THE BRITISH THREAD II

That's in very bad taste Walt. Littledick specialises in such originality. He has a desk job and is still protesting about the cutting of his umbilical chord.

Well, back in the 60's, my hosts didn't want that I'd read The Mail ...

What's the noise on Vidoe referees?

We (Aust) copped our share of disputable decisions in this world cup (and played like turkeys as well) and can cop it on the chin but this does not mean i can't comment.
All teams have the same chance of getting a bad/ disputable call so in that sense it's fair for everyone.
The game is a fast flowing game and video Refereeing would slow/stop the game in some situations.
I do believe that there is opportunity to review red card decisions and possibly review dissallowed goals.
With red cards, there seems to be a break in play at that point. Players sent off could be sin binned until the video ref confirms or unconfirms the decision. If the decision is unconfirmed the player would return to the field.
Radio communications with the onfield ref would be needed.

I just want to remind you that there's the old Saxon rule: if football is played between cousins (aka England vs Germany), the ball has to be touching the net, not just crossing the line. (It's not just Saxon: Arminius did the same with the Roman's, Widukind with Charlemagne's team.)

This rule was re-discovered in 1966 and re-entacted the very same year in Wembley.

There's no chance of video refereeing of football. The risks are too much compared to the risks now.

The England "ungoal" kept the ball in play. I saw an 8 minute long sequence of play in one game. Such a sequence didn't happen after the "ungoal" but it might have done and it might have resulted in a goal at the other end and a yellow or red card being shown.

If, after a long time interval, the tape was viewed and the ungoal declared a goal whilst the other side's fans were celebrating you could get a riot. And are any cards valid in what then becomes, say, 8 minutes "unplay" which would presumably have to be added to the time at the end. It's ridiculous.

In other sports play is constantly being stopped and thus it is much easier.

There are large amounts of money and emotional energy involved and such incidents as we saw yesterday might easily happen in the final.

Two goal linesmen is probably the answer but then does it apply to all football matches under FIFA's jurisdiction many of which are played before a handful of spectators.

Football fans recognise human error as being part of the game and they also enjoy the arguments about these sorts of incident.

I agree with FIFA.

It is easy to rescind cards when the match is over and it is done in England although not during the game.

spendy I dont see the need for a long interval. If a decision needed more than 1 min consideration you would accept the refs ruling. If its not obviouse or blatant and reqires frame by frame disection of the replay then the refs decision stands
I dont think its feasible that a score would be made within that kind of a time limit. admittedly there are a lot of things that could happen in a minute or so (red cards injuries) so your point is well made but arguable

Undoing a red card decision after the game is at least a start especially in cases where acadamy awards should be made. This blatently taking a dive business has almost put me off and needs to be stamped out.

Walter are you trying to put one over me? I didnt see any old saxons playing.

Alls fair in love, war and football.

Ironically perfect for the Germans, wasn't it...a thumping victory against the land of the Daily Mail and a disputed goal against, not given.

What a laugh.

what are your thoughts in video reffing Mc T.

please note how assidiously i am avoiding talking about cricket at present.

My wife said,

"The German goalkeeper saw the ball had crossed the line! He should have admitted it!"

She is so sweet and innocent.

she prolly picked that fair play trait up in Aust.

I'm not sure you saw the point dp. The goalie grabbed the ball and kicked it upfield, or threw it. When does play stop after that? If the ref doesn't give the goal right away play goes on and can last, as I said, for a considerable period before the next stoppage. I wasn't talking about how long a decision making process could take. That is usually manageable. It would have been 10 seconds in this case.

And there's the difficulty of all the games coming under FIFA's jurisdiction. As far as I'm aware the International Cricket Conference only legislates for international cricket. There are thousands of football games played every weekend with FIFA's rules in play.

All I'm saying is that I understand why FIFA resists the technology. If China, say, wanted to bring in technology they would be thrown out of FIFA and would be barred from any football which FIFA controlled.

For sure it looks sensible to bring in technology in this incident. FIFA are imagining other types of incident. For example, claims that a ball was out of play on the wing before it was crossed and headed into the back of the net just out of reach of the goalie's despairing fingertips. How about a claim that the German goalie was over the penalty area line when he kicked the ball up route one for the first goal. They do sometimes go over the line. What about shirt tugging on corners.

It's horrendous. FIFA are quite right. With millions of ££££s at stake you could get games stopped for court hearings under company law and various other stuff. It's a professional game.

Suppose the incident happened in the last minute of overtime with the scores level. And all Sepp Blatter has to do to avoid complications is to stoneface it and take the heat of outraged commentators knowing that it will all blow over as destiny takes its usual course.

It's more likely that she never played football for these stakes.

Immediatly the video ref communicates with the field ref. The field ref blows his wistle and play recommences as would be usual after a goal is scored.


Agreed, whatever ruling is in place needs to be abole to work in many imaginable situation.
I cant pretend i have any depth of game knowledge here thats why i'm talking to the specialists.


In our football if the field ref is concerned he asks for a ruling. Play continues until a ruling is given. If the ball is ruled out of bounds, play returns to the boundary and recommences. All intermediate play is null and void.


If its not blatant or excessive (more than 1 step?) it prolly doesnt make a lot of difference.

All that is required is for players and staff to accept the ruling. Buit you are correct in the statement that millions od $$$ are at stake. Its very easy to say "change the rules".

Lots of cricket players won't walk after a snick to the keeper.

bed time for me. I'll look in tomorrow

nighty-night.

Looks in as promised.

I turned on A2K for that?? ?? ??

Anyway, I've been cleaning up my double bass (my brother gave me an old tatty one, but it's cleaned up quite well and now I'm going to get it professionally fettled) and it looks quite nice, much better anyway.
The man in the repair shop said it was worth doing. Needs new strings and a bridge, a different (secondhand) tailpiece, a new sound post (internal strut) and some judicious glueing and cramping.
Afer cleaning some white paint scuffmarks off the fingerboard (black) I used shoe-cleaning scuff cover! Ya gotta improvise. Looks just like ebony now.

The strings repair man is back in the shop tomorrow, so I'll take it in then.

That's what we have now with the ref's decision being final. It works. It's accepted. You win some and you lose some. And controversy is good for the game, the pundits and the punters.

We can't have a video ref interrupting the beautiful game and starting a discussion everytime the ref misses something.

Which games would you have a video ref involved? If these TV people don't watch out FIFA will take control of the cameras. No replays. The TV audience gets what the crowd gets. We want people who are responsible for the game to say what's what rather than a bunch of pensioners who are watching a screen with Mr Linaker and who talk rubbish half of the time. They said England put in a good performance against Slovenia--sheesh!

Okay--it's a corner for Germany and an England defender controls the ball with his arm blindside to the ref in a melee of shirts. He passes it out and a long raking pass to the wing finds Rooney in space. He takes it to the by-line to hold it up to give Defoe a chance to get into the box and fires in a fast low cross which the latter tries to head but misses and it bounces off his shoulder in a loop into the far corner of the net with the goalie stranded. 10 secs say. England fans in delerium. Commentator screaming his borrowed machismo. Pub rafters vibrating the length and breadth of our green and pleasant. Fork trucks loading red and white merchandise worth a billion smackers.

Video refs my arse. You would be going back to a penalty for Germany. Red alert. Sepp Blatter is right. The argument from authority. That's why he's the boss. Football's Pope.