Time for Soccer to change...

namloc1980

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The game is a shambles as is. Major changes required.

The whole "but what about the lads down the park" argument is LOL. That people involved in amateur / underage soccer believe they are playing the same game as is being played at the WC / Premiership is the height of self delusion.

Erm.....it actually is the same game.

LuckyLloyd

namloc1980 wrote: »

Erm.....it actually is the same game.

It has the same basic rules. But it is played at a vastly different pace, officiated in a vastly different manner, with vastly differing stakes at play. It is therefore highly appropriate things are done to improve the accuracy of results at the highest level that cannot be mimicked at the lower levels.

SK1979

The thing that p*sses me off most lately is the amount of time wasting etc that goes on in games. I'd actually be in favour of them introducing a system similar to rugby where the ref stops the clock when the ball goes dead. The length of a half could be reduced to say 35 - 40 mins to accomodate the time lost or something.

Also, there should definitely be a "third umpire" for contentious decisions.

And players need to be made respect referees and their decisions. Stop all the aggro towards them. IF a ref f*cks up, they should be sacked afterwards (by the FA / UEFA etc) not by the players / managers.

everdead.ie

eagle eye wrote: »

So then what happens?

Does the game clock get reset to the time of the goal?

How many controversial goals are there in a game add 30 seconds injury time that'd take care of it.

seadnamac

Some people just don't like change.

K-9

Goal line technology or video evidence over off sides wouldn't solve the Henry incident though.

What would you need to avoid the Henry incident?

seadnamac

K-9 wrote: »

Goal line technology or video evidence over off sides wouldn't solve the Henry incident though.

What would you need to avoid the Henry incident?

Automatic review of any suspicious incident that results in a goal. For example, in rugby, the video ref is asked "Is there any reason for me not to award a try."

dfx-

curry-muff wrote: »

But still, allowing the manager to challenge a decision up to 3 times a game could possibly work.

That 3 decisions thing has been heavily criticised in cricket by the very captains of the teams using them and by tennis players. There's been way too many spurious reviews. And even still decisions that should be given out are not because the on-field decision stands.

Stekelly wrote: »

But theres no need to stop anything. The ref can continue as normal until he gets word in his earpiece from a 4th offcial telling him somethign is up.

By the time anyone saw the replay yesterday of Lampard's shot, Podolski could've made it 3-1. What do you do if Podolski scores and then the 4th official says, Lampard's shot went in...

everdead.ie wrote: »

How many controversial goals are there in a game add 30 seconds injury time that'd take care of it.

3 calls each...6 calls, 3 minutes + 3 minutes injury time for substitutions + injury time..it's adding up. TV channels will not be happy...and that's before you look at whether the ball went in or not.

ArmaniJeanss

seadnamac wrote: »

Automatic review of any suspicious incident that results in a goal. For example, in rugby, the video ref is asked "Is there any reason for me not to award a try."

So if Shay Given had saved from Gallas after the Henry handball, pushing the ball over the bar for a corner where does that leave us?
(And then France score a legitimate goal from the corner obviously).

NTMK

namloc1980 wrote: »

And who's going to pay for setting up Hawkeye at Tolka Park or Turners Cross or in the Scottish Third Division?

I don't see how that's a problem. there's no problem with it not being used in lower leagues in other sports.

Hawk-eye doesn't change the game either as it would only take a second for the ref to be notified

K-9

seadnamac wrote: »

Automatic review of any suspicious incident that results in a goal. For example, in rugby, the video ref is asked "Is there any reason for me not to award a try."

Didn't know that was in Rugby.

Where 's the line (:rolleyes:) in Rugby though. Say something happens 50 yards out, can they go back?

Just thinking about Henry. Say the free kick should never have been awarded, how would that be rectified?

Overall, I can see why the goal line technology could be introduced. The whole ball is over the line or not. Offside as well, but what happens if it wasn't offside? Free kick from where?

Just thinking of where you draw the line? Battiston Vs. Shumacher in 82? What happens there?

NTMK

K-9 wrote: »

Goal line technology or video evidence over off sides wouldn't solve the Henry incident though.

What would you need to avoid the Henry incident?

the Additional refs like in the Europa league should pick up those incidences

K-9

NTMK wrote: »

the Additional refs like in the Europa league should pick up those incidences

Like Umpires in the GAA? Fair enough.

Of course they'll miss something as well. We'll just have to accept it then.

I think the problem with stuff like this is, where do you draw the line.

namloc1980

seadnamac wrote: »

Automatic review of any suspicious incident that results in a goal. For example, in rugby, the video ref is asked "Is there any reason for me not to award a try."

Isn't the TMO in rugby limited to checking whether or not a try was scored i.e. was the ball touched down etc. The TMO can't say review suspicous incidents "Ref there was actually an offside earlier on in the build up to that try".

Gavin "shels"

Not sure if it's been mentioned but the main stumbling block for goal line technology and all that malarky is not all countries will be able to afford it and I doubt FIFA/UEFA/etc... will fund it so that every stadium has this technology and instead it will have to be clubs or FA's to foot the bills.

Speaking for a League of Ireland and Shels side, I'd hate to see it come in, we've been robbed of goals, etc... but I wouldn't see myself enjoying a game if this stopping and starting at goals happened week in and week out.

NTMK

namloc1980 wrote: »

Isn't the TMO in rugby limited to checking whether or not a try was scored i.e. was the ball touched down etc. The TMO can't say review suspicous incidents "Ref there was actually an offside earlier on in the build up to that try".

i think it can as a few years ago(04) wasn't there an incident in the Ireland Scotland game where a Scottish player knocked on the ball and touched it down and the ref brought it to the TMO

_blank_

NTMK wrote: »

I don't see how that's a problem. there's no problem with it not being used in lower leagues in other sports.

So what about Dalymount then? Bohs don't play in a "lower league", do they?

namloc1980

ok let's say you bring in replays for incidents like the Lampard goal and Tevez goal i.e. ball over line or not and goal scored from offside position or not....fair enough. What happens where a striker is played in and is one on one with the keeper but the linesman calls offside. Replay however shows he was well onside! what happens then??

seadnamac

namloc1980 wrote: »

Isn't the TMO in rugby limited to checking whether or not a try was scored i.e. was the ball touched down etc. The TMO can't say review suspicous incidents "Ref there was actually an offside earlier on in the build up to that try".

Yes but that doesn't mean that is the way it has to be in football. I was just using it as an example.

seadnamac

namloc1980 wrote: »

ok let's say you bring in replays for incidents like the Lampard goal and Tevez goal i.e. ball over line or not and goal scored from offside position or not....fair enough. What happens where a striker is played in and is one on one with the keeper but the linesman calls offside. Replay however shows he was well onside! what happens then??

Linesman puts his flag up suggesting he thinks it is offside. Ref lets play continue until it comes to an end. If it results in a goal kick or a save, play continues. If it results in a goal or a corner it's available to be reviewed. All players instructed to play to the whistle.

As far as I'm concerned all these issues that people are raising are pedantic matters that can be ironed out with workable solutions.

namloc1980

seadnamac wrote: »

Linesman puts his flag up suggesting he thinks it is offside. Ref lets play continue until it comes to an end. If it results in a goal kick or a save, play continues. If it results in a goal or a corner it's available to be reviewed. All players instructed to play to the whistle.

As far as I'm concerned all these issues that people are raising are pedantic matters that can be ironed out with workable solutions.

So the linesman no longer has any say in calling offside which now becomes the exclusive job of the TMO. The game would take forever if potentially every single offside had to be referred to the replay official.

K-9

seadnamac wrote: »

Linesman puts his flag up suggesting he thinks it is offside. Ref lets play continue until it comes to an end. If it results in a goal kick or a save, play continues. If it results in a goal or a corner it's available to be reviewed. All players instructed to play to the whistle.

As far as I'm concerned all these issues that people are raising are pedantic matters that can be ironed out with workable solutions.

But, but, but...............

That doesn't make sense. If it is a goal or a corner it gets reviewed, if its a goal kick or a save play on. Makes no sense.

Its either an offside or it isn't? That isn't being pedantic.

LeBash

I can't see video refs coming into it.

Big teams/countries tend to be the ones that come off the better from these things and lets be honest, there is far too much money in football to leave it purely to chance.

If a handball in the box favoured a small team/country, FIFA would certainly be more open to make a replay of it.

_blank_

SSN Reporting that Blatter has said that the introduction of technology will be discussed at the next International FA Board Meeting

artanevilla

Des wrote: »

So what about Dalymount then? Bohs don't play in a "lower league", do they?

We (Bohs) have had problems a couple of times with goals that should/shouldn't have been given. Two spring to mind, the ghost goal V Bray, where the ball went in, hit the stancheon and came back out, the goal was not given. And I think it was against Drogheda where they scored, dispite the ball being nowhere near over the line, it was probably nearer the penalty spot, yet a goal was given. A simple review of a replay would have solved these problems.

I think any league which has professional teams should implement it. FIFA should have it a must for all international match, UEFA for all European matches etc, and idividual FA's to implement it by choice, i.e have it in the Premier Leagues in England and Ireland, but maybe not the lower leagues like The Conference and even the Irish Division One.

Another solution would for it to be done on a stadium/club basis. The way UEFA run the Champions League is that a stadium must meet certain criteria. Perhaps stadiums should be responsible for providing the facility of video technology, and have it a requirement for it to be used for certain matches, Premier League, Seria A, World Cups etc.

seadnamac

namloc1980 wrote: »

So the linesman no longer has any say in calling offside which now becomes the exclusive job of the TMO. The game would take forever if potentially every single offside had to be referred to the replay official.

Where did I say every decision? This coupled with something like three challanges per game would result in maybe one or two or maybe no offsides being reviewed. It just means it can be. You know, for fairness sake.

seadnamac

K-9 wrote: »

But, but, but...............

That doesn't make sense. If it is a goal or a corner it gets reviewed, if its a goal kick or a save play on. Makes no sense.

Its either an offside or it isn't? That isn't being pedantic.

I don't see how it doesn't make sense. Again, coupled with managers having maximum three challanges per game this would lead to one, two or maybe none of these decisions actually being reviewed. Why do people look at it as which every single decision would have to be reviewed? They wouldn't.

The linesman can still do his job it just means every now and then his descison can be questioned to make sure it's correct. What the hell is wrong with that? It's the way a line judge works in tennis.

Again, I am not saying I have the solutions, I've just giving possible examples of how it could work.

Some people just don't like change.

ArmaniJeanss

seadnamac wrote: »

Where did I say every decision? This coupled with something like three challanges per game would result in maybe one or two or maybe no offsides being reviewed. It just means it can be. You know, for fairness sake.

You did say though that everytime the linesman puts his flag up for offside that the referee ignores it and lets play go on. Then if a goal is scored its avilable for review/challenge, otherwise if its saved or missed play goes on (you never said what would happen if the keeper pushes it behind for a corner or commits a foul by the way).
Your idea has massive gaping holes in it, its not even close to being a workable solution.

To dismiss the people who point this out with the putdown of "some people just don't like change" is not really helping the debate.

Personally I'm all in favour of change if a sensible working solution can be found. Its difficult though.

artanevilla

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

You did say though that everytime the linesman puts his flag up for offside that the referee ignores it and lets play go on. Then if a goal is scored its avilable for review/challenge, otherwise if its saved or missed play goes on (you never said what would happen if the keeper pushes it behind for a corner or commits a foul by the way).
Your idea has massive gaping holes in it, its not even close to being a workable solution.

To dismiss the people who point this out with the putdown of "some people just don't like change" is not really helping the debate.

Personally I'm all in favour of change if a sensible working solution can be found. Its difficult though.

In a situation like the above, or indeed the Henry, corner, goal scenario, the call by the manager or captain, must be made at the time of the incident, whilst the ball is still in play. Obviously this would be difficult, would the play be allowed to continue to see the outcome if there were a protest? Or would it be stopped? Both have their difficulties. The continuation would be a waste of time. The latter would present scenarios for abuse, e.g, if a player was through on goal, clearly onside, a call could be made by the opposition manager/captain. They force a stoppage, stopping a goal scoring chance. What happens then? Do the attacking team restart with a free kick?

Obviously a start would be to implement it only in cases where goals are scored.

seadnamac

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

You did say though that everytime the linesman puts his flag up for offside that the referee ignores it and lets play go on. Then if a goal is scored its avilable for review/challenge, otherwise if its saved or missed play goes on (you never said what would happen if the keeper pushes it behind for a corner or commits a foul by the way).
Your idea has massive gaping holes in it, its not even close to being a workable solution.

To dismiss the people who point this out with the putdown of "some people just don't like change" is not really helping the debate.

Personally I'm all in favour of change if a sensible working solution can be found. Its difficult though.

I absolutely take your point. However, did you miss the three or four occasions where I said that I was wasn't claiming to have the solutions but simply putting forward examples of how things might possibly work?

In a general sense, I think people/FIFA should accept that things need to change and the sport needs to evolve, just like all other sports have, and society in general to be very broad about it. And thus, concentrate on finding workable solutions instead of just looking for reasons for the sport not to change.

seadnamac

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

You did say though that everytime the linesman puts his flag up for offside that the referee ignores it and lets play go on. Then if a goal is scored its avilable for review/challenge, otherwise if its saved or missed play goes on (you never said what would happen if the keeper pushes it behind for a corner or commits a foul by the way).
Your idea has massive gaping holes in it, its not even close to being a workable solution.

To dismiss the people who point this out with the putdown of "some people just don't like change" is not really helping the debate.

Personally I'm all in favour of change if a sensible working solution can be found. Its difficult though.

And to be fair if the keeper pushes it behind, it's corner, so it would be able to be reviewed like I said. And if it ends in a penalty then of course it would be reviewed. That's not much of strech. Anyway...

Guy:Incognito

dfx- wrote: »

By the time anyone saw the replay yesterday of Lampard's shot, Podolski could've made it 3-1. What do you do if Podolski scores and then the 4th official says, Lampard's shot went in...

.

Lampards shot was obviouly a goal in real time.

namloc1980

Stekelly wrote: »

Lampards shot was obviouly a goal in real time.

It wasn't obvious to the linesman or the referee.

tolosenc

Des wrote: »

SSN Reporting that Blatter has said that the introduction of technology will be discussed at the next International FA Board Meeting

"Discussed" and then swiftly rejected. Lipservice, imo.

What football needs is a TMO, and diving/cheating review panels with harsh sentences - say, 6 months for deliberately trying to mislead/influence the ref? Most would think twice if they knew they'd be caught and have a lengthy ban.

tolosenc

namloc1980 wrote: »

It wasn't obvious to the linesman or the referee.

Sepp?

applehunter

Mr. Blatter should watch some of the officiating in the LOI.

Think he might change his stance pronto.

Can't remember the game, think it was Galway where the ball flew past the keeper into the net and hit the back stanchion and came out and the ref disallowed the goal.

namloc1980

applehunter wrote: »

Mr. Blatter should watch some of the officiating in the LOI.

Think he might change his stance pronto.

Can't remember the game, think it was Galway where the ball flew past the keeper into the net and hit the back stanchion and came out and the ref disallowed the goal.

A few years ago at a Dundalk game didn't the ball go into the goal but go through a hole in the net and the goal wasn't awarded.

applehunter

applehunter wrote: »

Mr. Blatter should watch some of the officiating in the LOI.

Think he might change his stance pronto.

Can't remember the game, think it was Galway where the ball flew past the keeper into the net and hit the back stanchion and came out and the ref disallowed the goal.

Sorry artanevilla, didn't see you had made the same point.