Penalty or Not

[Dangeruss]

We need video refs,
the stakes are so high nowadays that the wrong decision could cost you millions

 

[lazzer]

it would kill the game of IMO

 

[Joe_Fox]

What game is that? The game of In My Opinion?

Sounds great, let's have a go, I'll start:

In My Opinion, it was a peno. :icon_lol:

 

[Real Sharapova]

We need video refs,
the stakes are so high nowadays that the wrong decision could cost you millions

Unfortunately, unlike Rugby Union, Rugby League and Cricket, there are not that many natural breaks in play in footy where you could take time to look at these things. Where football wins over these other games ( in my humble opinion ) is that it is in the main a continuous game, and I'd hate to lose that. Also, if you are continually stopping the game, that can muck up some peoples' travel arrangements if the game is extended too much, and TBH, we get mucked about enough with changed kick-off dates & times to satisfy to the TV companies. As has been stated before, these things tend to even themselves out over a season, and some TV coverage doesn't give you a definitive answer anyway.

 

[Dangeruss]

Unfortunately, unlike Rugby Union, Rugby League and Cricket, there are not that many natural breaks in play in footy where you could take time to look at these things. Where football wins over these other games ( in my humble opinion ) is that it is in the main a continuous game, and I'd hate to lose that. Also, if you are continually stopping the game, that can muck up some peoples' travel arrangements if the game is extended too much, and TBH, we get mucked about enough with changed kick-off dates & times to satisfy to the TV companies. As has been stated before, these things tend to even themselves out over a season, and some TV coverage doesn't give you a definitive answer anyway.

ok i see where you are coming from ....
but as boy genius stated earlier in the thread the game was held up for longer than it would have been if the ref had of gone straight to the touchline to have a look at the decision.
i agree that it would in some way hold the game up but not all desitions just the ones that could effectivly give the game and the points to the cheatin bastards......

 

[Hector]

It could be restricted to penalty decisions only. These are rare (and therefore wouldn't be disruptive) but since they usually give a goal, and often victory, to one team, they are critical. Video examination could also eliminate the numerous wrong offside decisions, but that would be very disruptive, and therefore would be best avoided.

 

[Feriol]

It could be restricted to penalty decisions only. These are rare (and therefore wouldn't be disruptive) but since they usually give a goal, and often victory, to one team, they are critical. Video examination could also eliminate the numerous wrong offside decisions, but that would be very disruptive, and therefore would be best avoided.

what about if the ref doesn't think its a penalty, and wouldn't give it? where play would continue, do you stop to check?

should be penalties that aren't given are more common IMO and more influential.

it balances itself out. A video panel that punish blatant divers after the game would help to prevent cheating to some extent.

 

[Leesoh]

The only reason the game stopped for so long was because of the furore it caused.

If we had video replays, we'd have nothing to discuss on forums like this.

 

[Durham Fox]

Unfortunately, unlike Rugby Union, Rugby League and Cricket, there are not that many natural breaks in play in footy where you could take time to look at these things. Where football wins over these other games ( in my humble opinion ) is that it is in the main a continuous game, and I'd hate to lose that. Also, if you are continually stopping the game, that can muck up some peoples' travel arrangements if the game is extended too much, and TBH, we get mucked about enough with changed kick-off dates & times to satisfy to the TV companies. As has been stated before, these things tend to even themselves out over a season, and some TV coverage doesn't give you a definitive answer anyway.

Spot on that! Would ruin the game IMO.

 

[Brauny Blue]

No video technology for me. We all need a ref to slag off, and an opponent to hate when we're down the pub discussing a match. Anyway Maradona would have had is ' hand of god ' goal chalked off, and that wouldn't do because its ensured that every Englishman hates the Argentinian twat.

 

[Boy Genius]

No video technology for me. We all need a ref to slag off, and an opponent to hate when we're down the pub discussing a match. Anyway Maradona would have had is ' hand of god ' goal chalked off, and that wouldn't do because its ensured that every Englishman hates the Argentinian twat.

I hated the argentinians well before then and it is still as strong now, with or without video refs at football matches...

 

[Kettering Pete]

The ref on Saturday would have given the penalty because he beleived it was a foul. No other reason. He has to make his mind up in a split second and he would have given it honestly becuse his view of it would have confirmed it was a foul for him.

If he'd been in another position he might have seen it differently and not given it. Technically, he was in the correct position for that period of play.

What should be done now is that the FA should have the power to retrospectively review all penalty calls (given or not given) and take firm action against those who have clearly dived. They are the cheats, not the ref. That is where video replays will help. Some players will have just fallen over, fine; but the cheats should get a suspension.

Oh, and ban the offside law too. What is the point of it?

 

[Joe_Fox]

[B][SIZE=1]   .-.                     .-.[/SIZE][/B][SIZE=1]
[B].--' /                     \ '--.[/B]
[B]'--. \       _______       / .--'[/B]
[B]  \ \   .-"       "-.   / /[/B]
[B]   \ \ /             \ / /[/B]
[B]    \ /               \ /[/B]
[B]     \|   .--. .--.   |/[/B]
[B]      | )/   | |   \( |[/B]
[B]      |/ \__/   \__/ \|[/B]
[B]      /      /^\      \[/B]
[B]      \__    '='    __/[/B]
[B]        |\         /|[/B]
[B]        |\'"VUUUV"'/|[/B]
[B]        \ `"""""""` /[/B]
[B]         `-._____.-'[/B]
[B]            / / \ \[/B]
[B]          / /   \ \[/B]
[B]         / /     \ \[/B]
[B]      ,-' (       ) `-,[/B]
[B]      `-'._)     (_.'-`[/B][/SIZE]

 

[Bilborough Fox]

he was ecstatic when he scored though - big celebration!

He would do, after all he hasn't had much to celebrate the way he's played this season.

 

[Redditch Fox]

The ref on Saturday would have given the penalty because he beleived it was a foul. No other reason. He has to make his mind up in a split second and he would have given it honestly becuse his view of it would have confirmed it was a foul for him.

If he'd been in another position he might have seen it differently and not given it. Technically, he was in the correct position for that period of play.

What should be done now is that the FA should have the power to retrospectively review all penalty calls (given or not given) and take firm action against those who have clearly dived. They are the cheats, not the ref. That is where video replays will help. Some players will have just fallen over, fine; but the cheats should get a suspension.

Oh, and ban the offside law too. What is the point of it?

Lots of good points here.

I can't remember exactly where the ref was positioned but undoubtedly it looked a credible penalty and Huckerby is looking for the 'reflex' action type response from a ref.

Its interesting that FIFA won't allow serious action against divers - is this a sign that mainland Europe/ South American associations regard the dive as almost a part and parcel of the game?

On the off side rule, the authorities -as you hint - have made a complete dog's dinner of the situation with this nebulous position of whether or not a player in an' off side' is 'interfering' with play. As has been said thousands of times - what's a player doing on the pitch if he is not interfering in play?

 

[harry]

Lots of good points here.

I can't remember exactly where the ref was positioned but undoubtedly it looked a credible penalty and Huckerby is looking for the 'reflex' action type response from a ref.

Its interesting that FIFA won't allow serious action against divers - is this a sign that mainland Europe/ South American associations regard the dive as almost a part and parcel of the game?

On the off side rule, the authorities -as you hint - have made a complete dog's dinner of the situation with this nebulous position of whether or not a player in an' off side' is 'interfering' with play. As has been said thousands of times - what's a player doing on the pitch if he is not interfering in play?

What really pisses me off is not only the penalty decision but the fact that he booked Paddy for protesting. If that had been Manure and he had been surrounded by half a dozen players would he have booked anyone?

 

[Leesoh]

What really pisses me off is not only the penalty decision but the fact that he booked Paddy for protesting. If that had been Manure and he had been surrounded by half a dozen players would he have booked anyone?

It was D'Urso, who was surrounded by the Manure squad against Middlesborough at OT. Funnily enough.

 

[webmaster]

On the off side rule, the authorities -as you hint - have made a complete dog's dinner of the situation with this nebulous position of whether or not a player in an' off side' is 'interfering' with play. As has been said thousands of times - what's a player doing on the pitch if he is not interfering in play?

The problem with being strict and saying everyone is interfering with play is that you'll rule out a lot of good goals - Arsenal's first goal against Juventus last week for example.
It would also bring a return to the old offside trap style defending that used to happen a lot in the eighties, with back fours all running forward as one as a ball is about to be played forward, leaving the strikers in an offside position. If that happens now, the strikers can just ignore the ball and a midfielder can run through. In the past it would have always been flagged as offside.
I think some people have forgotten how negative some of the tactics used to be, and why the interpretation of the offside law was changed. It's better as it is, it just means it's more difficult for some people to understand.

 

[Redditch Fox]

The problem with being strict and saying everyone is interfering with play is that you'll rule out a lot of good goals - Arsenal's first goal against Juventus last week for example.
It would also bring a return to the old offside trap style defending that used to happen a lot in the eighties, with back fours all running forward as one as a ball is about to be played forward, leaving the strikers in an offside position. If that happens now, the strikers can just ignore the ball and a midfielder can run through. In the past it would have always been flagged as offside.
I think some people have forgotten how negative some of the tactics used to be, and why the interpretation of the offside law was changed. It's better as it is, it just means it's more difficult for some people to understand.

Interesting point - but I also recall how the trap could be unlocked under the previous interpretation by the striker(s) also retreating with the defenders leaving the midfielder to come through and score.

 

[From Gradel to Grave]

No video technology for me. We all need a ref to slag off, and an opponent to hate when we're down the pub discussing a match. Anyway Maradona would have had is ' hand of god ' goal chalked off, and that wouldn't do because its ensured that every Englishman hates the Argentinian twat.

IMO a referee should be able to ask for a decision based on video footage during a game where he isn't sure about the correct decision to make.

It would remain up to the referee how often to do this and whether to just go with the flow of the game (as it is now with free kicks, playing advantage etc.)