CL: CSKA Moscow vs Arsenal | 17/10/06

[Rodelero]

It takes 10 seconds for a guy with 5 cameras to use a system to say Yes or No.

Rugby doesn't FLOW badly because of it, nor does cricket.

If anything it adds to the game due to the pretty amazing suspense of it.

It doesn't happen often, we're talking once or twice a match at most


The only decisions really needed are:

Handballs that would result in penalties/freekicks/goals: eg. Gallas v Charlton EPL, Thierry Henry vs CSKA CLGroup
Offsides that would result in goals: eg. Eto'o vs Arsenal CLFinal
Ball over the line or not: eg. Tottenham vs Manchester United EPL

There is no doubt in my mind that the 3rd umpire in Cricket improves the game, and it would for Football.

It doesn't need to BOG down the game because quite frankly, it takes at maximum a minute. Celebrating a goal takes 3-4 minutes for crying out loud.

Some of you are good posters but you all seem to be in a cranny somewhere in the middle of the 1970s and you don't seem to want to budge.

Luck will always be there, making the amount of luck that changes the course of the game without ruining the game, should be an objective for FIFA/UEFA.

The very last thing i'm saying on this subject:

When its a small result, in a position that didn't really matter, and with a result that isn't going to kill us yet, you don't argue.
When it loses us a cup, you do.

 

[asajoseph]

It takes 10 seconds for a guy with 5 cameras to use a system to say Yes or No.

Actually, it can take a lot longer than 10 seconds sometimes. Sometimes it can be up to 4 or 5 minutes, especially in sports like Rugby.

It also depends entirely on what decisions you're willing to challenge - both rugby and cricket have very strict guidelines on what can, and can not be referred to a video referee.

It doesn't happen often, we're talking once or twice a match at most

Again, that's not true. In rugby league, I'd guess that at least half of the tries scored are referred to the video referee - if there's any doubt at all on the field, it goes to the video ref.

Furthermore, there's a distinct difference between the way football and rugby (both codes)/cricket. The latter games, to differing degrees, can be isolated easily into 'plays' (to steal the american terminology - a 'play' in cricket, is very distinct, as is a play in rugby league, and arguably union too. Football, in it's nature, flows much more.

Handballs that would result in penalties/freekicks/goals: eg. Gallas v Charlton EPL, Thierry Henry vs CSKA CLGroup

So again, what do you do if the referee sees a potential handball? Blow the whistle and refer to the video ref and potentially deny one team the opportunity to counter-attack, or the other to make the most of having the ball in the opposition area? Neither of those options are hardly fair. Or do you let play continue and then bring it back once the video ref has made up his mind? Again, that can take minutes, so hardly an ideal situation either.

The same applies to your latter two scenarios - technological inquiry is sometimes, but not always immediately conclusive.

 

[awooga83]

i worry a little about us offensively. hleb, rosicky, fabregas all fantastic passers. sometimes i feel they dont see a pass quick enough. last season people reckoned henry was too static. this season, i'v seen him make so many runs without reward. the preference of those 3 to play to feet all the time worries me.

we miss bergkamp. a player who sees a pentrating pass before the ball even gets to him. a defence splitting pass is about timing i.e. not giving the defence time to react. its about 1 maybe 2 touches maximum.

maybe kel's right. maybe we need a seond forward again. those three in midfield are juggling circulation of the ball with looking for pentrative passes.

i worry about the lack of chances we actually create from passing and movement. its a bigger concern if you consider i say this in light of the fact we'v played watford and sheff united at home.

I agree, i was wondering about that myself recently we haven't really played balls that put him in behind them and even when we do play it long its played to where Henry is, not ahead of him for him to run onto so quite often the ball is cut out before it reaches him.

 

[Rodelero]

It takes 10 seconds for a guy with 5 cameras to use a system to say Yes or No.

Actually, it can take a lot longer than 10 seconds sometimes. Sometimes it can be up to 4 or 5 minutes, especially in sports like Rugby.

It also depends entirely on what decisions you're willing to challenge - both rugby and cricket have very strict guidelines on what can, and can not be referred to a video referee.

It doesn't happen often, we're talking once or twice a match at most

Again, that's not true. In rugby league, I'd guess that at least half of the tries scored are referred to the video referee - if there's any doubt at all on the field, it goes to the video ref.

Furthermore, there's a distinct difference between the way football and rugby (both codes)/cricket. The latter games, to differing degrees, can be isolated easily into 'plays' (to steal the american terminology - a 'play' in cricket, is very distinct, as is a play in rugby league, and arguably union too. Football, in it's nature, flows much more.

Handballs that would result in penalties/freekicks/goals: eg. Gallas v Charlton EPL, Thierry Henry vs CSKA CLGroup

So again, what do you do if the referee sees a potential handball? Blow the whistle and refer to the video ref and potentially deny one team the opportunity to counter-attack, or the other to make the most of having the ball in the opposition area? Neither of those options are hardly fair. Or do you let play continue and then bring it back once the video ref has made up his mind? Again, that can take minutes, so hardly an ideal situation either.

The same applies to your latter two scenarios - technological inquiry is sometimes, but not always immediately conclusive.

A lot of your 'points' are related to other sports. A seriously important decision thats dodgy in football happens once or twice a match at most.

Yes, these sports have strict guidelines, football can have them too.
The only time i've ever seen video footage used? Zidane headbutt.

When the difference is the biggest cup in world football, or club football (World Cup and UEFA Champions league respectively), 2-3 minutes is NOT a problem.

The optimum problem in my mind is the yellow card not being revoked. I can see reasons why video refereeing is difficult to implement. What i can't see is why a yellow card that should NEVER have been given, where a goal was the correct result can't atleast be changed.

 

[asajoseph]

A lot of your 'points' are related to other sports. A seriously important decision thats dodgy in football happens once or twice a match at most.

But that's the difficulty - how far back do you 'rewind' the replay to detect an infringement?

Say, for example, that Argentina had 'possibly' fouled an opponent to gain posession immediately before their 20-something passing move that scored them a goal in the World Cup. Would you rewind the replay all the way back, once the goal had gone into the back of the net, to find out whether or not there had been a foul anywhere in the move? What if a player wins the ball with a foul, then loses it in, and then gains it back legitimately?

Indeed sometimes (albeit rarely) in rugby, because of the limited scope of how they can use video refereeing tries are given despite there being visible infringements because the referee is only looking for certain things (like whether or not the ball went into touch, not whether or not it was grounded).

Finally, you have to remember that questionable incidents don't always automatically stop the play of the game - if a player possibly handles the ball in the area and wins possession, you're depriving him and his team the opportunity of counter-attacking if you stop the game immediately, but if you let it flow, at what point do you call the game back? When the ball next goes out of play? That would make football extremely disjointed! Even 'goal-line' decisions that are questionable are affected like this - the only time it would ever seem appropriate to stop the game and call in the video referee is if the ball actually hits the back of the net.

The optimum problem in my mind is the yellow card not being revoked. I can see reasons why video refereeing is difficult to implement. What i can't see is why a yellow card that should NEVER have been given, where a goal was the correct result can't atleast be changed.

That, for me, is a different issue, as it doesn't affect the outcome of the match.

 

[Rodelero]

I never said that fouls should be one of the things used with a video system.

Referees are there to enforce the rules and to decide whether something is a foul or not.

The deciding if its a foul should never change.

But balls over the line, handballs that cause goals to be allowed and dissallowed, different matter.

I don't have all the answers, but i do know its possible, atleast to some point to make football a fairer game.

 

[Mbaki Mutahaba]

Its all possible. Agreeing on the incidents that would force a review would be like a UN general assembly agreeing on Sactions against Iraq and much worse because in this case not only does each country have a say..but also clubs will do the same. You have those in the security council (G14) who will block/support anything that assures them of not losing $$$. Then you have the majority who just wants to play the game fairly. Its a pandora box!!!

Hope it doesnt happen in my lifetime even though I have had enough painful memories due to ref errors. Just imagine that FA CUP loss to liverpool when Henchoz handled the ball like 3 times...

 

[Rodelero]

Christ this forum is living in the past.


If EVERY single person could see AS the ball went in that it was legitimate, why the hell would it be some kind of UN Assembly.

You guys need to grow up and stop blowing things so far out of proportion when anyone challenges the status quo.

I thought that the people on this site might have a clue, but for all your talk about 'Beautiful Football', you still have some absurd idea that allowing massive factors of bias and luck into the game is right.

 

[Mbaki Mutahaba]

Christ this forum is living in the past.


If EVERY single person could see AS the ball went in that it was legitimate, why the hell would it be some kind of UN Assembly.

You guys need to grow up and stop blowing things so far out of proportion when anyone challenges the status quo.

I thought that the people on this site might have a clue, but for all your talk about 'Beautiful Football', you still have some absurd idea that allowing massive factors of bias and luck into the game is right.

My point is, so many wrong decisions in this game results in a different outcome, Its not just about the ball crossing the line because usually there are critical events that happen prior to that so video replay of the goal line will not resolve the issues and injustices.

If Henry breaks clear but was way offside and took a shot which went in and come out that would mean the ref reviewing the video and allowing an goal to stand when Henry was clearly offside. Is that justice to the opposite team? This beautiful game is not as simple as you make it bro. A lot of thought would have to be put to determine what requires and what doesnt require a video replay. And at the end it still won't be fair.

 

[Rodelero]

Christ this forum is living in the past.


If EVERY single person could see AS the ball went in that it was legitimate, why the hell would it be some kind of UN Assembly.

You guys need to grow up and stop blowing things so far out of proportion when anyone challenges the status quo.

I thought that the people on this site might have a clue, but for all your talk about 'Beautiful Football', you still have some absurd idea that allowing massive factors of bias and luck into the game is right.

My point is, so many wrong decisions in this game results in a different outcome, Its not just about the ball crossing the line because usually there are critical events that happen prior to that so video replay of the goal line will not resolve the issues and injustices.

If Henry breaks clear but was way offside and took a shot which went in and come out that would mean the ref reviewing the video and allowing an goal to stand when Henry was clearly offside. Is that justice to the opposite team? This beautiful game is not as simple as you make it bro. A lot of thought would have to be put to determine what requires and what doesnt require a video replay. And at the end it still won't be fair.

It may be above one man; but its not above the whole of FIFA for crying out loud.

Rugby has ALL of these problems, and a more complicated rule-book by far, and they manage it better than FIFA do.

The game isn't simple, what is simple is that:

Henry scored.

What has occured:

Yellow Card, No Goal. Effective loss of a point, and addition of 2 points to CSKA


If Henry gets a second yellow you'll all change your tune.

 

[asajoseph]

Oh get off your high horse will you?

You keep bringing up rugby as a shining example of how video refereeing 'works', yet from you obviously have absolutely no idea how, or why.

I'm really not interested in repeating myself, but anyone who's at least seen the Rugby-Special highlights of the 6-Nations will be able to tell you that the reason that video-replays work in rugby is that the only situation in which they're used the game has necessarily halted anyway.

Using the same logic, perhaps Henry's goal against CSKA would have stood, but Sp**s 'goal' against Man Utd. would not ,Gallas' 'handball' against Charlton would not (as you suggested it should be). Goal-line replays would be unfair on both sides (as I've explained), as would every questionable penalty decision.

Life's a *****, get over it. If you come up with a foolproof way of implementing fair decisions, write somebody a letter, or start another thread.

 

[Faust]

Hello for All!!! I today come back from Moscow to my city Saint-Petersburg and this's our photos from Arsenal sector on Lokomotiv stadium

I 8)

my girlfriend :wink:

 

[gunnerGH]

you look friendly enough ops:

 

[Faust]

Video from Arsenal sector on Lokomotiv stadium

link

 

[11vanpersie]

why was they in the eqvilant of tottenhams stadium?