FIFA's ruling, closing the door on technology...

[walks on water 0]

...I do believe is influenced by a wish to determine the big decisions their way.

What do you think? Are the ramifications from ''dodgy'' decisions that occur too expensive in the modern game?

[nolegs 0]

It''s "our"trough and only"our" pigs are allowed to put their snouts in it....expressly only with "our" permission.

[Ghost of Davie Ross 0]

I''m comletely baffled by FIFA''s attitude - it flies in the face of common sense.

[NorwichCasual 0]

I cant get on with FIFA... We invented football but the name has been hijacked by billy foreigner

FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION

Naaa

How can you take anything they say seriously

[Bill 1,788]

Thank god a breath of fresh air at last.

This kind of nonsense does NOT belong in football. It merely serves to turn the game into the staged, TV controlled farce that is Amercan ''football''.

Before simple people bleat out how it is used in tennis and cricket I would suggest they understand that both those games have natural breaks at the point of the decision. Those decisions are absolute and regularly feature almost every few minutes.

The arguments behind this cruddish idea are so flawed they are laughable.

On the question of appeals. Unless unlimited then we are back to where we started ie if you use up your quota and then a ball is later shown to be over the line then the idiocy has failed. If unlimited then it will merely become another time wasting feature with no guarantee of any accuracy other than audience figures for TV.

This stupidity has nothing to do with fairness but is merely a means for TV to insert ads and would merely mean that enough appeals were called for so as to ensure this.

Football has beaten off Blatter and the other shysters who would have our game wrecked - likewise with bigger goals, no offside, game in four quarters, plastic pitches. We already suffer from being told when we have to attend games from fri night - monday night to dance to the tune of TV. We need to keep what little control we do have of our game rather than allow big business to take it over further.

The rules determine that the referee decides. Mistakes are made. Mistakes are made by players. That is the game. Or are we to have it so sanitised that we cannot accept the whole free flowing open nature of the game that makes it so enjoyable.

To hand control to TV companies would push the small elite (that would be paid for this nonsense) further away from the rest of the game. TV should reflect what happens and report that. NOT decide what happens to suit it''s target audience. Those who want such contrived absurdities should watch wrestling instead.

[25overpar 0]

To be fair I think most advocates of the use of technology are only calling dor it''s use on the goal line and not for off-side, tackles, throw-ins or violent conduct (although the authorities are quite happy to use video evidence when cosidering violent conduct or other red card issues). Like it or not there is far too much at stake in today''s game. Just imagine we scored a goal on the last day of the season that meant the difference between promotion or staying in League One and it was not given, just like Birmongham suffered at the weekend. How would you feel about it then?

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="City1st"]Thank god a breath of fresh air at last. This kind of nonsense does NOT belong in football. It merely serves to turn the game into the staged, TV controlled farce that is Amercan ''football''. Before simple people bleat out how it is used in tennis and cricket I would suggest they understand that both those games have natural breaks at the point of the decision. Those decisions are absolute and regularly feature almost every few minutes. The arguments behind this cruddish idea are so flawed they are laughable. On the question of appeals. Unless unlimited then we are back to where we started ie if you use up your quota and then a ball is later shown to be over the line then the idiocy has failed. If unlimited then it will merely become another time wasting feature with no guarantee of any accuracy other than audience figures for TV. This stupidity has nothing to do with fairness but is merely a means for TV to insert ads and would merely mean that enough appeals were called for so as to ensure this. Football has beaten off Blatter and the other shysters who would have our game wrecked - likewise with bigger goals, no offside, game in four quarters, plastic pitches. We already suffer from being told when we have to attend games from fri night - monday night to dance to the tune of TV. We need to keep what little control we do have of our game rather than allow big business to take it over further. The rules determine that the referee decides. Mistakes are made. Mistakes are made by players. That is the game. Or are we to have it so sanitised that we cannot accept the whole free flowing open nature of the game that makes it so enjoyable. To hand control to TV companies would push the small elite (that would be paid for this nonsense) further away from the rest of the game. TV should reflect what happens and report that. NOT decide what happens to suit it''s target audience. Those who want such contrived absurdities should watch wrestling instead.[/quote]

 

Sorry, I think the decision not to allow goal line cameras is complete ballcocks.In today''s day and age, it''s such a no brainer that IMO there is no need for any discussion.

[norfolkchance1 0]

I can hear the collective sound of heads being buried in the sand.

Did they not realise how close the last World Cup final nearly became remembered for Zidane not getting sent off, and potentially France going on and winning the final.

In some respects it might have helped if that had happened, the uproar in Italy would have been deafening and they would have had no choice but to bring in technology of some description.

[dreamteam 0]

Managers would soon want to abolish technology if it works against them.

You only hear people screaming for it when to have it would be advantageous to their team.

Another effect it would have is to make the endless 606 &Talksport type phone ins redundant, as referee baiting is a major part of their broadcasts.

[First Wizard 0]

Madness, if International cricket, tennis and rugby can adopt it why can''t they, something stinks.

[Guest]

[quote user="City1st"]Thank god a breath of fresh air at last. This kind of nonsense does NOT belong in football. It merely serves to turn the game into the staged, TV controlled farce that is Amercan ''football''. Before simple people bleat out how it is used in tennis and cricket I would suggest they understand that both those games have natural breaks at the point of the decision. Those decisions are absolute and regularly feature almost every few minutes. .[/quote]

 

What about Rugby Union? It works Very well there...

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="City1st"]Thank god a breath of fresh air at last. This kind of nonsense does NOT belong in football. It merely serves to turn the game into the staged, TV controlled farce that is Amercan ''football''. [/quote]

whilst i agree with everything else you have said in your post the above sentance is uneducated and misinformed.

There is nothing staged about American Football, or TV controlled for that matter.. there is a myth that the TV companies tell the teams to stop playing so they can run adverts every few minutes and the challenge rule they have works.. (Evidence: the superbowl this year)

 each team gets 2 challenges per half, if they get it wrong they lose that challenge, if they get it right they get the play reversed.. the Referee has 1 minute to review the play, if he cant make his mind up the play stands.

By that time the players have decided their next play and are ready to go again if needs be.

 

[NottsCanary 0]

[quote user="GRFC"]

[quote user="City1st"]Thank god a breath of fresh air at last. This kind of nonsense does NOT belong in football. It merely serves to turn the game into the staged, TV controlled farce that is Amercan ''football''. Before simple people bleat out how it is used in tennis and cricket I would suggest they understand that both those games have natural breaks at the point of the decision. Those decisions are absolute and regularly feature almost every few minutes. .[/quote]

 

What about Rugby Union? It works Very well there...

[/quote]Correct, even if it was just used as goal-line monitoring, like when they check to see if the ball did actually touch the ground under control in rugby, it would be a massive help, and only take a few seconds!