Goal Line Technology

[Chindie]

How about when cynical bastard managers start making appeals even though they know a decision is right just to kill time or put pressure on the ref or wind the opposition up?

Indeed, or to stop counter attacks.

It'll become tactical.

[Mr_Dogg]

How about when cynical bastard managers start making appeals even though they know a decision is right just to kill time or put pressure on the ref or wind the opposition up?

I'm sure there would be rules involved or only certain situations that can be appealed.

[PieFacE]

So what happens when they've made 3 appeals and the ref makes an absolute howler later on?

You've solved nothing, just added a new tactic and ruined the flow of the game.

Leave the game alone.

Well i think the point is you dont appeal unless it's totally neccesary.

How often do you see 3 major incidents in one game which would be appealed?

If they don't use their appeals wisely, then it's their own fault surely.

[MrWeedMcGrass]

How about when cynical bastard managers start making appeals even though they know a decision is right just to kill time or put pressure on the ref or wind the opposition up?

I can see the likes of Allardayce orgasming over the idea of shafting a rival.

[PompeyVillan]

The only way it could work is if it is the referee's decision to stop the game. Appeals wouldn't work at all.

I'm not really in favour to be honest. I'm sceptical as to how it could be introduced effectively. I used to believe that it was a no brainier, but I think there is more of a problem with refs being influenced by the 'bigger' team than the occasional contentious call.

[TrentVilla]

Yeah it's very rare that there's usually 6 incidents in a game which leaves people absolutely confused. It's very rarely 1 or 2 moments in every game. And it takes what, 30seconds to sort it out?

The point is if they have 3 appeals each they will use them, regardless of what decisions they are debating.

Say we losing at Small Heath 1-0 with 3 mins to go and pressing hard to get a goal, would you be okay with their managers challanging 3 decisions, any 3 decisions with the intention of simply taking the sting out of the game?

Because that is what would happen and to think otherwise is nieve.

[TrentVilla]

So what happens when they've made 3 appeals and the ref makes an absolute howler later on?

You've solved nothing, just added a new tactic and ruined the flow of the game.

Leave the game alone.

Well i think the point is you dont appeal unless it's totally neccesary.

How often do you see 3 major incidents in one game which would be appealed?

If they don't use their appeals wisely, then it's their own fault surely.

You are missing the point.

[PieFacE]

Yeah it's very rare that there's usually 6 incidents in a game which leaves people absolutely confused. It's very rarely 1 or 2 moments in every game. And it takes what, 30seconds to sort it out?

The point is if they have 3 appeals each they will use them, regardless of what decisions they are debating.

Say we losing at Small Heath 1-0 with 3 mins to go and pressing hard to get a goal, would you be okay with their managers challanging 3 decisions, any 3 decisions with the intention of simply taking the sting out of the game?

Because that is what would happen and to think otherwise is nieve.

Yeah i do agree and i have posted on a previous page that the only problem with appeals is that it will be manipulated and used for the wrong reasons, i also stated i'm not too sure on what should be done to stop it. There must be a way though....

[Chindie]

So what happens when they've made 3 appeals and the ref makes an absolute howler later on?

You've solved nothing, just added a new tactic and ruined the flow of the game.

Leave the game alone.

Well i think the point is you dont appeal unless it's totally neccesary.

How often do you see 3 major incidents in one game which would be appealed?

If they don't use their appeals wisely, then it's their own fault surely.

Is it not possible for 4 completely valid incidents requiring appeal to occur in a game? Especially since, with any form of technology coming in, sooner or later it'll be used for every aspect of the rules.

Appeals based system is moronic.

The whole thing is frankly stupid because it won't work without fundamentally making the game a different beast, but appeals are just mindnumbingly poor as a solution.

[Mr_Dogg]

Yeah it's very rare that there's usually 6 incidents in a game which leaves people absolutely confused. It's very rarely 1 or 2 moments in every game. And it takes what, 30seconds to sort it out?

The point is if they have 3 appeals each they will use them, regardless of what decisions they are debating.

Say we losing at Small Heath 1-0 with 3 mins to go and pressing hard to get a goal, would you be okay with their managers challanging 3 decisions, any 3 decisions with the intention of simply taking the sting out of the game?

Because that is what would happen and to think otherwise is nieve.

Things that could be appealed: A ball crossing the line, a goal disallowed for offside, a potential penalty decision.

They couldn't appeal for a a foul in the centre circle or a throw in or something trivial.

[TrentVilla]

Yeah i do agree and i have posted on a previous page that the only problem with appeals is that it will be manipulated and used for the wrong reasons, i also stated i'm not too sure on what should be done to stop it. There must be a way though....

Well I'm yet to here a logical plan from anyone including those in the game and the media who are calling for it that would see it implimented without spoiling the game and seeing it used by managers for their own teams gain.

Until I do I'm against it, dead against it.

[TrentVilla]

Yeah it's very rare that there's usually 6 incidents in a game which leaves people absolutely confused. It's very rarely 1 or 2 moments in every game. And it takes what, 30seconds to sort it out?

The point is if they have 3 appeals each they will use them, regardless of what decisions they are debating.

Say we losing at Small Heath 1-0 with 3 mins to go and pressing hard to get a goal, would you be okay with their managers challanging 3 decisions, any 3 decisions with the intention of simply taking the sting out of the game?

Because that is what would happen and to think otherwise is nieve.

Things that could be appealed: A ball crossing the line, a goal disallowed for offside, a potential penalty decision.

They couldn't appeal for a a foul in the centre circle or a throw in or something trivial.

It would be easy to find 3 things to appeal in one minute let alone 3 minutes.

[MrWeedMcGrass]

Mistakes are made but class will shine through. The best teams usually win even if calls go against them. They odd game it doesn't, oh well something to talk about.

Not always. A big 'mistake' from a referee almost always turns the game around. You simply cannot measure how a decision affects a game because it is an intangible quantity. By utilising a chip you are eliminating it.

So what do we class as a "Big mistake"? Is it a goal crossing the line and not being given or an throw-in given to the wrong team that leads to up to the goal that cross the line that wasn't given. Refs make mistakes all the time and they all effect the game.

A goal kick given when it should have been a corner effects the game. It could lead to a goal 30 seconds later. You would have to call in on all wrong decisions and not at all and they would delay the game.

That's not the point. Obvious mistakes such as goal line decisions need to be weeded out from the game as they serve no purpose. There is 'controversy' and uncertainty in other aspects of the game which I have nothing against but this needs to go. The game does not even need to stop in this case.

I am not much for the 'appeal' system myself but a chip in a football to award a legitimate goal is a no brainer for me.

[PieFacE]

So what happens when they've made 3 appeals and the ref makes an absolute howler later on?

You've solved nothing, just added a new tactic and ruined the flow of the game.

Leave the game alone.

Well i think the point is you dont appeal unless it's totally neccesary.

How often do you see 3 major incidents in one game which would be appealed?

If they don't use their appeals wisely, then it's their own fault surely.

You are missing the point.

Why? What is the point? Subs were introduced to improve the game, as a manager you take the risk when using them as you only get 3.

Why cant that theory be applied to appeals?

[Mr_Dogg]

Yeah it's very rare that there's usually 6 incidents in a game which leaves people absolutely confused. It's very rarely 1 or 2 moments in every game. And it takes what, 30seconds to sort it out?

The point is if they have 3 appeals each they will use them, regardless of what decisions they are debating.

Say we losing at Small Heath 1-0 with 3 mins to go and pressing hard to get a goal, would you be okay with their managers challanging 3 decisions, any 3 decisions with the intention of simply taking the sting out of the game?

Because that is what would happen and to think otherwise is nieve.

Things that could be appealed: A ball crossing the line, a goal disallowed for offside, a potential penalty decision.

They couldn't appeal for a a foul in the centre circle or a throw in or something trivial.

It would be easy to find 3 things to appeal in one minute let alone 3 minutes.

Well I listed 3 potential incidents that can be appealed, not everything would be allowed to be appealed.

[PieFacE]

It would be easy to find 3 things to appeal in one minute let alone 3 minutes.

Yeah but you're missing the point, you wouldnt just appeal anything because it wouldnt be logical.... why waste your appeals on 3 minor incidents which don't really matter.

So yeah as i said, you'd use them only when necessary...

[Chindie]

Why couldn't everything be appealed? I thought the problem here was poor decisions? Any poor decision can have an enormous effect on the game. So you have to allow any decision to be reviewed.

[Mr_Dogg]

Why couldn't everything be appealed? I thought the problem here was poor decisions? Any poor decision can have an enormous effect of the game. So you have to allow any decision to be reviewed.

No, it's all about game changing decisions, not every decision.

[TrentVilla]

Why? What is the point? Subs were introduced to improve the game, as a manager you take the risk when using them as you only get 3.

Why cant that theory be applied to appeals?

Sorry I posted that before I saw your last post.

I'm starting to repeat myself here but so we are 1-0 down with 5 minutes to go and trying to get back into the game. The opposition manager makes 2 subs then challanges 3 decisions, pointless challanges of decisions everyone knows are correct and totally stops are pressure.

You would be okay with that? Ok with that sort of thing happening in countless games every weekend just to avoid the odd bad decision once in a while?

[PieFacE]

Why couldn't everything be appealed? I thought the problem here was poor decisions? Any poor decision can have an enormous effect of the game. So you have to allow any decision to be reviewed.

Because an appealing system is a compromise from nothing being appealed which is very frustrating when it goes against you, to everything being appealed because it would ruin the game.