Any claims that video replays would massively delay are bollocks, frankly. Even if you don't want a game to be held back with frequent replays then you could still give each team a fixed amount of reviews, like in the cricket.
By this stage there is no credible claim against the use of video replays. The lack of them is holding the game back.
Any claims that video replays would massively delay are bollocks, frankly. Even if you don't want a game to be held back with frequent replays then you could still give each team a fixed amount of reviews, like in the cricket.
By this stage there is no credible claim against the use of video replays. The lack of them is holding the game back.
Any claims that video replays would massively delay are bollocks, frankly. Even if you don't want a game to be held back with frequent replays then you could still give each team a fixed amount of reviews, like in the cricket.
By this stage there is no credible claim against the use of video replays. The lack of them is holding the game back.
Broadly speaking I'm against video replays but I believe it's time to trial the technology and see how it goes.
However this fixed number of challenges idea is terrible. The goal last night happened in the final minute. Imagine having the technology available to check the decision but not being able to because you have used up all your challenges? That would be a joke.
You also have to realise that in practice such a move would see refs completely bottle any big decision. They would inevitably make the "easy" decision and put the onus on a team to challenge it.
There are plenty of issue with video technology that I don't think those in favour have properly considered but unless we look at it properly we will never discover if it is practical or not and the calls for it's introduction won't go away.
Before any video technology does get a trail, the system of use has to be agreed first. Whilst I like the idea of a limit the number of challenges, I think some clarity in what can and can't be looked at with video needs looking at. For example last night, when Mason gave the corner when Giggs clearly didn't touch the ball, that I'm sure would have been reviewed during the game if an appeal system had been in place, using either up a or the review a team has.
I would suggest that goals be automatically reviewed, so obviously the United goal was a clean goal, no issue, one replay all good. Birmingham's goal could have taken a while to sort out. The angle of camera wasn't clear for any of the offside decisions, so it would be a guess really on the video ref to call that. The hand ball, was more ball to hand due to the foul on Rio, which I would hope the video ref would have called. However how many replays would have been taken to answer this I don't know, plus would the ref just ask like in Rugby for one item or all the things to be reviewed?
As for the notion of United going unbeaten this season, like Arsenal we've alreday got beat, West Ham beat us. Yes, we haven't lost in the league yet, but that's only one competition in the season.
As for the notion of United going unbeaten this season, like Arsenal we've alreday got beat, West Ham beat us. Yes, we haven't lost in the league yet, but that's only one competition in the season.
Well then Arsenal never went unbeaten during that season in 2004 as they lost to Man Utd in the FA cup and Chelsea in the champions league? They must have lost in the league cup too because they never won it.
Welcome to the real world, perhaps we'll actually see an opposition penalty given at Old Trafford
It's not the penalties that give Man Utd an unfair advantage at Old Trafford, it's the constant added extra time that refs keep loading on when Man Utd are in a losing or drawing position.
There's never ever been a penalty awarded against united at old trafford in the premiership years and they get at least 5 minutes injury time every time they need a goal, if they are winning they'll only be 2-3 minutes at most, also the referees make it so only Man U are allowed to attack and try to score during injury time.
Most of United's titles are down to biased refs down the years, without them probably wouldn't have won half the titles they have.
It's not the penalties that give Man Utd an unfair advantage at Old Trafford, it's the constant added extra time that refs keep loading on when Man Utd are in a losing or drawing position.
The added time is clearly indicated before the 90 mins are up. Its fair for both teams, what is to stop the other team from going and scoring another?
I kind of want video technology soon, but there's many problems about doing it, which is why it probably wont happen.
For example. Let's say for instance it's United against Chelsea. United have a shot and it hits the crossbar and APPEARS to go over the line, but the official isn't sure. Here lays the problem. If this decision is challenged and halts the game, it can result in many problems. After the ball coming off of the line, Chelsea could of hit on the counter attack and scored within a matter of seconds. However, if this is challenged, Chelsea don't get the chance to counter attack and the game is brought to a halt. What if the decision was right? What if the ball wasn't over the line? The game has been stopped and Chelsea have been denied a chance to counter attack.
Video technology has pro's and con's and it's going to take a long time to work out a system that benfits the game but also doesn't effect the game in a negative way, such as slowing it down, changing certain rules, stopping certain play and so on. People think it can and should just be thrown into play, which it cant.
As for the original topic, I'd love us to go unbeaten all season, but I'm not too sure it'll happen. I think we stand a great chance of pulling it off as long as we keep our confidence high. Last season we had the amazing record of clean sheets, not letting in a goal for a massive amount of time, then we let in one and it really effected our confidence. The key game will be against Chelsea at SB. I think we're capable of getting draws or better at the likes of Emirates and WHL by far, but SB is a different story.
you seem to be missing the point or you just don't understand the rules of football. You get a penalty for a foul on the penalty area. Now if the opposition team don't get into the penalty area then they can't have a chance of a penalty.
Re technology I just cannot see much real arguements against some introduction.
Re over the goalline, that needn't hold up anything at all. The technology is there for it to be decided instantly and beep the referee. That one's a no brainer to me.
Otherwise for all goals that there is the remotest of doubts whether the referree is more inclined that it was a goal or wasn't I'd refer it upstairs to a referee with a monitor who can quickly judge such as offside or not, or other foul. Yes some decisions may still be borderline but most wrong decisions are clear on replay so more goals would be correctly given or ruled out . And the game is stopped at that time anyway.
I'd be tempted myself to extend that to penalties although I accept that reviewing penalties that the initial reaction is not to give is possibly stopping a game still in motion. But I actually feel players would adapt and accept if it was decided that penalty claims would be reviewed. I do accept that there may be more penalty decisions as against goals still open to interpretation. But again you would get many more decisions ultinmately correct.
So 1) goalline - no brainer 2) goals - makes absolute sense to me that can be quite quickly reviewed. 3) penalties - I'd also review but at least just 1) and 2) would improve matters greatly.
Football demeans itself by increasingly relying just on officials' eyes in a technology age and getting so many game changing decisions clearly wrong when most of the other top sports have seen the light, and invariably after initial scepticism and arguement technology introduction has been seen as a real improvement.
Wasn't the first penalty at OT in years an absolute joke decision anyway? Justice was done when it was saved.
The fact that Man Utd have not played brilliantly but are stilll unbeaten is quite worrying for the teams around them. Just shows you what a superb job Ferguson is doing in drilling a winning machine.
If they do, it doesn't say much for the rest of the prem, from what I have seen man utd have been pretty average on numerous games but still get the win, that form should not see them go unbeaten.
Comments
By this stage there is no credible claim against the use of video replays. The lack of them is holding the game back.
Like Cricket.....
I'll say no more.
We are tip of the heap of crap.
How any team can be still on top with one league away win is beyond me.
They say its a close season - I say its pure crap with players that can't live up to the number their playing for.
The rot is on cas the money is gone.
Broadly speaking I'm against video replays but I believe it's time to trial the technology and see how it goes.
However this fixed number of challenges idea is terrible. The goal last night happened in the final minute. Imagine having the technology available to check the decision but not being able to because you have used up all your challenges? That would be a joke.
You also have to realise that in practice such a move would see refs completely bottle any big decision. They would inevitably make the "easy" decision and put the onus on a team to challenge it.
There are plenty of issue with video technology that I don't think those in favour have properly considered but unless we look at it properly we will never discover if it is practical or not and the calls for it's introduction won't go away.
I would suggest that goals be automatically reviewed, so obviously the United goal was a clean goal, no issue, one replay all good. Birmingham's goal could have taken a while to sort out. The angle of camera wasn't clear for any of the offside decisions, so it would be a guess really on the video ref to call that. The hand ball, was more ball to hand due to the foul on Rio, which I would hope the video ref would have called. However how many replays would have been taken to answer this I don't know, plus would the ref just ask like in Rugby for one item or all the things to be reviewed?
As for the notion of United going unbeaten this season, like Arsenal we've alreday got beat, West Ham beat us. Yes, we haven't lost in the league yet, but that's only one competition in the season.
You're not the first to mention it:D
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=1409404
Welcome to the real world, perhaps we'll actually see an opposition penalty given at Old Trafford
There has been plenty.
Well then Arsenal never went unbeaten during that season in 2004 as they lost to Man Utd in the FA cup and Chelsea in the champions league? They must have lost in the league cup too because they never won it.
You have to remember that most opposition teams at old trafford hardly ever even get into the penalty area let alone have a penalty claim.
Its quite a myth as i can remember plenty of penalties being taken by the opposition at old trafford without checking the stats.
It's not the penalties that give Man Utd an unfair advantage at Old Trafford, it's the constant added extra time that refs keep loading on when Man Utd are in a losing or drawing position.
Most of United's titles are down to biased refs down the years, without them probably wouldn't have won half the titles they have.
The added time is clearly indicated before the 90 mins are up. Its fair for both teams, what is to stop the other team from going and scoring another?
For example. Let's say for instance it's United against Chelsea. United have a shot and it hits the crossbar and APPEARS to go over the line, but the official isn't sure. Here lays the problem. If this decision is challenged and halts the game, it can result in many problems. After the ball coming off of the line, Chelsea could of hit on the counter attack and scored within a matter of seconds. However, if this is challenged, Chelsea don't get the chance to counter attack and the game is brought to a halt. What if the decision was right? What if the ball wasn't over the line? The game has been stopped and Chelsea have been denied a chance to counter attack.
Video technology has pro's and con's and it's going to take a long time to work out a system that benfits the game but also doesn't effect the game in a negative way, such as slowing it down, changing certain rules, stopping certain play and so on. People think it can and should just be thrown into play, which it cant.
As for the original topic, I'd love us to go unbeaten all season, but I'm not too sure it'll happen. I think we stand a great chance of pulling it off as long as we keep our confidence high. Last season we had the amazing record of clean sheets, not letting in a goal for a massive amount of time, then we let in one and it really effected our confidence. The key game will be against Chelsea at SB. I think we're capable of getting draws or better at the likes of Emirates and WHL by far, but SB is a different story.
you seem to be missing the point or you just don't understand the rules of football. You get a penalty for a foul on the penalty area. Now if the opposition team don't get into the penalty area then they can't have a chance of a penalty.
Re over the goalline, that needn't hold up anything at all. The technology is there for it to be decided instantly and beep the referee. That one's a no brainer to me.
Otherwise for all goals that there is the remotest of doubts whether the referree is more inclined that it was a goal or wasn't I'd refer it upstairs to a referee with a monitor who can quickly judge such as offside or not, or other foul. Yes some decisions may still be borderline but most wrong decisions are clear on replay so more goals would be correctly given or ruled out . And the game is stopped at that time anyway.
I'd be tempted myself to extend that to penalties although I accept that reviewing penalties that the initial reaction is not to give is possibly stopping a game still in motion. But I actually feel players would adapt and accept if it was decided that penalty claims would be reviewed. I do accept that there may be more penalty decisions as against goals still open to interpretation. But again you would get many more decisions ultinmately correct.
So 1) goalline - no brainer 2) goals - makes absolute sense to me that can be quite quickly reviewed. 3) penalties - I'd also review but at least just 1) and 2) would improve matters greatly.
Football demeans itself by increasingly relying just on officials' eyes in a technology age and getting so many game changing decisions clearly wrong when most of the other top sports have seen the light, and invariably after initial scepticism and arguement technology introduction has been seen as a real improvement.
The fact that Man Utd have not played brilliantly but are stilll unbeaten is quite worrying for the teams around them. Just shows you what a superb job Ferguson is doing in drilling a winning machine.
They prob will now ha!