Decision reviews Cricket V football

[londonblue]

Like Fish, I don't really understand the argument about football being too quick a game for referrals. Of course it isn't. Your average 90 minute match will have the ball in play for less than 60 of those minutes. Football is a very slow-paced game with a huge number of natural breaks.

There should be a referral system at least with decisions only overturned if the evidence shows quickly that the original decision was wrong (so the issue of degrees of contact shouldn't really come into it but clear handballs or cases where the ball either is or is not out of play can be caught). Personally I'd have almost everything refereed by cameras. The idea that the richest game in the World allows offside decisions to be made by middle-aged blokes waving pieces of cloth whilst pretending that it's possible to look in two places at once is laughable.

It is indeed correct that football has many breaks, but (unlike cricket) none of them (other than half time) are predictable. I'll quote me from earlier in this thread:

But if an offside is claimed, and given erroneously, but the player would have been through on goal. When do you stop the game?

 

[Beefy]

You do what you do in Yankball. The manager indicates that he wants to use an appeal and then you do the appeal when the ball next goes out of play.

In the case that you're talking about (an offside given incorrectly) you'd only be appealing the awarding of a freekick because the game would obviously come to a stop with the referee's whistle. You don't need to worry about when to stop the game as the referee has already stopped it for you.

 

[GNH]

You do what you do in Yankball. The manager indicates that he wants to use an appeal and then you do the appeal when the ball next goes out of play.

In the case that you're talking about (an offside given incorrectly) you'd only be appealing the awarding of a freekick because the game would obviously come to a stop with the referee's whistle. You don't need to worry about when to stop the game as the referee has already stopped it for you.

I think LB was talking about if you weren't offside but the assistant flagged and the ref blew his whistle. What happens then if it's proved wrong? Does the attacker then get a free "1 on 1" run at goal ice hockey stylie?

 

[Beefy]

I know what he's talking about. As I said in that case you're contesting the award of a free kick. As soon as the ref has blown the whistle the game stops.

 

[fbm]

I know what he's talking about. As I said in that case you're contesting the award of a free kick. As soon as the ref has blown the whistle the game stops.

But how do you restart the game if the lino was wrong? The technology has shown the decision to be incorrect but the game has already stopped. Hardly fair, is it? If the game hadn't stopped and the striker had scored, then the decision could have been reviewed at the natural stoppage - but for that to happen there needs to be no stoppage via the whistle.

Use of technology in those instances only works one way and will lead to practically no decisions being made because it will be reviewed when the ball goes dead.

Is that what the game is coming too? A series of "plays" that get reviewed in the natural breaks afterwards to see if there was anything wrong?

 

[Firestorm]

In reality the team would only appeal the referees decision if a goal was scored, or not allowed
As long as the appeal has to be lodged within a minute of the contentious incident there should be less of problem, and the ref can choose when (within a reasonable time scale) when to stop the play to assess the appeal.
This would stop the concerns raised above, as the referee would allow play to contune after the contentious offside,if the appeal was made, a goal is scored / not scored and then the appeal assesed. This would also stop spurious appeals just to stop play (ie 0-0 in time added on, 1 appeal left and the opposition break clear)
Combined with a limit on the appeals that should solve most of the problems.

However all scenarios for errors / abvuse would need to be addressed before implementation in case there is something which will end up making a mockery of the whole thing

 

[londonblue]

You do what you do in Yankball. The manager indicates that he wants to use an appeal and then you do the appeal when the ball next goes out of play.

In the case that you're talking about (an offside given incorrectly) you'd only be appealing the awarding of a freekick because the game would obviously come to a stop with the referee's whistle. You don't need to worry about when to stop the game as the referee has already stopped it for you.

Ok. So the game has been stopped, but the team that were through on goal ask for a review, and it turns out they were correct, and the player who was through on goal should have been able to continue. How do you restart the game? The appeal would be pointless.

I'm not really for or against technology, but if it is used I want it to do three things:

1. Work equally well for both the attacking and defending teams in all circumstances.
2. Not slow the game down with any more stoppages. As pointed out, there are plenty already.
3. Be fair to both teams in all circumstances. Otherwise we'll just to substituting the arguments we currently have with new ones.

Until these criteria, and a few others that I haven't thought of off the top of my head, are met then I would rather we didn't bother.

 

[Firestorm]

Ok. So the game has been stopped, but the team that were through on goal ask for a review, and it turns out they were correct, and the player who was through on goal should have been able to continue. How do you restart the game? The appeal would be pointless.I'm not really for or against technology, but if it is used I want it to do three things:

1. Work equally well for both the attacking and defending teams in all circumstances.
2. Not slow the game down with any more stoppages. As pointed out, there are plenty already.
3. Be fair to both teams in all circumstances. Otherwise we'll just to substituting the arguments we currently have with new ones.

Until these criteria, and a few others that I haven't thought of off the top of my head, are met then I would rather we didn't bother.

Thats the crux of it , would the appeal process lead to close decisions being left "to wait for the appeal" ? Which would mean technology was driving the game rather than assisting .

To be honest I think it could only work for decisions which the officials have not given, It would be an aid to the match officials rather than a judge.

 

[londonblue]

Thats the crux of it , would the appeal process lead to close decisions being left "to wait for the appeal" ? Which would mean technology was driving the game rather than assisting .

To be honest I think it could only work for decisions which the officials have not given, It would be an aid to the match officials rather than a judge.

Agreed, but even then it's not perfect. For example, a player is fouled, but the foul is not given. In the mean time the player who was committed the foul is himself fouled in retaliation. The player that committed the 2nd foul is then sent off. However, the team appeal the foul that was not given in the first place and are vindicated. Should the player that was sent off then be re-instated?

 

[Csboy]

Maybe Football could follow American Football and have a caoches challenge. In american Football the head coach has 2 referrals per half. Clearly thats to much for Football but the Coach could be able to make one challenge per game.
Its all very well having goal line technology but what about the Henry handball that led to the goal in the play offgame between France and Ireland and of course the infamous hand of God goal.

 

[Firestorm]

Agreed, but even then it's not perfect. For example, a player is fouled, but the foul is not given. In the mean time the player who was committed the foul is himself fouled in retaliation. The player that committed the 2nd foul is then sent off. However, the team appeal the foul that was not given in the first place and are vindicated. Should the player that was sent off then be re-instated?

No because Violent conduct (and retaliation is violent conduct) does not require the ball to be in play.

 

[londonblue]

No because Violent conduct (and retaliation is violent conduct) does not require the ball to be in play.

In your opinion...others may say that the second offence only happened because the referee didn't blow up for the original foul, and so the player should be allowed back.

Again, I'm not saying either is right or wrong, just that if we don't have a consensus then all we'll be doing is substituting one set of arguments for another.

 

[Beefy]

Ok. So the game has been stopped, but the team that were through on goal ask for a review, and it turns out they were correct, and the player who was through on goal should have been able to continue. How do you restart the game? The appeal would be pointless.

Which is why an appeal wouldn't be used in that circumstance. If it were to be used and the decision overturned then you'd re-start as you do today in a situation where the ref had to stop the game without an infringement having taken place - with a drop ball.

You'd appeal in circumstances where the outcome of the appeal can help you. Goal wrongfully disallowed for offside, handball, a penalty award which turns out to be an obvious dive. The referee's whistle always stops the game so the circumstance that you keep coming back to isn't at all relevant.

 

[Beefy]

Agreed, but even then it's not perfect. For example, a player is fouled, but the foul is not given. In the mean time the player who was committed the foul is himself fouled in retaliation. The player that committed the 2nd foul is then sent off. However, the team appeal the foul that was not given in the first place and are vindicated. Should the player that was sent off then be re-instated?

"Being perfect" isn't the objective. "Being less ****" is.

In your opinion...others may say that the second offence only happened because the referee didn't blow up for the original foul, and so the player should be allowed back.

Again, I'm not saying either is right or wrong, just that if we don't have a consensus then all we'll be doing is substituting one set of arguments for another.

With respect - this isn't an argument that you're making now. It's pretty clear what would happen in that circumstance. You seem to be wanting the overturning of a decision to somehow wipe out it ever having happened from the space time continuum (eg your previous example of the offside). An appeal can only ever dictate which team has the re-start and what that re-start is. If the incorrectly flagged player knocks out the linesman prior to the appeal then he'd still be given a red card for violent conduct.

 

[londonblue]

"Being perfect" isn't the objective. "Being less ****" is.

We have a flawed system now. In my opinion there is no point in replacing it with another flawed system. As I said, I'm not really for or against referral systems. I just don't see the point if they still lead to arguments, and if they're not completely fair to both teams. I understand your view that a team shouldn't appeal if the appeal is pointless (using the example I described), but then what is the point of the review if it can't work in all situations? All it will do is lead to more arguments, until yet more technology is used. Where would you draw the line?

With respect - this isn't an argument that you're making now. It's pretty clear what would happen in that circumstance. You seem to be wanting the overturning of a decision to somehow wipe out it ever having happened from the space time continuum (eg your previous example of the offside). An appeal can only ever dictate which team has the re-start and what that re-start is. If the incorrectly flagged player knocks out the linesman prior to the appeal then he'd still be given a red card for violent conduct.

That's not entirely fair. It's a genuine question, and you can be guaranteed that some manager will complain if their player is the one that is sent off but the passage of play that led to his sending off is then "scrapped" and a drop ball used to restart the game. To believe all managers and players etc will just accept that is unrealistic in my opinion.

We also haven't yet looked into the issue of time. Using the second example, of the player being sent off, and the play brought back, what would you do with the clock? Would you carry on, or make sure the clock was reset for the time that coincides with the appeal?

 

[Firestorm]

In your opinion...others may say that the second offence only happened because the referee didn't blow up for the original foul, and so the player should be allowed back.

Again, I'm not saying either is right or wrong, just that if we don't have a consensus then all we'll be doing is substituting one set of arguments for another.

Not my opinion

Laws of the game - Interpretations of the laws of the game page 123 Law 12 "Violent conduct may occur either on the field of play or outside its boundaries, whether the ball is in play or not"

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/28/law12-en.pdf

 

[londonblue]

Not my opinion

Laws of the game - Interpretations of the laws of the game page 123 Law 12 "Violent conduct may occur either on the field of play or outside its boundaries, whether the ball is in play or not"

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/worldfootball/clubfootball/01/37/04/28/law12-en.pdf

I understand, but that doesn't account for situation when we effectively go back in time and start from another point. It's a bit like the film Back to the Future, you have to go backwards to affect the correct future! I'm not saying that the law as it stands should or shouldn't continue, just that FIFA would need to consider it properly and decide what they intend to do about it because it could be argued both ways.

 

[fbm]

We have a flawed system now.

We have no system now. We have referees and assistants who try their best but who make wrong decisions and mistakes, just like players do.

We can all say that the Lampard goal v Germany in the 2010 World Cup should have stood, and goalline technology would help with that. It wouldn't help with the "Hand of God" goal though.

I think the danger is that bringing technology into football is trying to make the game too perfect. As we can see, there can be no right of redress when the referee has stopped the game incorrectly when it would have otherwise almost certainly resulted in a goal being scored.

To me, that is no different than having a goal scored incorrectly that stands. But let's say that we do review the goal just to make sure everything is ok. I use my earlier example - if the defence appeal for offside and it's proved the goalscorer was onside, but the review actually shows a handball that had been missed, is the goal disallowed? And how far back into the move do they review? If the move started with a throw in, should they check the throw in was correctly awarded?

It's a nightmare - keep it out of the game.

 

[londonblue]

We have no system now.

Yes we do:

We have referees and assistants who try their best but who make wrong decisions and mistakes, just like players do.

 

[FarmdogSUFC]

We have no system now. We have referees and assistants who try their best but who make wrong decisions and mistakes, just like players do.

We can all say that the Lampard goal v Germany in the 2010 World Cup should have stood, and goalline technology would help with that. It wouldn't help with the "Hand of God" goal though.

I think the danger is that bringing technology into football is trying to make the game too perfect. As we can see, there can be no right of redress when the referee has stopped the game incorrectly when it would have otherwise almost certainly resulted in a goal being scored.

To me, that is no different than having a goal scored incorrectly that stands. But let's say that we do review the goal just to make sure everything is ok. I use my earlier example - if the defence appeal for offside and it's proved the goalscorer was onside, but the review actually shows a handball that had been missed, is the goal disallowed? And how far back into the move do they review? If the move started with a throw in, should they check the throw in was correctly awarded?

It's a nightmare - keep it out of the game.

This is my worry with it. Will be like watching someone play Fifa.