Yesterdays Linesman Judgement

[gheesom]

Replays would have to be on a goal or no goal basis.. Offside's, etc, would ruin the flow.

However; if managers are given say 1 "Challenge" per half on an offside call than that might not be so noticeable.

Welcome btw

I think with offsides, it would mostly be involved with a goal, scored but was offside and not given...challenge and get the goal overruled and vice versa.

 

[Nordecke]

I think with offsides, it would mostly be involved with a goal, scored but was offside and not given...challenge and get the goal overruled and vice versa.

yea but that happens frequently.. Could effect flow..

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

Then they still get the yellow or red.
And it won't stay in for that long, if you think you've just scored a goal you'll do everything in your power to hoof it out of play.

That's considerably affecting the course of the following period of play is it not?

 

[samcdavies94]

If the officials are unsure about a goal, then they stop the game, go to the video ref etc. if it's a goal, then back to the centre. If it isn't then the attacking team give the ball back to the defending team// or they have a goal/free kick and the game continues.
I thought of that in about 30 seconds...why it's taken FIFA or UEFA or whoever years to even consider i don't know

 

[Tubey]

yea but that happens frequently.. Could effect flow..

I think it was within 20-30 seconds of the ball crossing the line for the Anichebe header that Sky had the replay going and the world knew it crossed the line. It was a matter of seconds after Ben Arfa was brought down on the counter that the replay is shown.

The fourth official does absolutely nothing else at all, so why not have him on the touchline watching a monitor and simply make a judgement call based on TV evidence. It'd take a minute tops.

Let each side have three challenges per game, which means the game would be extended by 10 minutes per game maximum. To stop spurious challenges (to break up momentum towards the end of the game etc.), the ref has the ability to not allow a challenge if need be.

Challenges can only be made over dubious "over the line" decisions or offside calls (whether for or against) for a goal.

It isn't rocket science.

 

[RFUS]

Said it a million times before, but just use the hawkeye tennis thing.

Give each captain 3 calls that are refunded if they're correct and there we go, problem solved. Yes it would stop the game at small intervals but it adds another element of entertainment and a bit of a tactical side too, as you can't waste your calls.

I know there are reasons not to do it but I'd happily sacrifice a few minutes to get the right decision, because the frustration of having genuine goals ruled out last a lot longer than that. And bad decisions (Rodwell's derby red card for example) can ruin games altogether.

 

[Royal]

That's considerably affecting the course of the following period of play is it not?

And what?

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

And what?

And that.

 

[EFC Si]

Ref should blow the whistle...it's unfair enough anyway if the half the team has run off the pitch celebrating

 

[SpeedEFC]

I don't get why people are so concerned about the flow of the game. Sure, implementing video reviews might break up play now and again but it wouldn't stop play as much as a ref who isn't willing to let the little things slide (which happens all too often in football) plus football is a very stop start game at times anyway with throw ins, goal kicks and corners. At the end of the day it would be much better in the long run because there would be no way a decision couldn't be correct (or if it is but a team hasn't got enough challenges remaining then they get what they deserve for wasting their challenges), plus it would mean it is more likely that retroactive decisions would be implemented since it is the same thing as video reviews in principle. I guess you could say people not in favour of this aren't seeing the bigger picture and what good it could do for a bit of annoyance here and there.

 

[EFC Si]

Said it a million times before, but just use the hawkeye tennis thing.

Give each captain 3 calls that are refunded if they're correct and there we go, problem solved. Yes it would stop the game at small intervals but it adds another element of entertainment and a bit of a tactical side too, as you can't waste your calls.

I know there are reasons not to do it but I'd happily sacrifice a few minutes to get the right decision, because the frustration of having genuine goals ruled out last a lot longer than that. And bad decisions (Rodwell's derby red card for example) can ruin games altogether.

It takes 10 seconds for somone backroom to look at the replay on the screen then say to the ref via the wire thing 'it crossed the line'.

 

[Royal]

And that.

I don't see why that's an issue?

 

[pfim]

Even if you assume it will affect the flow of the match (which it won't), that's much better than affecting the result of the match.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

Wouldn't mind if say each team got 3 challenges in each match, if they're right they keep the challenge and the correct decision is given if its clear from the video replay.

However if say a manager challenges an offside decision (like Fellainis last night) but in this case they are wrong their team loses a player simialr to the sin bin in rugby for 10 mins.

Because if the officials are sho **** and its so easy the get the decisions right then the managers would never be wrong after raising a challenge would they? Sure they are in a different position and all that but that doesn't stop them criticising decisions currently does it.

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

I don't get why people are so concerned about the flow of the game. Sure, implementing video reviews might break up play now and again but it wouldn't stop play as much as a ref who isn't willing to let the little things slide (which happens all too often in football) plus football is a very stop start game at times anyway with throw ins, goal kicks and corners. At the end of the day it would be much better in the long run because there would be no way a decision couldn't be correct (or if it is but a team hasn't got enough challenges remaining then they get what they deserve for wasting their challenges), plus it would mean it is more likely that retroactive decisions would be implemented since it is the same thing as video reviews in principle. I guess you could say people not in favour of this aren't seeing the bigger picture and what good it could do for a bit of annoyance here and there.

Wasting their challenges? What if you get more than three of those decisions in a game? What if something happens in the first minute and a manager thinks, you know what best not waste our challenges as that looks a close call - but in fact turns out to be a clear goal? You're never going to eradicate incorrect decisions completely so I think the question is, is the effect on the nature of the game worth it?