This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- A trip through history
- Bmo 1 1996 q1
- A Level Computer Science
- Letter of Rec for international UG applicant
- Learning materials for biological sciences!
- Autistic access to the archive survey
- Archives and Records Management - Distance Learning?
- Songs lol
- whats the best laptop for IT or business courses
- Pride Month 2023: what are your LGBTQ+ media recommendations?
- KU Freshers: Finding Your Way Around Campus
- does anyone have any good mlm anime?? cant find any that arent weird
- makeup questions
- Looking for any individual driving instructors in Newcastle
- artists like mitski?
- Ideal TV cross-overs?
- accomodation for erasmus students
- How can i fix my hairline
- About Postgraduate Funding Options for Humanities & Arts MPhil
- OCR GCSE Science (Biology, Chemistry, Physics) Textbooks?
Archive SPTM/0001/REC/HPOO
Scroll to see replies
pig
I was jumping up and down last night! I laughed myself literally stupid with my face 2 inches from the screen, losing my voice in the process, only to find that there had been a floodlight robbery. I'd rather wait 30 seconds for confirmation than feel the utter disbelief that crept over me.
lol yes, if it is for the ball crossing the line or not, then yes we should bring it in, as this only happens once every 30-40 games, so it will not happen all the time, but for offsides and handballs videos are not needed (although maradonas goal would never have stood, and england would have won the world cup.....damn....fukin argentine)
What I don't understand is - why can't they just give us the extra 2 points? We all know it's a goal so they should give us the points.
theaman
What I don't understand is - why can't they just give us the extra 2 points? We all know it's a goal so they should give us the points.
lol, once they do that, then a game of football would never finish until about half an hour after the final whistle, and we analyse the video evidence. technically, if u scored, man u can say they would have played even more attacking and score an equaliser. Come on, these things do happen. I still remember when Scholes scored past porto in champ league last season, but it was ruled offside.....porto went on to win it.....so why dont they just give us the champions league now! (your comment is just as absurd)
pig
This is why the FA is bent (ref. my post in the other thread about ferguson). You can't get any redress from them, even when they are wrong. Even if it was just to say 'we cocked up, sorry spurs, but there's nothing we can do now' it would be something. Ideally, teams should be able to sue the FA for incurring a financial penalty upon them (dropped points = lost money) by employing shonky officials. But you can't, and if you even suggest they are dodgy they will fine you. Madness.
Is disgusting. The system is totally wrong, and there is nothing we can do about it, they won't let you get a word in.
It was nice to see Martin Jol keep his composure in his television interview after the game though, he seems a thoroughly decent bloke him -
Still, Alex Ferguson admitted it was a goal, television replays shown that it was a goal - the points should be awarded to Spurs, but it ain't happening. Bent.
yea it should be introduced to stop all the confusion in games.. its really unfair what happened to spurs, and i would be very annoyed to say the least if that was me!
It should only be used for important decisions though.
It should only be used for important decisions though.
haha yea sure whatever
I don't see how video technology will cause any longer delays than already exist when a difficult decision has to be made. Both sides always believe they're right, and will remonstrate their cause at length, occasionally with an added brawl between players (especially at Arsenal vs. Man Utd games 
).
Having the fourth referee's assistant (or are they called linesmen again now?) actually doing something helpful other than waving a sign with Ferguson's lucky number on it every 45 minutes and actually having him sat rewatching videos of decisive moments in the game will cut out the fighting and arguing between players and referee and won't result in any longer delays.
As for the comment about lower leagues, if they don't have TV cameras they miss out, chances are if they don't there's not a lot at stake anyway. Conference and up virtually all have them anyway, don't they?
). Having the fourth referee's assistant (or are they called linesmen again now?) actually doing something helpful other than waving a sign with Ferguson's lucky number on it every 45 minutes and actually having him sat rewatching videos of decisive moments in the game will cut out the fighting and arguing between players and referee and won't result in any longer delays.
As for the comment about lower leagues, if they don't have TV cameras they miss out, chances are if they don't there's not a lot at stake anyway. Conference and up virtually all have them anyway, don't they?
Hmm, there may have been something to the "incident" after all.
http://mat.rubberfeet.org/index.html#start
http://mat.rubberfeet.org/index.html#start
Gimp
chances are if they don't there's not a lot at stake anyway.
And anyway... league two and conference will have one or two cameras tops at most games. Not likely to help in many situations. Which will delay a game as 4th official will be looking at totally inconclusive TV evidence unable to make a decision.
And in any case, lots of the lower leagues don't even have a 4th official. More expense, when football should be cutting back on its ridiculous spending!
teamvillage
And anyway... league two and conference will have one or two cameras tops at most games. Not likely to help in many situations. Which will delay a game as 4th official will be looking at totally inconclusive TV evidence unable to make a decision.
And in any case, lots of the lower leagues don't even have a 4th official. More expense, when football should be cutting back on its ridiculous spending!
And anyway... league two and conference will have one or two cameras tops at most games. Not likely to help in many situations. Which will delay a game as 4th official will be looking at totally inconclusive TV evidence unable to make a decision.
And in any case, lots of the lower leagues don't even have a 4th official. More expense, when football should be cutting back on its ridiculous spending!
Perhaps if they stop paying the players such ridiculous amounts. If they don't have the facilities they don't use them, I don't see the harm in it.
Probably ha been mentioned already, but am in a hurry so can't bothered to check. They want to trialrun a ball with a chip in it, which will senda signal to the ref as to whether or not the ball has gone over the goal line. Instantly.
they could put chips in the players' kit too for use in automating offside decisions then taking your top off to celebrate might actually warrant the yellow card that it for some bizarre reason receives!
then taking your top off to celebrate might actually warrant the yellow card that it for some bizarre reason receives!Being a volunteer in Athens (home town) was a fantastice experience in 2004.
You must support the bid as it will not only regenerate some parts of London but it will be good for England. However the debt will be huge.
You must support the bid as it will not only regenerate some parts of London but it will be good for England. However the debt will be huge.
Yes and they must introduce it immediately!! I was watching the game live and I couldn't believe how that guy denied the goal to Tottenham.
I think technology used in sport would be useful, to stop some poor decisions. But in that match the points should not have been given to spurs because it is possible that if that goal went in it would change the entire way both sides played for the rest of the match, and there is no guarantee of the scoreline, so it would be stupid to do so.
And all the times that other obvious goals were disallowed, i don't think it would be right that only in this case the result would be changed.
I would argue that most of it is because the goal was against man u, and most people have a dislike to them so want to see it changed. When decisions of clear goals go against man u (i'm thinking for example paul scholes goal in the champions league which was clearly on side, but was disallowed), there is nowhere near this level of reaction, even though the game was alot more important.
And all the times that other obvious goals were disallowed, i don't think it would be right that only in this case the result would be changed.
I would argue that most of it is because the goal was against man u, and most people have a dislike to them so want to see it changed. When decisions of clear goals go against man u (i'm thinking for example paul scholes goal in the champions league which was clearly on side, but was disallowed), there is nowhere near this level of reaction, even though the game was alot more important.
theaman
What I don't understand is - why can't they just give us the extra 2 points? We all know it's a goal so they should give us the points.
Yet you can take violent conduct under the same process either further or when any of the officials failed to spot in the game...
Definitely want it, I live in London and it'd be grrrrrrrrrrrreat.
I sent off for a volunteer pack and everything
I sent off for a volunteer pack and everything
Almost on topic... just found this on the F.A. Website
An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a metre.
"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring
his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
things."
In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained "If
they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
guidelines. The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but
with the players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who broke
one the most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They placed a shot
on target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and perhaps he
s not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions. Fortunately if he
doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the game visiting teams,
by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old Trafford then our
officials are in a position to help Mr Jol make that cultural adjustment."
Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award a
goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
Nistleroy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never do.
No No No. Shocking, just the thought of it."
An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a metre.
"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring
his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
things."
In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained "If
they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
guidelines. The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but
with the players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who broke
one the most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They placed a shot
on target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and perhaps he
s not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions. Fortunately if he
doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the game visiting teams,
by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old Trafford then our
officials are in a position to help Mr Jol make that cultural adjustment."
Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award a
goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
Nistleroy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never do.
No No No. Shocking, just the thought of it."
teamvillage
Almost on topic... just found this on the F.A. Website
An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a metre.
"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring
his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
things."
In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained "If
they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
guidelines. The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but
with the players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who broke
one the most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They placed a shot
on target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and perhaps he
s not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions. Fortunately if he
doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the game visiting teams,
by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old Trafford then our
officials are in a position to help Mr Jol make that cultural adjustment."
Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award a
goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
Nistleroy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never do.
No No No. Shocking, just the thought of it."
An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility
for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a
shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a metre.
"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman
out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play
developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was
wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring
his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those
things."
In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained "If
they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to
wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their
support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen
to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA
guidelines. The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but
with the players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who broke
one the most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They placed a shot
on target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and perhaps he
s not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions. Fortunately if he
doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the game visiting teams,
by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old Trafford then our
officials are in a position to help Mr Jol make that cultural adjustment."
Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed
to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the
national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award a
goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van
Nistleroy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never do.
No No No. Shocking, just the thought of it."
Related discussions
- A trip through history
- Bmo 1 1996 q1
- A Level Computer Science
- Letter of Rec for international UG applicant
- Learning materials for biological sciences!
- Autistic access to the archive survey
- Archives and Records Management - Distance Learning?
- Songs lol
- whats the best laptop for IT or business courses
- Pride Month 2023: what are your LGBTQ+ media recommendations?
- KU Freshers: Finding Your Way Around Campus
- does anyone have any good mlm anime?? cant find any that arent weird
- makeup questions
- Looking for any individual driving instructors in Newcastle
- artists like mitski?
- Ideal TV cross-overs?
- accomodation for erasmus students
- How can i fix my hairline
- About Postgraduate Funding Options for Humanities & Arts MPhil
- OCR GCSE Science (Biology, Chemistry, Physics) Textbooks?
