Jump to content

World Cup 2010 - South Africa!


OldJoe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 676
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The only real problem I have with FIFA as the moment is Blatter. He refuses to accept technological change. He wont use goal line technology because 'it is prohibitively expensive'. Really Blatter? You mean like the camera in the corner of the goal? (Note that i am not saying that england would have won if that goal was counted, just that using technology would make sure that incidents like that wouldn't happen again).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also don't see the reason why the Big Screen in Football Stadiums can't be used as techonology, if you think its a goal, look at the big screen and let the ref decide.

a70kf.png

Divine Forces | #DF on irc.seersirc.net | Most Motivated |

http://rs-df.com/forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a terrible decision by the ref and his collegues. That number 5 from Mexico is horrible, by the way.

21o4pav.jpg

Signature by Maurice Sendak

When the stars make you drool just like a pasta fazool, that's amore!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully two poor referee decisions in one day will wake FIFA up and make them think about video technology.

 

Argentina are better than i expected, especially with all the stuff about Maradona. Argentina vs Germany should be one of the games of the tournament.

keen.png
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully two poor referee decisions in one day will wake FIFA up and make them think about video technology.

They say it would interrupt the flow of the game. That's a formidably stupid argument considering the game was stopped for thirty seconds because the players were arguing with the ref. You can see at least eight angles of the shot during that time, and you can't make mistakes. #-o

Matt: You want that eh? You want everything good for you. You want everything that's--falls off garbage can

Camera guy: Whoa, haha, are you okay dude?

Matt: You want anything funny that happens, don't you?

Camera guy: still laughing

Matt: You want the funny shit that happens here and there, you think it comes out of your [bleep]ing [wagon] pushes garbage can down, don't you? You think it's funny? It comes out of here! running towards Camera guy

Camera guy: runs away still laughing

Matt: You think the funny comes out of your mother[bleep]ing creativity? Comes out of Satan, mother[bleep]er! nn--ngh! pushes Camera guy down

Camera guy: Hoooholy [bleep]!

Matt: FUNNY ISN'T REAL! FUNNY ISN'T REAL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually quite dissapointed at how Argentina played the whole second time. I feel that Tevez should have stayed, and Veron should have replaced Di Maria. Hopefully they will play better against Germany.

 

Also:

 

[hide]1277666137502fd.gif

Poor Heinze, but I Lol'd[/hide]

16185_s.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video technology would be a pain, look at how long it takes for decisions in rugby and then apply that to every decision that is made during a football. Even with video technology there will be contentious refereeing decisions because there are so many decisions that just come down to a matter of opinion. Also, added time would increase exponentially with all the stoppages and this would cause more controversy.

 

Goal line technology is another thing all together though, it could be expensive though, particularly at the lower levels, and I don't like the idea of having technology at some levels of the game and not at other levels. I suuport it in principle if it could be paid for and applied universally.

 

That being said, England being robbed of a perfectly good goal that was over the line against Germany just 44 years after winning the world cup with a goal that was never in. Isn't karma fun :razz: .

wild_bunch.gif

He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart,

and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.

- Aeschylus (525 BC - 456 BC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually quite dissapointed at how Argentina played the whole second time. I feel that Tevez should have stayed, and Veron should have replaced Di Maria. Hopefully they will play better against Germany.

Obviously they weren't putting their all into it, all they needed to do was defend.

Matt: You want that eh? You want everything good for you. You want everything that's--falls off garbage can

Camera guy: Whoa, haha, are you okay dude?

Matt: You want anything funny that happens, don't you?

Camera guy: still laughing

Matt: You want the funny shit that happens here and there, you think it comes out of your [bleep]ing [wagon] pushes garbage can down, don't you? You think it's funny? It comes out of here! running towards Camera guy

Camera guy: runs away still laughing

Matt: You think the funny comes out of your mother[bleep]ing creativity? Comes out of Satan, mother[bleep]er! nn--ngh! pushes Camera guy down

Camera guy: Hoooholy [bleep]!

Matt: FUNNY ISN'T REAL! FUNNY ISN'T REAL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously they weren't putting their all into it, all they needed to do was defend.

 

But even there they didn't do too well. There were about 2 goal situations for Mexico in the ST, without including the goal. IMO, they should have gone for a 4-0 before relaxing so much, specially considering that if Mexico had another goal, leaving a 3-2, they would have gone crazy about Tevez's first goal.

16185_s.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video technology would be a pain, look at how long it takes for decisions in rugby and then apply that to every decision that is made during a football. Even with video technology there will be contentious refereeing decisions because there are so many decisions that just come down to a matter of opinion. Also, added time would increase exponentially with all the stoppages and this would cause more controversy.

You could still use them only when it's a tough call.

Matt: You want that eh? You want everything good for you. You want everything that's--falls off garbage can

Camera guy: Whoa, haha, are you okay dude?

Matt: You want anything funny that happens, don't you?

Camera guy: still laughing

Matt: You want the funny shit that happens here and there, you think it comes out of your [bleep]ing [wagon] pushes garbage can down, don't you? You think it's funny? It comes out of here! running towards Camera guy

Camera guy: runs away still laughing

Matt: You think the funny comes out of your mother[bleep]ing creativity? Comes out of Satan, mother[bleep]er! nn--ngh! pushes Camera guy down

Camera guy: Hoooholy [bleep]!

Matt: FUNNY ISN'T REAL! FUNNY ISN'T REAL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

going to strangle the next german i see

 

[bleep]ing gg [bleep]es

'Rock Hard' boss pure - 60/60 Attack | 99/99 Range | 1/1 Defence | 44/44 Prayer | 99/99 Strength | 99/99 Mage - level 79 combat EOC

 

## '07 Server ## "Best Runescape update ever: Removing 6 years of updates."

 

Rock_Hard.png

 

"Warning: If you are reading this then this warning is for you. Every word you read of this useless fine print is another second off your life. Don't you have other things to do? Is your life so empty that you honestly can't think of a better way to spend these moments? Or are you so impressed with authority that you give respect and credence to all that claim it? Do you read everything you're supposed to read? Do you think every thing you're supposed to think? Buy what you're told to want? Get out of your apartment. Meet a member of the opposite sex. Stop the excessive shopping and masturbation. Quit your job. Start a fight. Prove you're alive. If you don't claim your humanity you will become a statistic. You have been warned- Tyler"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video technology would be a pain, look at how long it takes for decisions in rugby and then apply that to every decision that is made during a football. Even with video technology there will be contentious refereeing decisions because there are so many decisions that just come down to a matter of opinion. Also, added time would increase exponentially with all the stoppages and this would cause more controversy.

You could still use them only when it's a tough call.

 

How do you define a tough call, if you leave that up definition up to the ref you leave them open to calls of bias every time they don't use the technology (and get it wrong).

wild_bunch.gif

He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart,

and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.

- Aeschylus (525 BC - 456 BC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video technology would be a pain, look at how long it takes for decisions in rugby and then apply that to every decision that is made during a football. Even with video technology there will be contentious refereeing decisions because there are so many decisions that just come down to a matter of opinion. Also, added time would increase exponentially with all the stoppages and this would cause more controversy.

You could still use them only when it's a tough call.

 

How do you define a tough call, if you leave that up definition up to the ref you leave them open to calls of bias every time they don't use the technology (and get it wrong).

 

The same way it's used in every other sport...

 

And if there's no "official review," the coaches can call a review if they want. If they're wrong and the ruling on the field stands, they lose a sub.

 

Also, this isn't an endorsement of video reviewing. I don't know where exactly I stand on it. Just saying it could be done imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who knows how it'd been if it'd been 2-2 in half time. Anyway, hopefully this will now put enourmous preassure on UEFA and Fifa to introduce video or penelty area refs. They had penelty area refs during the EL this season to try out, and it was very good. So, if they are relectuant to bring in videos, i'd say two additional refs, at least for big competitions like EL, CL, Euros, World Cup, qualifiers etc.

Having additional refs during the league games, where do you draw the line for need of refs? First, second, third, fourth etc division (thinking mostly of cost here)?

 

Well, England haven't played good at all during these matches. Cred to Germany tho, good stuff. And a boring quarter final... Two giants again meeting. Would be much better seeing them in the semis.

 

E: Mage: No. Managers calling for video reviewing would take too long. And being robbed from a sub would be terrible for the game.

J'adore aussi le sexe et les snuff movies

Je trouve que ce sont des purs moments de vie

Je ne me reconnais plus dans les gens

Je suis juste un cas désespérant

Et comme personne ne viendra me réclamer

Je terminerai comme un objet retrouvé

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video technology would be a pain, look at how long it takes for decisions in rugby and then apply that to every decision that is made during a football. Even with video technology there will be contentious refereeing decisions because there are so many decisions that just come down to a matter of opinion. Also, added time would increase exponentially with all the stoppages and this would cause more controversy.

You could still use them only when it's a tough call.

 

How do you define a tough call, if you leave that up definition up to the ref you leave them open to calls of bias every time they don't use the technology (and get it wrong).

 

The same way it's used in every other sport...

 

And if there's no "official review," the coaches can call a review if they want. If they're wrong and the ruling on the field stands, they lose a sub.

 

Also, this isn't an endorsement of video reviewing. I don't know where exactly I stand on it. Just saying it could be done imo.

 

The difference is in many other sports where such technology is used there is little room for interpretation - in tennis the ball is either in or out, in rugby the try scorer either had the ball incontrol when scoring or he didn't etc. If you even just look at a contentious tackles there are so many scenarios where it just comes down to a referee's preference and there is no way that a video review would alter a referee's taste.

 

Having managers call for a video review wouldn't work either as they are not in a good position to see what happens in the penalty box (where the majority of game changing incidents occur). Also losing subs for a wrong call would be horrible as it would lead to injured players having to play on when they shouldn't and making injuries worse which could potentially shorten careers in the long run.

 

Video technology can only work well in sports where there is little to no room for interpretation in regards to the rules, football in my opinion isn't one of them. The same goes for boxing where there can be a lot of things that go into judging who won a round - many of which are purely a matter of taste and preference. Yes, there will be room for human error by having people judging alone but video technology will not end contentious decisions in certain sports. By the way this is coming from a Scotland fan - we're continually robbed of results in one way or another but c'est la vie that is what being a football fan is about, some bad decisions go against you and some go your way.

wild_bunch.gif

He who learns must suffer, and, even in our sleep, pain that cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart,

and in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom to us by the awful grace of God.

- Aeschylus (525 BC - 456 BC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Video technology would be a pain, look at how long it takes for decisions in rugby and then apply that to every decision that is made during a football. Even with video technology there will be contentious refereeing decisions because there are so many decisions that just come down to a matter of opinion. Also, added time would increase exponentially with all the stoppages and this would cause more controversy.

You could still use them only when it's a tough call.

 

How do you define a tough call, if you leave that up definition up to the ref you leave them open to calls of bias every time they don't use the technology (and get it wrong).

 

The same way it's used in every other sport...

 

And if there's no "official review," the coaches can call a review if they want. If they're wrong and the ruling on the field stands, they lose a sub.

 

Also, this isn't an endorsement of video reviewing. I don't know where exactly I stand on it. Just saying it could be done imo.

 

The difference is in many other sports where such technology is used there is little room for interpretation - in tennis the ball is either in or out, in rugby the try scorer either had the ball incontrol when scoring or he didn't etc. If you even just look at a contentious tackles there are so many scenarios where it just comes down to a referee's preference and there is no way that a video review would alter a referee's taste.

 

Having managers call for a video review wouldn't work either as they are not in a good position to see what happens in the penalty box (where the majority of game changing incidents occur). Also losing subs for a wrong call would be horrible as it would lead to injured players having to play on when they shouldn't and making injuries worse which could potentially shorten careers in the long run.

 

Video technology can only work well in sports where there is little to no room for interpretation in regards to the rules, football in my opinion isn't one of them. The same goes for boxing where there can be a lot of things that go into judging who won a round - many of which are purely a matter of taste and preference. Yes, there will be room for human error by having people judging alone but video technology will not end contentious decisions in certain sports. By the way this is coming from a Scotland fan - we're continually robbed of results in one way or another but c'est la vie that is what being a football fan is about, some bad decisions go against you and some go your way.

 

That's irrelevant, we're not talking about reviewing bad tackles, we are talking about the simple yes or no decisions that require a sharp eye but no brain, and only if it's contested by a player. They're rarely points of contention, the referee usually gets it right and the players agree. If a player is thought to be making too many intentional illegitimate contests, then they should be booked for time wasting. In fact, most games probably wouldn't require the intervention of video replays at all. Simples, and not expensive nowadays either.

~ W ~

 

sigzi.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Germany vs England last night, I have to say the shot that bounced of the top of the goal into the goal itself SHOULD have counted as a goal. (and I was going for Germany too)

Popoto.~<3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.