March 15, 201214 yr I still can't believe how many people still haven't 'sussed' Adrian Durham out. If he didn't spout the stuff he did then we wouldn't be entertained by the mongtards who ring the show in a rage of fury. Durham is the best around at what he does.
March 15, 201214 yr Best of the bunch is Lee Dixon who tends to make some good points without being a patronising get. We have Warren Barton on Fox Soccer over here... He's not bad,.
March 15, 201214 yr That's why I'd not have much of an issue if they did do goal line technology, it doesn't get relied upon too often so wouldn't be a big deal And let's face it, goals are goals and can turn a game on its head and be the difference between 3, 1 and 0 points - whilst there are dives that lead to pens, sending offs etc the refs generally get them right so no need to stop the game every time to review I don't see how saying that's an easy way out or relates to charisma,, a lot of issues are down to the integrity of the players or refereeing competency, and can be dealt with retrospectively if not necessarily fairly Goals can't, qpr should've had a goal on sat, they won't get it now and it might send them down, if it happens too quick for the ref to see then why not have something that lets them know it crossed As said, not arsed either way, but there's a good case for instant goal line technology and for me that's where the line is drawn with regards "3rd party" assistance Your post highlights the issue perfectly. The arguement is that goal technology is ok because hardly happens, so in that sense, no problem, but if it hardly happens why bother ? Then you say goals can change games, so surely the logic has to be if they are so important and we have technology they get reviewed. Many more goals are given/disallowed because of incorrect offside desicions, and they are pretty factual and clear so surely that is the starting point? If you are going to solve a problem why tackle the small one rather than the big one? I know you are nt arguing one way or the other but it just highlights the issue
March 15, 201214 yr Your post highlights the issue perfectly. The arguement is that goal technology is ok because hardly happens, so in that sense, no problem, but if it hardly happens why bother ? Then you say goals can change games, so surely the logic has to be if they are so important and we have technology they get reviewed. Many more goals are given/disallowed because of incorrect offside desicions, and they are pretty factual and clear so surely that is the starting point? If you are going to solve a problem why tackle the small one rather than the big one? I know you are nt arguing one way or the other but it just highlights the issue I've always thought that the linesmen could raise their flag if they thought the player was offside, and then play could go on. If a goal resulted and the linesman had his flag up, the 4th official has a quick look on the replay and gives or denies the goal. Like rugby. It'd take about 20-30 seconds, and would be at a natural break in play anyways so wouldn't affect the flow at all really. If the play didn't result in a goal, then the flow of the game would actually be improved as we wouldn't have to wait for the free kick to be taken.
March 15, 201214 yr Would this review be done on the big screen too? It'd cause a fucking riot if we were denied a goal that "in our opinion" should have been given. An example: Mark Hughes reckons Pratley was off side for his goal. I reckon he wasn't in the second stage but was in the first stage, which is not offside.
March 15, 201214 yr Would this review be done on the big screen too? It'd cause a fucking riot if we were denied a goal that "in our opinion" should have been given. An example: Mark Hughes reckons Pratley was off side for his goal. I reckon he wasn't in the second stage but was in the first stage, which is not offside. Well there might be a problem (and it's the same with all technology solutions btw) because not all levels of the game have the same technology available. Hell, not all Premier League grounds have a big screen for this purpose. At grass roots level, this solution won't be possible at all because the 4th official (if there even is one) won't be able to watch a replay. The main problem with the offside law is they keep changing the bloody thing. To me, if you're offside you're offside, interfering or not, first or second (or even third?) phase. If you're beyond the second last defending player, then you're offside.
March 15, 201214 yr Your post highlights the issue perfectly. The arguement is that goal technology is ok because hardly happens, so in that sense, no problem, but if it hardly happens why bother ? Then you say goals can change games, so surely the logic has to be if they are so important and we have technology they get reviewed. Many more goals are given/disallowed because of incorrect offside desicions, and they are pretty factual and clear so surely that is the starting point? If you are going to solve a problem why tackle the small one rather than the big one? I know you are nt arguing one way or the other but it just highlights the issue I think goal line decisions are "small" because it's quick and easy to say goal or play on, there and then Regards offside goals, it's too varied, eg offside flag goes up, defence stop, striker doesn't hear whistle, scores - a review shows it wasn't offside, you can't give the goal as the defence played to the whistle, so how would you resolve that? It could work the other way, ie ref says it wasn't off, defence claim it was, review decides it was a goal but can you really have teams questioning refs decisions every 5 mins? As once that's in place, where do you draw the line? Pens? Corners? Free kicks? Red or yellow cards? Teams would forever be stoping play and asking for reviews, even if you limit them to 3 a game it makes a mockery of what power officials have So for me, goal line tech can help decisions that are too quick for refs to spot and are unable to make a decision on there and then - retrospective cards or the reversal off is fine too if not fair at the time, but you can't resolve all the big problems without forever stopping the games and quite frankly it'd be boring and frustrating So solve the small problem because you can, and trust them to get the rest right, it may not be the complete solution but solves one problem And if it really was a small problem, we still wouldn't bang on about taggarts goal 15 years on Funny that no one ever mentions mark fish's disallowed goal v Leeds in injury time that same season that was onside and scored so late it would surely given us the 1 point we needed to stay up
March 15, 201214 yr Funny that no one ever mentions mark fish's disallowed goal v Leeds in injury time that same season that was onside and scored so late it would surely given us the 1 point we needed to stay up My one and only trip to Elland Road. Dirty Leeds.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.