No no no, golf rules apply. It’s like a hole in one, you now owe each of us a drink.
I want Newcastle to go down for two reasons. First, the messiah crap mentioned previously. Second, well… Posh vs Newcastle will draw in a lot more away fans than Posh vs Hull, we need the money (the town, not the club)!
I checked the stats and it seems to me that chowder, with almost a quarter of the posts in this thread, is the most obvious candidate for buying everyone a drink. 
I’d like to see Newcastle go. It would be a stunning riposte to City, who think they’re running the show as far as joke clubs go. Spurs started out brightly, but have slipped out of the title race in recent months. The toon getting relegated would really shake up the big three and probably be enough to clinch the title for them.
More seriously, I want Newcastle to go because their players are a sorry collection of losers - there’s more talent in that squad then the rest of the relegation candidates put together. Their owner is a disgrace and it would be supremely satisfying to see the whole circus get what they deserve. I would feel bad for their fans; they’re a well supported team with a superb stadium - the Geordies can be a bit delusional but every one I’ve met has always been sound about football.
I think they’ll escape, though. I reckon Phil Brown’s Hull City will take the drop along with Middlesborough and West Brom. Hull are on a huge slide, don’t have the players, and get absolutely nothing out of the officials. That will take them down.
Well bugger me (literally), seeing as how you’ve taken the time and trouble to research the whole thread I guess it’s only fair that I buy each and everyone of you a pint of the falling down water.
After the last game of the current season I’ll be in the QuarryBank on Bloomsbury Lane, Timperley, Cheshire.
Anytime between 12 noon and closing, if I’m standing just ask, if lay flat out just take whatever cash I have out of my back pocket and squander it as you will.
It goes without saying that Manure fans are excluded from this most generous offer, let 'em buy their own bloody booze.
Anyway, where was I?, oh yes.
I gave Hull’s manager the name Taylor, It is of course Brown and nary a one of you spotted it.
On reflection I to would like to see Newcastle relegated, those “Toon” fans do not have a God given right to stay in the premiership, altho’ they think they have.
Yeah, bollocks to 'em, send the feckers down.
Having just read Busy Scissors post, that person is also excluded from the freebies City a joke club? cheeky sod
Probably not but it should be. I can see goal line technology coming in first.
How in the world COULD it be? Each and every “foul” of some import would be contested. And fouls are not all clear cut; they have an element of judgment in them (what is “reckless”?). So video doesn’t really help with many, if not most, fouls.
Even here in America, where we have sold our soul to the football replay official, we don’t allow fouls to be contested, only things that are factual: did the ball go over the line, did the person have his feet down inside the field, etc.
I just had to drag this post back up today. I did NOT notice the poster bothering to come back in and taste his dish of crow. I still don’t see him around, even though 3 of the 4 are in the SEMIs, and the only one knocked out went out to one of the English teams.
Now, of course, comes the real test. Can Chelsea dump Barca out? If so, then both finalists will be English, AGAIN, and we will know the true measure of English football.
If you go to the forum home page and click on ‘Replies’ to the right of the last poster, a popup appears giving you details of who has posted in that thread and how many times they have posted in it.
Your current tally for this thread is 236.
Well then if it’s that easy, and I never knew it was, forget the offer of alcoholic refreshment.
Incidentally I agree with DSY. The only time I can see technology coming into the game is to determine whether or not the ball has fully crossed the goal line
Predictions for tonight, then? Are Chelsea going to be stuffed five or seven nil? I’m going with five. I’m warming a nice hot mug of schadenfreude and will enjoy it immensely. And if a cricket score doesn’t transpire then don’t expect to see me here until October.
Oh, tits, it’s an ITV evening; that means I have to put up with Pleat mispronouncing Bosingwa all night. Still, Andy Gray is just as bad - I heard him a while back actually get it right, then say, “oh, sorry, Boswinga” as if correcting himself. Top stuff.
Quite easily really. For penalty or sending off situations.
It could be instituted if the will were there.
Which can and should be done. It works in other sports.
Eh; football, more than most sports, relies upon flow. I can’t think of much more disastrous than stopping to review call after call after call; even in cricket, a notoriously stop/start game, the recently implemented review system is grindingly dull, and contributes little but controversy and delay. How entertaining will it really be to watch Drogba go down as if shot from fifteen different angles, while the players cool down on the pitch and the crowd get more impatient by the second?
Nor am I convinced that in such subjective territory it would even noticeably improve the quality of officiation. I’ve been utterly convinced from one angle that a player has dived his little heart out, only to see from another that he was clearly caught. I really can’t see that most football officiation issues will be substantially improved by video dissection.
Ball-over-line, yeah, sure; but even then, I don’t think it’s worth the disruption unless it’s the goal-line we’re talking about. Football (in its better moments) has a flowing quality few other sports have, and I don’t think compromising that is something that should be taken lightly. We might say we’ll only use it for penalty/sending off situations, but that’s every time a player falls over in the box. This, of course, is not exactly a rare occurrence.
Right, second half’s started. Five goals ahoy.
I guess we won’t be seeing Dead Badger for a while. 0 - 0 at the Camp Nou full time. Chelsea’s mission is almost complete (they would be in better shape if they had scored one).
As for replay:
I am not aware of ANY sport that uses video replay to determine if fouls have occurred. Can someone provide an example of such a sport?
In soccer, how would a video help, Lochdale, in determining a penalty?? Of the ten direct free kick fouls, 7 have to be the result of play that is careless, reckless, or involves excessive force. How does video help determine if those were true?? Of the other three, handling has to be deliberate (weasel word, video no help again), “holds” an opponent (what exactly is “holding”?), leaving only spitting at an opponent, which is so unlikely to occur in the penalty area as to make it practically irrelevant.
What you don’t seem to be processing here is that video evidence is only of value in determining things that can be answered “yes” or “no” without resort to someone’s judgment. Like, “did white touch the ball last before it went over the line?” Great. So we can be more precise about corners vs. goal kicks (which we all see blown from time to time). Ditto throw ins. Whoopee. MAYBE we could use video to determine ball completely across the line, but I’m betting that’s better solved with sensors. And offside? Well, unless the camera is dead in alignment with the next-to-last defender, video is no better at discerning offside than the thousands of full-voiced spectators who are CERTAIN the assistant blew the call. 
And even in the limited instances when video replay is of value, have you seen what happens to a game when you try to use it? American football, despite a rule that is supposed to limit the interruption’s duration, can often be stopped for as much as five minutes while the replay official looks at the video. Hockey officials can take equally long to determine if the puck was in the net, or if the foot was in the crease, etc. It’s a nightmare, and it’s hardly the thing to introduce to a flowing game that prides itself on no timeouts.
In short: it’s unworkable, it won’t solve disputes over fouls, and it needs to be kept the hell away from real football. :mad:
I’m processing it just fine. If, however, we’re going to have the proverbial hand-wringing of decisions like Webb’s this weekend then video technology may be able to assist. It can clearly assist (and should be utilized) in situations involving questions of the ball going across the line but I also believe that it can be adapted to other situations if it is warranted. The line technology is readily available and is very unobtrusive.
The decision to use video could be in the referee’s hands or in the hands of the fourth official. It could be limited to penalty situations only. Given that the game essentially stops after a penalty is awarded you could have a review of a play like the one of Saturday. Then, based on a set criteria (e.g. the Ref can only be overrruled based on clear evidence of error) you can avoid decisions like Saturdays. So the technology is there (have you seen instant replay anytime in the last, oh I don’t know, ten years) and it could eliminate these types of decisions. Otherwise, absent Redknapp suggesting that Webb was biased, these are the decisions that we have to live with.
I don’t think it would ruin the purity of the game. I remember similar concerns were raised when the keeper’s ability to collect a back pass was eliminated and the fourth official setting injury time.
How would video evidence have been able to address the determination of Webb? The keeper touched the attacker. Of this there is no doubt. The only question becomes whether or not the touching that occurred was sufficient to result in a foul, for having violated one of the ten no-nos in Law XII. Since the no-no in question involves the weasel words “careless, reckless or with excessive force,” what is a replay official going to be able to say? The only person who’s opinions on that subject matter is the man with the whistle in the middle of the pitch.
And as for the assertion that the keeper got the ball first, so what? We know that this is not relevant when in the middle of the pitch a tackler touches the ball first, but at the same time trips up the opponent in a reckless manner. Why should the keeper or the penalty area matter in that case? The keeper needs to come and get the ball in a manner that is not going to result in tripping the attacker in a manner deemed “careless, reckless or with excessive force.” If he had done so, who is to say he would have been able to stop the shot?
So, you see, the video is irrelevant.
Which can be modified by use of a fourth official. The Ref’s authority has already been modified vis-a-vis determination of injury time so it is not unprecedented.
Not at all. It would simply allow another perspective to let the referee know what happened. In the example at hand, Webb was 40 yards from the actual tackle which makes it rather unlikely that he got the view that video would, and indeed did, offer. As there is already a break in the action, a more informed analysis could be undertaken. If a high bar were set to overturn the Ref then at least eggregious decisions could be overturned.
So no, video is not irrelevant. If used correctly it could augment the Ref’s perspective exponentially and allow for more nuanced decision making. Goal line technology is the logical next step and while I can’t ever see instant reply in football the notion that it is irrelevant doesn’t fly with me.
You STILL haven’t answered the vital question. Which is the issue of the interpretive words. You don’t comprehend that Howard Webb saw EXACTLY what did happen, and called the penalty, NOT because he didn’t see the ball touched by the keeper first, but because that was irrelevant to his call. Another view wasn’t going to make a difference.
Not to mention that, unless you have truly experienced how much time such a review takes, you simply cannot comprehend how much that would slow down the whole thing. A game that now takes a simple 1:50 to play, end to end, would take much much longer. NOT a good thing.
We will, I think, simply have to agree to disagree on this.
Or maybe not. Seems Howard Webb admits to error, and wouldn’t have called the penalty had he seen the touch. So maybe you ARE right after all, Lochdale, if some way could be found to make it short and snappy.
Well not sure I am right but I just think the possibility is worth exploring. I do, however, share your concerns that it could slow the game down or, worse, allow for some unseen “fifth” official to dictate a game. Whatever about the FA, I don’t trust anyone at FIFA.
I think goal line technology would be a good start and maybe leave it at that.
Should be a cracker tonight. I predict 3-2 to United.