Would you generally be in favour of increasing the number of officials from 4 to 6?
In favour
Opposed
Opposed, but would like to see some other similar solution (e.g. 2 onfield refs)
Opposed, but would like to see a technology based solution (e.g. instant replay, microchip in the ball for offsides/goal line)
0voters
As part of my continuing quest to get more football discussions going on this board, I propose the following:
European football authorities should move from a system of 4 officials per match to 6 officials per match. The two new officials would stand near each goal and would be primarily responsible for:
(1) ruling whether the ball crossed the goal line in close cases (they would only be a a few meters away); and
(2) providing an “opposite angle” view of the penalty box to assist the ref on penalty appeals and instances of diving.
This proposal would not stop or slow down the game (as instant replay would do) and would not require any additional unproven technology.
Penalty and diving instances are often the most critical decisions an official must make, and having a second set of eyes that can see the situation (a) up close, and (b) from the opposite angle as the on-field ref would help ensure that these decisions were made correctly. Penalty decisions would become more consistent, and instances of diving (a plague to the game) would be reduced.
The plan should initially be adopted for UEFA Champions League competitions, because one of the primary objections that have been raised to the idea (money to pay for additional officials for all the games) is not an issue for a Europe’s richest competition.
I went for the last option. I like having one fella in charge. As for diving i think that if the game is really serious about stamping it out then they need to analyse contentious issues after the game and give out some serious punishments. I would include the same for abuse of referees. I tend to avoid watching football now as I find players running after a ref who is not going to change his mind pathetic. I find refs not taking any action equally pathetic.
Re diving in particlur a friend back home came up with an interesting solution. When a contentious ‘foul’ occurs, the ref should ask the ‘victim’ if he is claiming the foul. If he does and is then subsequently found (using tv footage after the game) to have deserved an oscar, then the player gets a ban and his team lose the game. Managers would stop the diving pretty soon then. :fume:
I agree that post-match video reviews could be used far more extensively than they are now to help stamp out diving in particular. It still wouldn’t help with the question of whether to award a penalty on the field at the time the incident ocurred though. Still, it would be be better than nothing. As far as having one guy in charge, I agree with that too, but I think that could still fit within a 6 official system if it is clear that the ref on the field has the final say. So a good ref would defer to the “goal linesman” if he did not have a clear view.
Having his team lose the game sounds very harsh, even by my standards. The idea of asking the “victim” player whether he wished to “press charges” is interesting though…
I chose the last option too, I think football needs to keep up with the times and introduce technology to help officials. Dispite what people say that decisions eventually even out over the course of the season it is never the case.
Whilst I agree that refs sometimes make mistakes or they might just be shite (Mr. Manc Riley) I feel that this should be all the more reason to implement video refs. Millions of pounds in gate reciepts, TV revenues, player wages and competition prize money can be influenced by one mans’ decision. Doesn’t that seem a bit naive and incredibly stupid?
I’m a big fan of English Football and I can safely say that the officiating this season has been the worst I’ve ever seen. Off the top of my head I can recall the Arsenal vs Man U, Chelsea vs Liverpool and Man U vs Tottenham, the worst being the Tottenham goal how the hell the ref missed that I’ll never know.
Another point I agree with is the blatent dishonesty of the players. Dives and feigning injuries are so much a part of football I think people have accepted it as normal behavior. There should be some hardcore bannings regarding this type of behavior.
Do you ever get out to The Tavern (or elsewhere) to watch the matches? Which club do you support? (I’m guessing that they don’t wear red and play in Manchester… )
It’s a pity, I think, that things have gotten this far. I voted “Opposed”, because I’m a ‘purist’. I enjoy the element of human fallability. I was really disappointed when the TV umpire was introduced into cricket. Surely calling for the television ump means the umpire on the field has doubt, and the benefit of the doubt always goes to the batsman? But I digress…
Qrap is right - there is way too much riding on the result of nearly every game for there not to be changes.
2 onfield refs is an interesting idea - it certainly works well in field hockey (and so did removing the offside rule! Godsend!). Having refs for every aspect of the game, well, that means it could become like American Football - the game is stopped all the time, flags flying about like drunk canaries, lots of discussion etc. which takes away from the flow.
Even though I don’t like the idea of television replays, it has been very beneficial in rugby. I mean, Roy Carroll had to practically untangle himself from the net, grabbing the ball back against Spurs.
As far as the diving goes (Christiano Ronaldo, are you listening?!), isn’t the rule that purposefully trying to get a foul against another player brings a yellow card? Those add up, and will result in suspensions eventually. But yeah, some boy-wonder whose only trick is 92 step-overs swiftly followed by an impression of being taken out by a sniper… the game can do without that (and, actually, I do support a team wearing red from Manchester!).
Jumpers for goalposts! Next goal wins! That’s how it should be!
i think its inevitable that football follows rugby and cricket in use of the man upstairs aka video ref…it wouldnt slow the game down that much and would only need to be used for penalty area incidents and clarification on goals scored, cardable offenses…this season has been a real death-knell for the 3 man system because too many games have been decided not by level of skill on the pitch but by level of incompetency of officials (eg that swedish clown in the barca/chelsea fiasco)
How can we get the offside rule enforced properly?
Would anyone be in favour of using a video review for offsides decisions? I suspect most would not, because this would do more to slow down the game than using video only for penalty/goal decisions. But it could also be restricted to situations where the striker is clear, the flag goes up, and the striker burries the goal (i.e. they would be allowed to play on for, say 5 seconds).
I guess I would not approve of this. On the other hand, I do think that enforcement of the offside rule has gotten completely out of hand. The idea that “even is on” is a joke – very few official have the courage to actually call it that way.
Why is this true? Because if a linesman make a mistake by calling an even player onside and then a goal is scored the linesman is going to be held over the flames after the match. But what happens if he mistakenly flags for offside when the player was really on? NOTHING. Zip. People grumble and then move on – that mistake costs the linesman very little.
The result is that the current state of offsides enforcement is absurdly biased against the attacking team, which leads to less dynamic attacking play and more stops in the action.
So even though the video idea may not be the right solution – I really hope that something can be done to correct the current systemic bias in offsides enforcement as well. Anyone with any ideas on this one?
One other idea they could take is similar to the American Football system of challenges. Each team has a set number of challenges with which it is able to use television replays to dispute major incidents. In American football they are charged a time-out if their challenge doesn’t result in the decision being overturned, so they could take away a subsitution from teams doing the same in real football.
As for diving, it is something that is really upto the players, managers and fans to show disapproval unilaterally. It’s no good just saying Ronaldo is always diving so should be banned, every team has a player(s) that will go down far too easily. It’s much harder to criticise your own players, when what they are doing could make the difference between you winning and losing.
You never see players getting brought up on charges of diving but if someone even waves a hand near someone else it’s an instant 3 match ban.
One other idea they could take is similar to the American Football system of challenges. Each team has a set number of challenges with which it is able to use television replays to dispute major incidents. In American football they are charged a time-out if their challenge doesn’t result in the decision being overturned, so they could take away a subsitution from teams doing the same in real football.
As for diving, it is something that is really upto the players, managers and fans to show disapproval unilaterally. It’s no good just saying Ronaldo is always diving so should be banned, every team has a player(s) that will go down far too easily. It’s much harder to criticise your own players, when what they are doing could make the difference between you winning and losing.
You never see players getting brought up on charges of diving but if someone even waves a hand near someone else it’s an instant 3 match ban.
Can they also do something about the length of time it takes to take a free kick/penalty? After the ref has blown for a foul, waits of a minute or more are common.
It seems too me that we should introduce something similar to the rugby rule. Defending players have to get back 10 yards within 5 seconds. If not, the attacking team can move the ball forward an extra 10 yards. For penalties, any defending player still in the penalty area, talking to the ref after 5 seconds would get an automatic yellow card. A red card after 10 seconds.
David
a little surprised no one has commented on the most recent threat to games … guys like Mourinho whining and bitching so much when they lose that they rile up the knuckle-draggers to threatening heights.
while no big fan of frisk, i still don’t agree with what he had to go through. it’s not the way for a ref to go out, especially one that is held in high regard by uefa etc.
i agree that refs need some more help in getting the job doen, especially in these days of the “two-and-a half-twist-in-the-pike-position” dives thta might garner a medal at the olympics.
i kinda like davidla’s suggestion about really limiting the amount of time that players (managers) can spend bitching - holding up the game. any chance we’ll see anything done in the aftermath of the frisk fiasco?
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a few minor measured implemented in the wake of the Frisk episode, but somehow I can’t see it being a major overhaul.
Have you read anything about the details of the threats? knuckle-draggers is one thing … but I thought there was some kind of implication that it was something more sinister. Russian mafia stuff.
Maybe I was just trying to hard to read between the lines and ended up finding implications that weren’t really there?
Apparently 100% of Premiership managers surveyed (and 96% of all professional managers in England) would like to have video replay for goal-line decisions.
83% of Premiership managers would also like to use video replay for penalty decisions.
)
.