Terrible refereeing ruining football - the saga continues.

[Royal Rother]

back to Topic I think the standard of refereeing has been better than any major competition I can remember. The howlers are what everybody remembers whereas in reality (well, in the games I have seen) there have been very few over-officious refs booking players unnecessarily, very few games spoiled by whisltle happy chappies, and very few wrong offside calls.

[Stranded]

Football is a stop start game though - not as obviously so as say rugby but the game stops at very regular intervals. A stat I saw recently is that in a 90 min game of football the ball is only in play for around 48 mins - so thats 42 mins where the game is stopped.

Therefore if they did need to stop a game for a reason of a possible goal it shouldn't be as much of a problem as some would like to make out - though how the game restarts would be a tricky though as we are talking about a situation that occurs fairly rarely not insurmountable.

Having said that I would prefer the Hawkeye method as it is almost instantaneous and with less room for error.

[Wycombe Royal]

Howard Webb (and his assistants) have been excellent in the games I have seen them officiate.....

[Sun Tzu]

Football is a stop start game though - not as obviously so as say rugby but the game stops at very regular intervals. A stat I saw recently is that in a 90 min game of football the ball is only in play for around 48 mins - so thats 42 mins where the game is stopped.

Therefore if they did need to stop a game for a reason of a possible goal it shouldn't be as much of a problem as some would like to make out - though how the game restarts would be a tricky though as we are talking about a situation that occurs fairly rarely not insurmountable.
.

Stopping the game for a 'possible' incident is totally different to anything we have now, where the stoppage is 'natural' ie if the ball goes off the pitch we all know what is happening, likewise if the ref gives a foul we know what is going on. To stop the game 'pending' a decisionthat might take some time to resolve, and may be contested even when it is resolved is utterly new. Not to say it couldn;t be done, it just seems unnecessary and out of context with the game.

Would agree that Webb and co have been excellent - despite many on here telling us before hand he was a bad ref !!!!

[Deadlock]

FIFA said it would be too expensive to introuduce..

So what exactly do they do with the millions made from the game each year!?

Hey, coke and whores aren't free, you know.

[floyd__streete]

"The game must be played in the same way no matter where you are in the world," he wrote. "The simplicity and universality of the game is one of the reasons for its success."

For once, Sepp, I agree. Instant 0.5 of a second decisions for ball over the line if the technology is available, otherwise an absolute no-no to any other nonsense regarding offside or penalty decisions or god knows whatever else being 'replayed'. Cricket is an oft trumpeted example by the rabid replay brigade, as if there aren't bad decisions in that sport from time to time.

[royal tee]

"The game must be played in the same way no matter where you are in the world," he wrote. "The simplicity and universality of the game is one of the reasons for its success."

For once, Sepp, I agree. Instant 0.5 of a second decisions for ball over the line if the technology is available, otherwise an absolute no-no to any other nonsense regarding offside or penalty decisions or god knows whatever else being 'replayed'. Cricket is an oft trumpeted example by the rabid replay brigade, as if there aren't bad decisions in that sport from time to time.

I was a supporter of using more technology in cricket for lbw's, bat/pad catches etc but one of the real downsides with URDS is the loss of spontaneous excitement when a wicket is taken. Now there is a pregnant pause while the batsmen discuss whether to appeal or not and then if they do appeal there is the wait until the decision is given. The whole wicket taking process gets stretched out over a number of minutes and feels unsatisfactory. I can well imagine the same thnig happening in football

[soggy biscuit]

Blatter has given a statement this morning saying that they will now look at implementing goal line technology.

[Sun Tzu]

"The game must be played in the same way no matter where you are in the world," he wrote. "The simplicity and universality of the game is one of the reasons for its success."

For once, Sepp, I agree. Instant 0.5 of a second decisions for ball over the line if the technology is available, otherwise an absolute no-no to any other nonsense regarding offside or penalty decisions or god knows whatever else being 'replayed'. Cricket is an oft trumpeted example by the rabid replay brigade, as if there aren't bad decisions in that sport from time to time.

I look forward to Blatter revealing how he will implement this incredible proposal, which would require vast expense !

There are so many ways football is played differently in different parts of the world, at different age levels and different standards.

[Ian Royal]

goal line technology seems a good idea to me.

And the use of a 4th / 5th oficial with a screen under certain circumstances.

Like where there is a stopage anyway - ie whether the ball was inside or outside the post a la Watford, whether a card is due or not. This would be especially useful where there may have been serious foul play but the ref isn't sure what happened.

The 4th/5th official could have a similar buzzer to the linos to alert the ref of a decision that needs to be made.

I don't think the game should be stopped unless it was going to be done anyway though. Offsides aren't an issue, because you err on the side of the attacker and if it goes in double check it.

[Sun Tzu]

And the use of a 4th / 5th oficial with a screen under certain circumstances.

It would have to be a 5th official, no way could a 4th official do it as they have plenty of other responsibilities and obvioulsy could not have a screen pitch side anyway.

Like where there is a stopage anyway - ie whether the ball was inside or outside the post a la Watford, whether a card is due or not. This would be especially useful where there may have been serious foul play but the ref isn't sure what happened.

Don't think an extra official could or should deal with cards at all. All disciplinary decisions need to be made by the same person to ensure consistency.

Offsides aren't an issue, because you err on the side of the attacker and if it goes in double check it.

Can't see that working. The offside could be some time before the ball actually goes in. I don;t think there is a huge amount wrong with the way offsides work now and think it would be next to impossible for technology to make offside calls (judging active play would be really hard !)

[floyd__streete]

I look forward to Blatter revealing how he will implement this incredible proposal, which would require vast expense !

There are so many ways football is played differently in different parts of the world, at different age levels and different standards.

It is the spirit of what Blatter says which I agree with. And you accuse me of twisting things . I think that in general the concept of the beautiful simplicity of two goals, 22 men/women/kids, one ball and a relatively simple set of rules is a common global denominator surely? I should hope that the venerable Sun Tzu is not one of those muppets foaming at the mouth demanding every contentious decision be replayed ad nauseum until the 'correct' decision is made!

[Ian Royal]

whatever could introduced it would have to be accepted as limited and not there to stop all eventualities.

I'm not saying the 5th official should make a decision on cards, but be able to answer specific questions for the ref which allow him to check his decision on a card.

Did the player get hit in the face? Was the elbow swung? Was there accidental contact or a clear trip?

It's all got to be part of a wider campaign - more respect from players to officials and each other. Rewarding them so that they don't have to dive to win a penalty or freekick. Penalising them for overreactions to tackles.

It's a very tricky line to cross and needs to be handled carefully. But there is simply no good reason why technology shouldn't be introduced to aid the officials.

It is ludicrous that such clearly incorrect decisions as Lampard's goal, Tevez's goal, Reading's goal against Watford are still allowed to happen.

[floyd__streete]

Oh and by the way Costa of Portigal has just - in my opinion - rather disgracefully been sent off thanks to - in my opinion - some quite reprehensible play acting from Capdevila of Spain. Clarence Seedorf tends to disagree with me apparently, and there is the rub.....who decides that the decision is contentious enough for replay? A referral system? Sounds absolute bobbins to me and has been a mixed success in cricket, a game in which there is a natural break in play after every ball. And how long do we get to study the replay for? Until the crowd have got bored? Until ITV can squeeze in a car advert? Technology for anything other than ball over the goal-line - NO FANKS.

"But how do we deal with the cheats, Floyd"? Trial by television after the game. Bans. Fines. Hit the players where it hurts them most, in the pocket Sure, it won't help out the side who have been conned, but what goes around comes around and more vigorous damnation of cheats - because that is what they are - would bring an end to this kind of nonsense in the bud once and for all. Sadly, when you get the likes of Eduardo being spared a ban for taking a cheating tumble in the Celtic penalty area we have no chance of eradicating this infuriating cheating.

[Ian Royal]

Well the guy quite clearly swung an elbow for no reason other than to try and hit Capdevilla so it looked a red to me. And a possible yellow for simulation of an injury.

I'd accept retrospective fines on cheating. But as i've said you can't just use the stick, you have to give the players a reason to believe they will get a correct decision in their favour if they don't dive or feign injury. At the moment you have to go down "hurt" to actually get something.

[floyd__streete]

It is ludicrous that such clearly incorrect decisions as Lampard's goal, Tevez's goal, Reading's goal against Watford are still allowed to happen.

Lampard's goal could have been awarded in a nano-second with the right technology, equally Watford could have been awarded their goal kick in the blink of an eye when the buzzer/klaxon/alarm bell/duck whistle didn't sound for a Reading goal. During the time it takes to watch Tevez's header two or three times to get it right you could nip to the loo.....and perhaps stop there to read the paper and never return to watch such a boring stop-start spectacle.

[Terminal Boardom]

back to Topic I think the standard of refereeing has been better than any major competition I can remember. The howlers are what everybody remembers whereas in reality (well, in the games I have seen) there have been very few over-officious refs booking players unnecessarily, very few games spoiled by whisltle happy chappies, and very few wrong offside calls.

I still stand by my earlier comment that this tournament has had the best performances out of the match officials. Sure, mistakes are made but I reckon about 90 % have been spot on. To be fair, there have only been 2 big errors. Realistically, and honestly, would they have really changed the eventual scorelines of either game?

[Terminal Boardom]

Blatter has given a statement this morning saying that they will now look at implementing goal line technology.

This is a complete and utter farce. There should be no need for such a discussion. Goal line technology is available here and now and should be used. The purpose of another discussion is merely papering over the cracks.

[Ian Royal]

It is ludicrous that such clearly incorrect decisions as Lampard's goal, Tevez's goal, Reading's goal against Watford are still allowed to happen.

Lampard's goal could have been awarded in a nano-second with the right technology, equally Watford could have been awarded their goal kick in the blink of an eye when the buzzer/klaxon/alarm bell/duck whistle didn't sound for a Reading goal. During the time it takes to watch Tevez's header two or three times to get it right you could nip to the loo.....and perhaps stop there to read the paper and never return to watch such a boring stop-start spectacle.

Lampard's - I know. Tevez's - wouldn't make the pause to go back and kick off / take a goal kick much longer at all.

[RoyalChicagoFC]

Any introduction whatsoever of video technology to review incidents from matches in progress is a gigantic leap toward a slippery slope the inevitable results of which will include, but by no means be limited to, world government and unconcealed public acts of bestiality becoming a commonplace

I mean, we're all just sorta supposed to know this --are we not?