Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Indy

Is it about time for a three challenge rule? Allowing managers to challenge such poor penalty awards?

Recommended Posts

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Indy"]If a penalty is not awarded or goal dissalowed for offside then there should be a challenge allwoed by the Manager! just the three per game. It would not take up much time nor would it be every two minutes because it would be upto the manager to use them wisely.[/quote]Seriously? Imagine this scenario...City are under pressure, all the players are in our half, the ball is booted forward and collected by Kei Kamara who charges forward and is one-on-one with the keeper. Kei rounds the keeper and just as he''s about to release his shot, the opposing manager appeals for offside. The appeal is dismissed so City are awarded a free kick with all the opposing eleven players behind the ball...after the police have quelled the riot?[/quote]

In the scenario I suggested, you would not be able to stop play. If Kamara scored it could be reviewed after the goal is scored. For situations where there is no immediate break in play the manager/captain signals to the 4th official, they review while play goes on and if necessary the play is brought back if the initial decision is found to be wrong. If there is a break in play in the mean time the play stops until a decision has been made.

It''s so simple, it might go against some of the old fashioned ideals of the game but as I said before, when a season in the PL is worth £60m + I''d much rather a bit of common sense and use of technology already available. Love the idea of doing away with linesmen as well and using a combination of cameras on rails and Hawkeye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Indy"]If a penalty is not awarded or goal dissalowed for offside then there should be a challenge allwoed by the Manager! just the three per game. It would not take up much time nor would it be every two minutes because it would be upto the manager to use them wisely.[/quote]Seriously? Imagine this scenario...City are under pressure, all the players are in our half, the ball is booted forward and collected by Kei Kamara who charges forward and is one-on-one with the keeper. Kei rounds the keeper and just as he''s about to release his shot, the opposing manager appeals for offside. The appeal is dismissed so City are awarded a free kick with all the opposing eleven players behind the ball...after the police have quelled the riot?[/quote]He was not saying this, If Kamara went round the keeper and scored. The ref would then look to see if he is offside! Not stop the game instantly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

One change I would support however is the introduction of technology for offsides and do away with linesman. There is absolutely no need to have linesmen now. A camera and computer can tell if a player is offside immediately, 100% accuratly, 100% of the time. Some of you will be driving around in cars that make 500 decisions every SECOND so if you think that this change would slow the game down I urge you to stop living in 1955 and join us in 2013.

[/quote]

 

I am kind of on your side here. I like the idea of using technology when it comes to offsides. I am also a fan of simplifying the offside rule to where you are offside if an attacking player is inbetween the defence and the keeper when the ball is kicked. None of this crap about interferring with play or not eitehr you are onside or you are not.

 

I don''t however agree with getting rid of linesmen. They should be made Assisstant referees. There should be 4 of them. Each running one half the pitch on both sides. This won''t help stop incompetence but it will give the referee''s more help. You often see goal kicks and corners given the wrong way because the linemasn is on the wrong side of the pitch and the ref is 30 yards away with a plyer in his line of sight.

 

I don''t think the challenge rule is a good one as some smart managers will find a way to manipulate the call. I just think there should be more help for the refs. The 6th official should be able to review penalty and free kick decisions. They should even be allowed to rule on acts of violent conduct. I just don''t think anyone affiliated with either side should be allowed to have anything to do with the decision making process.

 

Davo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Long drives home"][quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Indy"]If a penalty is not awarded or goal dissalowed for offside then there should be a challenge allwoed by the Manager! just the three per game. It would not take up much time nor would it be every two minutes because it would be upto the manager to use them wisely.[/quote]Seriously? Imagine this scenario...City are under pressure, all the players are in our half, the ball is booted forward and collected by Kei Kamara who charges forward and is one-on-one with the keeper. Kei rounds the keeper and just as he''s about to release his shot, the opposing manager appeals for offside. The appeal is dismissed so City are awarded a free kick with all the opposing eleven players behind the ball...after the police have quelled the riot?[/quote]He was not saying this, If Kamara went round the keeper and scored. The ref would then look to see if he is offside! Not stop the game instantly![/quote]But what if Kamara didn''t score, their keep pumped it up field (the review is still ongoing BTW) and suddenly it''s in the back of our net just as they decide Kamara is offside... what happens then?  It''s back to an Ipswich free-kick for the first offside 20 seconds earlier?  I tell you what, I''d better get emailing Greater Anglia to ask them to delay the 22:00 back to London until Midnight!  I''m 31 now and my grandad has just decided to give up his season ticket at 86.  If I''m lucky enough to have another 55 years of following City in me I''d be happy to bet that no realtime review system other than for goal-line incidents will be implemented within this time.  The offside rule is the only one with a slight potential, but it just will not happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I honestly think making the ref hooked up to a mic that goes through the stadium sound system would solve it.

I can''t see a ref telling a packed stadium a linesman 50 yards further away from him has caused him to over-rule himself and give a penalty he didn''t see/want to give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But what if Kamara didn''t score, their keep pumped it up field (the review is still ongoing BTW) and suddenly it''s in the back of our net just as they decide Kamara is offside... what happens then? It''s back to an Ipswich free-kick for the first offside 20 seconds earlier? I tell you what, I''d better get emailing Greater Anglia to ask them to delay the 22:00 back to London until Midnight!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

people need to think about what they say first.

whilst I''m not sure if replays are the answer, that certainly isn''t how it would work.

as with other sports that use replays. the opposing manager would not use his appeal UNLESS KK had scored.

hence, he would only be able to use it in a break of play, say if he DID score or if he knocked it off the keeper out for a corner.

if the keeper latched onto the ball, a review would not be used, and the game would carry on as normal.

I really don''t see how people are struggling with this concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Javiers Deaf Translator"]But what if Kamara didn''t score, their keep pumped it up field (the review is still ongoing BTW) and suddenly it''s in the back of our net just as they decide Kamara is offside... what happens then? It''s back to an Ipswich free-kick for the first offside 20 seconds earlier? I tell you what, I''d better get emailing Greater Anglia to ask them to delay the 22:00 back to London until Midnight!

-------------------------------------------------------------------

people need to think about what they say first.

whilst I''m not sure if replays are the answer, that certainly isn''t how it would work.

as with other sports that use replays. the opposing manager would not use his appeal UNLESS KK had scored.

hence, he would only be able to use it in a break of play, say if he DID score or if he knocked it off the keeper out for a corner.

if the keeper latched onto the ball, a review would not be used, and the game would carry on as normal.

I really don''t see how people are struggling with this concept.[/quote]It would have to be instant appeal, you can''t wait for a break in play as the manager could be wired and have someone watching the game live on TV telling them whether or not to appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and why does that mean you wouldn''t wait for a break in play? if the supposed offside did not harm the opposition there would be no need for it.

using words like "can''t" is taking it to the extreme, as you CAN wait for a break in play(as if the offside did work against them in some manner, there would be a break almost right away), just like many other sports, but is it just that you would not like it to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Javiers Deaf Translator"]and why does that mean you wouldn''t wait for a break in play? if the supposed offside did not harm the opposition there would be no need for it.

using words like "can''t" is taking it to the extreme, as you CAN wait for a break in play(as if the offside did work against them in some manner, there would be a break almost right away), just like many other sports, but is it just that you would not like it to?[/quote]I''m using words like "can''t" as a systems needs to be 100% fair and not open to bias, and waiting for a break in play would not allow that to happen.  In cricket an appeal is made by the players in the middle with no influence from the balcony (although this has been questioned on a few occasions when there''s a delay between the decision being made and the appea).  In Rugby the TV referee is called by the pitch referee who is impartial (unless it''s Wales v England), there is no appeal from either team.  Tennis is the same as cricket, it''s the players making the call, not the management.  I''m not sure what happens in the NFL as I know that''s been mentioned a few times.I''m a big fan of technology, I''d love it to be used if it could be used fairly, but an appeal based system just isn''t suited to football in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tennis is done by player, as there is no real management system. but it is impossible for that to be done in open play.

and as for the NFL, it is done as you explain, a manager(coach) on the sidelines, mic''d up to a team member watching from a live tv stream.

if the opposition play and go forward to get a touchdown, but the defending team thinks there was a foul or the ball didn''t fully cross the line, they then call for a review during the stop.

and thanks to the three review rule in American football. this probably adds maybe 5-7 minutes to a full game. the reason for the amount of time an AF game takes is due to all the stops for adverts.

wouldn''t it simply be a sort of "play advantage" type rule? if the offside did not hurt the team, why not just carry on instead of using a review? if it did hurt the team a stop in play would be used.

I struggling to think of a situation where if a decision hurts a team, a stop in play doesn''t come.

a defending player fouled in an attacking play - if it leads to a goal or corner - stop in play, review takes place. if it leads to a goal kick or counter attack - advantage.

offside wrongly given - stop in play - review - free kick from the point of the offside pass.

offside not given - if it leads to a goal or corner - stop in play - review. if it leads to a goal kick or counter attack - advantage played.

the same can be done for corners, throw in, and any foul in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Davo"][quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

One change I would support however is the introduction of technology for offsides and do away with linesman. There is absolutely no need to have linesmen now. A camera and computer can tell if a player is offside immediately, 100% accuratly, 100% of the time. Some of you will be driving around in cars that make 500 decisions every SECOND so if you think that this change would slow the game down I urge you to stop living in 1955 and join us in 2013.

[/quote]

 

I am kind of on your side here. I like the idea of using technology when it comes to offsides. I am also a fan of simplifying the offside rule to where you are offside if an attacking player is inbetween the defence and the keeper when the ball is kicked. None of this crap about interferring with play or not eitehr you are onside or you are not.

 

I don''t however agree with getting rid of linesmen. They should be made Assisstant referees. There should be 4 of them. Each running one half the pitch on both sides. This won''t help stop incompetence but it will give the referee''s more help. You often see goal kicks and corners given the wrong way because the linemasn is on the wrong side of the pitch and the ref is 30 yards away with a plyer in his line of sight.

 

I don''t think the challenge rule is a good one as some smart managers will find a way to manipulate the call. I just think there should be more help for the refs. The 6th official should be able to review penalty and free kick decisions. They should even be allowed to rule on acts of violent conduct. I just don''t think anyone affiliated with either side should be allowed to have anything to do with the decision making process.

 

Davo

[/quote]

I would agree with this. I would like to see a ref be able to refer the matter to a video official if he is genuinely unsure about a given incident/decision. I guess though you would then get controversy where referees refuse to refer decisions which are subsequently shown to be incorrect. I am sure some would be willing to use the technology whereas others would be too arrogant to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Javiers Deaf Translator"]but as I said earlier, I''m also not sure if this is the way to go, I do think a simple ref mic hooked up to the stadium sound system would solve most issues.[/quote]

Really? I can''t see how this would help at all. Would make it even harder to get a decision away at places like Old Trafford and the Emirates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

[quote user="Javiers Deaf Translator"]but as I said earlier, I''m also not sure if this is the way to go, I do think a simple ref mic hooked up to the stadium sound system would solve most issues.[/quote]

Really? I can''t see how this would help at all. Would make it even harder to get a decision away at places like Old Trafford and the Emirates.

[/quote]

Agree. In most cases where a poor or incorrect decision is made, we as the watching public know why hes made it. We knew at the weekend why arsenal got a penalty (the linesman saw kel pull him to the ground) and having that conversation available for all to hear would have made no difference would it?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BYG - the home fans would need to make noise before refs could be intimidated and places like OT or the Emirates :D

but agreed, it could be a problem somewhere like anfield.

but can you imagine a ref saying this?

"there were each a player from Arsenal and Norwich tugging at shirts. I thought nothing of it, but my linesman 50 yards away brought to my attention that it is a penalty."

...obviously it wouldn''t come out exactly like that, but if they had to explain it so not only the people in the stadium can hear it, but also radio broadcasters, quotes on the BBC, Sky, and other sporting stations.

they would be walking into many stadiums and getting abuse before games even kicked off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Davo"][quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

One change I would support however is the introduction of technology for offsides and do away with linesman. There is absolutely no need to have linesmen now. A camera and computer can tell if a player is offside immediately, 100% accuratly, 100% of the time. Some of you will be driving around in cars that make 500 decisions every SECOND so if you think that this change would slow the game down I urge you to stop living in 1955 and join us in 2013.

[/quote]

 

I am kind of on your side here. I like the idea of using technology when it comes to offsides. I am also a fan of simplifying the offside rule to where you are offside if an attacking player is inbetween the defence and the keeper when the ball is kicked. None of this crap about interferring with play or not eitehr you are onside or you are not.

 

I don''t however agree with getting rid of linesmen. They should be made Assisstant referees. There should be 4 of them. Each running one half the pitch on both sides. This won''t help stop incompetence but it will give the referee''s more help. You often see goal kicks and corners given the wrong way because the linemasn is on the wrong side of the pitch and the ref is 30 yards away with a plyer in his line of sight.

 

I don''t think the challenge rule is a good one as some smart managers will find a way to manipulate the call. I just think there should be more help for the refs. The 6th official should be able to review penalty and free kick decisions. They should even be allowed to rule on acts of violent conduct. I just don''t think anyone affiliated with either side should be allowed to have anything to do with the decision making process.

 

Davo

[/quote]I agree with all of this, with the exception of the highlighted.For me, adding more refs can only increase the chance that they will f**k something up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of people''s opinions it looks like there are plenty of ideas at least worthy of consideration by the powers and maybe a trial. Many posters reasons for not doing it can be easily factored into a solution. However just look at how hard it was to get goal line tech implemented - there seems to be no appetite for it at the top of the game and increasingly out of touch reasons given for not doing it.

The technology is there, the motive to do it is there, intelligent people can surely come up with a way to make it as little of a disruption as possible. I just can''t understand the ridiculous argument that people would rather have a game flow than have an opportunity to ensure decisions are made correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jim Smith"] I would agree with this. I would like to see a ref be able to refer the matter to a video official if he is genuinely unsure about a given incident/decision. I guess though you would then get controversy where referees refuse to refer decisions which are subsequently shown to be incorrect. I am sure some would be willing to use the technology whereas others would be too arrogant to do so.[/quote]
My opinion though is that the decision should be two way. The ref can refer these decisions "upstairs" and the man "upstairs" can also highlight things to the ref.
So like the tackle the other week by the Wigan youngster McManaman if the TV guy had seen it then he could flag it up to the ref with his recommendation.
I would also make a summary of all instances of communication between the two individuals available to the clubs after the match.
Davo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"][quote user="Davo"][quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

One change I would support however is the introduction of technology for offsides and do away with linesman. There is absolutely no need to have linesmen now. A camera and computer can tell if a player is offside immediately, 100% accuratly, 100% of the time. Some of you will be driving around in cars that make 500 decisions every SECOND so if you think that this change would slow the game down I urge you to stop living in 1955 and join us in 2013.

[/quote]

 

I am kind of on your side here. I like the idea of using technology when it comes to offsides. I am also a fan of simplifying the offside rule to where you are offside if an attacking player is inbetween the defence and the keeper when the ball is kicked. None of this crap about interferring with play or not eitehr you are onside or you are not.

 

I don''t however agree with getting rid of linesmen. They should be made Assisstant referees. There should be 4 of them. Each running one half the pitch on both sides. This won''t help stop incompetence but it will give the referee''s more help. You often see goal kicks and corners given the wrong way because the linemasn is on the wrong side of the pitch and the ref is 30 yards away with a plyer in his line of sight.

 

I don''t think the challenge rule is a good one as some smart managers will find a way to manipulate the call. I just think there should be more help for the refs. The 6th official should be able to review penalty and free kick decisions. They should even be allowed to rule on acts of violent conduct. I just don''t think anyone affiliated with either side should be allowed to have anything to do with the decision making process.

 

Davo

[/quote]I agree with all of this, with the exception of the highlighted.For me, adding more refs can only increase the chance that they will f**k something up...[/quote]
It''s all fubar now. The introduction of a multitude of cameras in to Stadiums is allowing fans to see more then we ever have done and every week there are bad decisions made affecting the out come. Refs need help and not some tool standing behind the goal to see if the ball crossed the line but not the blatant handball mere feet away.
Davo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BarclayWazza"]Regardless of people''s opinions it looks like there are plenty of ideas at least worthy of consideration by the powers and maybe a trial. Many posters reasons for not doing it can be easily factored into a solution. However just look at how hard it was to get goal line tech implemented - there seems to be no appetite for it at the top of the game and increasingly out of touch reasons given for not doing it.

The technology is there, the motive to do it is there, intelligent people can surely come up with a way to make it as little of a disruption as possible. I just can''t understand the ridiculous argument that people would rather have a game flow than have an opportunity to ensure decisions are made correctly.[/quote]This I can agree with. While I''m against any sort of video review at the moment, until some ideas were worked through and trialled, my opinion is formed on how I think it would (or wouldn''t) work.Anyway, nice to see a good proper debate on here for once, rather than the doom and gloom of our current plight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22157469The Football Association said the 24-year-old Argentina striker will not

be charged retrospectively for the two-footed tackle in City''s 2-1

victory.
Assuming we did want to go with a video review system, what hope do we have to get a proper video review system in place, when the FA can''t even use it properly retrospectively?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The ghost of Michael Theoklitos"]http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22157469The Football Association said the 24-year-old Argentina striker will not

be charged retrospectively for the two-footed tackle in City''s 2-1

victory.
Assuming we did want to go with a video review system, what hope do we have to get a proper video review system in place, when the FA can''t even use it properly retrospectively?[/quote]More FA Bullcr@p, it wasn''t the tackle, it was the secondary two footed stamp after the tackle that should have been penalised.Each such instance makes it just that little clearer that the FA see the idea of technology assisted refereeing as nothing more than a big dickie bird floating in their overflowing swill trough, no way will the fat cats permit anything which might spoil their little party, letting high profile players from high profile teams off guarantees they get the biggest and loudest on their side should there ever be a debate on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
same as an injury. the ref will stop play if the challenge is made. if the challenge is unsuccessful, drop ball to the team in possession at the challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I would be massively in favour of something that would work.

End of the day, like cricket, nfl and Rugby. It would be only used for a matter of fact and would need irrefutable evidence.

In reality, that would mean Norwich could have appealed the corner. Probably wouldn''t have done. Then appealed the penalty, they would have sided with the ref as there was a shirt pull, and it wouldn''t have been irrefutable.

The third goal, Walcott offside we would have appealed and won.

Whilst football at times appears like it needs a ''system'', the reality having irrefutable evidence would just mean offside, and ball over line (corners). Not sure, what would happen for ''handballs''. Since the wording deliberate, would be quite hard to overturn as a matter of fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stringers army

The ref gains quite a lot by keeping high profile managers on their sides.

Every time a slightly dodgy mistake or even the correct decision against Man Utd. You see Fergie come out and have a massive go at the ref.

Whilst everyone, rightly say, these are professionals (believe 80k a year). Whilst I would love to be on that salary, I don''t think I would like the abuse they get from every ground, every media outlet and a large proportion of the managers. In the past we''ve seen ref''s get death threats from Chelsea fans, resulting in a couple of ref''s retiring.

I use to remember a time when cricket umpires and tennis officials use to receive the same treatment. However, I can''t remember the last time that the authority of a match official at cricket/rugby/tennis was questioned. This is the biggest plus from use of technology, it removes to a large degree the mistakes from officials, and places it in the players/teams.. should have reviewed it, and everyone moves on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×