ban after the game

Nice idea but very hard in principle. Ok, there are the odd blatant dives each season, but some of the times players go to ground it's almost impossible to prove it one way or the other.

And where do you draw the line? A lot of falls look like dives as the player tries to avoid the challenge in the first place so there's minimal contact.

 

[gregs_y2k]

Nice idea but very hard in principle. Ok, there are the odd blatant dives each season, but some of the times players go to ground it's almost impossible to prove it one way or the other.

And where do you draw the line? A lot of falls look like dives as the player tries to avoid the challenge in the first place so there's minimal contact.

OI know it would be difficult to put into practice but if it's what the ref deems a dive and which would be a booking make it a red. Any blatant ones picked up afterwards and are missed by the ref should be a retrospective ban. If like you say it's not obvious then in my eyes it's not a dive and nothing happens. There will be a few that get away with it but it will serve its purpose and cut out a lot of the diving in what makes football a laughable sport at times.

 

[Miles Away]

Laugh all you want but the NFL is the the best run and most entertaining league in the world.

The salary cap has meant teams can't bury themselves in debt and also can't buy success. The draft means competitive balance is struck each and every year. The use of technology and rule adjustments have made referreeing performance a virtual non-issue.

There is so much FIFA could glean from the NFL to improve the game but they are run by old corrupt toads.

 

[FryattFox]

Laugh all you want but the NFL is the the best run and most entertaining league in the world.

The salary cap has meant teams can't bury themselves in debt and also can't buy success. The draft means competitive balance is struck each and every year. The use of technology and rule adjustments have made referreeing performance a virtual non-issue.

There is so much FIFA could glean from the NFL to improve the game but they are run by old corrupt toads.

Do we want a cup final where with 2 minutes to go one team lets the other team score, only for the player to accidentally bundle the ball into the net?

(Only joking - I agree with what you've said. Although they are incomparable as leagues at present given the different formats of the draft, etc.)

 

[pork pie fox]

Laugh all you want but the NFL is the the best run and most entertaining league in the world.

The salary cap has meant teams can't bury themselves in debt and also can't buy success. The draft means competitive balance is struck each and every year. The use of technology and rule adjustments have made referreeing performance a virtual non-issue.

There is so much FIFA could glean from the NFL to improve the game but they are run by old corrupt toads.

As I'm sure you'd expect me to do MA, I agree with you. There are the odd incidents with decisions that crop up (i.e. the infamous tuck rule from a few years ago), but they are certainly less in number. Ahmad Bradshaw's 'forward progress' ruling in the win vs the 49ers was the only controversial call I can think of in the play-offs this year and that's in 11 matches of intense pressure.

 

[Miles Away]

It was a bit silly, wasn't it?

 

[gregs_y2k]

Laugh all you want but the NFL is the the best run and most entertaining league in the world.

The salary cap has meant teams can't bury themselves in debt and also can't buy success. The draft means competitive balance is struck each and every year. The use of technology and rule adjustments have made referreeing performance a virtual non-issue.

There is so much FIFA could glean from the NFL to improve the game but they are run by old corrupt toads.

Who's laughing at you? I think there should be a salary cap brought in as well and even possibly a drafting system as well

 

[spionfox]

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.

One of the best Leicester performances I have seen was a couple oif seasons back when we played Newcastle at home. The referee wrongly (IMO) sent one of ours off and our ten men bravely went for most of the game to get the nil nil. We even pressed at times and could have won.

Top battling spirited performance, ten against twelve.

 

[Kettering Pete]

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.

Just because FIFA can't organise a piss up in a brewery doesn't mean the idea is wrong. The lines of decmarcation between responsibilities should be simple. Gaol line assistants should only be viewing ball in and out of play and therefore goals scored. FIFA are a useless bunch if they can't even get that right!

I don't like the idea if video replays because it would slow the game down, lower leagues wouldn't be able to afford it so we'd have a two teir game, managers would use the appeals to halt the momentum of the opponents play if they are under pressure, or the players would be surrounding the ref to pressure him to go to a video replay - and then you only have to look at the Beckford incident to see that it isn't always conclusive, and whatsmore in a sending off incident you can't hear what is being said which may have some bearing on the decision.

Having refereed for 27 years I can see the advantages but I am not yet convinced that it would work and really improve the game and might in fact make things worse. I'd worry about the reaction if a ref didn't give a penalty then the video judge overrulled it andsaid yes it's a penalty. Is the replay going to be shown on the TV screens? Will the conceding fans accept the penalty anymore than they do now? Because the ref couldn't see the incident doesn't make him a bad ref but that would have totally undermined his authority and how is that going to affect the behaviour of the players during the rest of the game in a prticularly stormy match?

There was an outcry a few years back about referees being shopkeepers and teachers and so they were made professional. This was going to revolutionise decision making? I actually think it has but I doubt if that is the general perception. I think that deccisions should be explained - if people understood then I think there would be less hassle. Oh and get rid of the offside law!

Let's face it though whilst FIFA are in charge they will just muddy the waters with a little innefctual tinkering. Somebody decisive and with a vision needs to take football over.

 

[RHYDAL]

Completely agree with all of this. Except you need the areas for goalkeepers. And the penalty itself.

Do you? Why not just let goalkeepers handle anywhere inside their own half? I mean how far are they really going to wander away from goal? Would need to enforce or possibly amend the 6 second rule though. As for taking a penalty, the sector attached to the box indicates the distance the other players have to be retreated already, would just need extending.

 

[gregs_y2k]

Just because FIFA can't organise a piss up in a brewery doesn't mean the idea is wrong. The lines of decmarcation between responsibilities should be simple. Gaol line assistants should only be viewing ball in and out of play and therefore goals scored. FIFA are a useless bunch if they can't even get that right!

I don't like the idea if video replays because it would slow the game down, lower leagues wouldn't be able to afford it so we'd have a two teir game, managers would use the appeals to halt the momentum of the opponents play if they are under pressure, or the players would be surrounding the ref to pressure him to go to a video replay - and then you only have to look at the Beckford incident to see that it isn't always conclusive, and whatsmore in a sending off incident you can't hear what is being said which may have some bearing on the decision.

Having refereed for 27 years I can see the advantages but I am not yet convinced that it would work and really improve the game and might in fact make things worse. I'd worry about the reaction if a ref didn't give a penalty then the video judge overrulled it andsaid yes it's a penalty. Is the replay going to be shown on the TV screens? Will the conceding fans accept the penalty anymore than they do now? Because the ref couldn't see the incident doesn't make him a bad ref but that would have totally undermined his authority and how is that going to affect the behaviour of the players during the rest of the game in a prticularly stormy match?

There was an outcry a few years back about referees being shopkeepers and teachers and so they were made professional. This was going to revolutionise decision making? I actually think it has but I doubt if that is the general perception. I think that deccisions should be explained - if people understood then I think there would be less hassle. Oh and get rid of the offside law!

Let's face it though whilst FIFA are in charge they will just muddy the waters with a little innefctual tinkering. Somebody decisive and with a vision needs to take football over.

I don't think it's an issue, not having it across the board anyway, it's not used at every court at Wimbledon or every tournament or cricket test, and there's no huge outcry. If necessary, use tv replays in the top tiers and perhaps extra officials in the lower tiers. It's a fairly decent compromise in my opinion. I think the claim that it will 'slow down the game' is such a poor counter argument. Matches get slowed down anyway when the ref gets swamped by players, so if they had a conclusive video confirmation, then the matter would be done just as quick or even quicker 9 times out of ten. To stop it being abused, you' implement a finite amount of appeals per game like in other sports and it would only be the captain or the manager that could appeal and within a reasonable time frame as some have already said on here.

The goal line assistants should have been given more power, if they can see a foul or hand ball from an angle that the other officials can't then they should be able to give that decision.

I don't think it matters too much whether the replays are shown on the screen or not, they are in cricket and tennis and if anything it adds to the atmosphere. But I can understand why the refs would want it to be only shown to the official in the room making the decision, so that no added pressure is on them.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Please God let the game continue as it is. Football is great because it flows and I'm prepared to put up with the odd mistake to let it stay that way.

 

[RHYDAL]

I don't like the idea if video replays because it would slow the game down, lower leagues wouldn't be able to afford it so we'd have a two teir game,

That boat has sialed.; )In the lower leagues, stuff goes unpunished that would lead to a suspension in the Premiership. John Terry probably wouldn't be in so much grief if his incident had happened in the Blue Square.

 

[FryattFox]

Do you? Why not just let goalkeepers handle anywhere inside their own half?

One of my favourite bits of football (excitement wise) is when a keeper handles outside the area. And I think the own half handling would change the game too much to be honest.

As for taking a penalty, the sector attached to the box indicates the distance the other players have to be retreated already, would just need extending.

I think we are making the same point. It's just that you'd get rid of the box and have a hockey-like D around the goal for penalties. Makes sense, just that it's almost seems easier to leave the penalty box alone and change the referees abilities.

 

[Miles Away]

Please God let the game continue as it is. Football is great because it flows and I'm prepared to put up with the odd mistake to let it stay that way.

Like the Frank Lampard goal?

For me that was the tipping point. World Cup game against England and Germany and a mistake that could easily be avoided changes everything.