Now playing on dirty.radio: Loading... |
#321
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
no - only fucking boneheadeds like you.
i'm explaining FIFA's stance. that's not my stance. it's FIFA's stance and why they do what they do. and it's a compelling argument when you think about the philosophy of a simple game. though you can't handle the concept of a fucking draw, so i'm on tough ground anyway. so let's say we have it. what do we have replays for? goal/no goal? offside? diving? foul? hurt feelings? where do we stop? how often do we stop? i'd say goal/no goal is quick - after that you're getting into no end of fucking schoolground yah-boo-sucks pissing about. as much gamesmanship will sneak in moaning and demanding replays as to make the game unwatchable. in short - GET FUCKING OVER IT AND STOP THE FUUUUUCKING BOOORING MOANING.
__________________
uw0761 nutts2020 |
#322
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
In my view, replays should only be given for goals. Check and see if the guy is onside and if the ball cleared the line. That's it.
Yellow and red cards should be dished out upon review of the game (diving/cheap shots) the next day or so to ensure the Italians have to play all their bench players |
#323
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
all for that - it'd cut it out very quickly.
__________________
uw0761 nutts2020 |
#324
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
You could all just watch and play rugby.
Simple game - hard ass hits - no diving theatrics - got replay when needed - big scores. Game for all sizes - fat blokes and skinny fast ones. Comes in 3 versions - touch, sevens, 15's. Simple costumes. And we all sit around and drink beers after and have a wee singsong. .... I'll get me coat.
__________________
Doesn't information itself have a liberal bias? - S. Colbert |
#325
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
Quote:
__________________
"I have always LOVED Underworld" - Sir Elton John |
#327
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
4 - there's 'league' too. though fatties and softies need not apply...
__________________
uw0761 nutts2020 |
#328
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
Quote:
northern boofhead version of the game they play in heaven! It's even simpler than the union version though - so might make more sense to some. Actually back on the ref/technology thing. How many games - out of the thousands that are played around the world in leagues every year - are actually directly affected by the referee's mistakes? Henry's double handball. The Germany goal. For my mind - offsides are different - that's a linesman's call - and if you want to bring in replays for that - then you will alter the game irrevocably. IMO. Football is a simple game - that's the beauty of it. I know you all demand exact accuracy - but it's not chess with shoulder pads - like the NFL is. It's not cricket - where you're appealing to the umpire to make a decision ... ie. How was that? = Howzzzaaaatttt!!!! Even in rugby - where the referee has the option to ask the TMO (TV match official) to confirm a decision - the referee is still the final say. In one of the tests last year - the TMO and the TV replay guy took about 5 minutes to make a decision - and finally the referee said, "Sod this for a lark", blew the whistle and awarded the try. Ignoring the technology. Sometimes you get shit decisions - and for my mind, that's the nature of sport - in whatever game, in whatever code and with whatever technology - sometimes shit happens and actually - it's just a game. Shake hands, have a shower and get a beer together.
__________________
Doesn't information itself have a liberal bias? - S. Colbert |
#329
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
Quote:
However, referees have the power to blow their whistle and stop play if they deem what has happened reason enough. This happens for injuries or things like two balls on the field, or someone from the crowd throwing something at the keeper. If you had video cameras in combination with other goal line technology this would be a moot point too...
__________________
UW0764 || Professor: "Underworld have never failed to disappoint me" || Yannick changed my avatar picture. |
#330
|
|||
|
|||
Re: FIFA World Cup 2010
with blatter apologising to england and mexico, it looks like something's going to change anyway...
as for goal/no goal decisions - that's as much a linesman's call than a ref's - often moreso as he's usually the closest official to the incident. that said, uefa have been trialling with extra linesmen behind the goal in the uefa cup this season, and iirc there was a couple of absolute howlers there too... if you look at cricket (where there's plently of time to stop and scratch your arse about things) you have umpires who are now too scared to give a decision and err on the side of caution, referring even clear-cut decisions to the third bloke. furthermore, you have people moaning about playing some tests where technology isn't available/is too dear and therefore isn't used - so you have an effective 2-tier version of the sport - and that's at TEST level... so with football you have to think about the technical implications of this. which leagues/competitions? how many teams? how many grounds? haves/have nots? not every league can afford this - look at the shit state of football finances in The Best League In The World and ask how many would like to install/test and run new technology... ...you also need a replay technician at every match, a team to run the technology, somewhere to house it, an extra official to adjudicate... and for how many instances, as chuck rightly asks?
__________________
uw0761 nutts2020 |
Post Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|