- This topic has 23 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’m all for goal line technology. It’s about time imo.
I’d also use technology for the offside rule.
Unlike a foul, which one ref will interpret differently from another, with the offside rule, you are either onside or offside. With the number of cameras at games now, it would be easy to implement a quick decision.
If the attacking team is flagged for offside by the linesman and they go on to score, then it should be reviewed by a 3rd party ( a video ref if you like). This will take all of 15-30 seconds, about the time it takes to kick off again. If offside, obviously, no goal. Kick off from the centre spot, rather than a free kick. If on side, then the goal stands. kick off as normal.
If the attacking team are flagged and don’t go on to score, let play go on.
Basically, keep the game flowing, even if the lino flags. If no goal, no issue. If a goal occurs, then review it.
I would strongly disagree that they add to the excitement. In Rugby League it seems about half of the tries go to the video ref. Kinda makes cheering a try pretty pointless as you have to wait for a video board to confirm it.What’s more exciting? Seeing the ball hitting the back of the net and going mad celebrating or mildly cheering before turning to a scoreboard for 2 minutes?
Note that I didn’t cite Rugby League – nothing can make that game more exciting ;)
I’m all for goal line technology. It’s about time imo.I’d also use technology for the offside rule.
Unlike a foul, which one ref will interpret differently from another, with the offside rule, you are either onside or offside.
That’s simply not true though, is it? With this daft passive/not interfering with play business, offside is almost as much down to interpretation as a foul is.
The naked eye cannot always determine whether someone is offside or not in real time and so therefore the use of cameras and hindsight by pundits usually settles any arguments, but that is always too late ! I think that each manager should be allowed 3 ‘Calls’ like the tennis in the event of a suspected offside situation, this would probably add an extra 60 secs ( If that ) for each ‘Call’! How many times do games get delayed when players round on the ref due to what they believe to be a bad call from an official !
I’m all for goal line technology. It’s about time imo.
I’d also use technology for the offside rule.
Unlike a foul, which one ref will interpret differently from another, with the offside rule, you are either onside or offside.
That’s simply not true though, is it? With this daft passive/not interfering with play business, offside is almost as much down to interpretation as a foul is.[/quote]
If you’re on the field, you’re interfering with play. That was always the theory in the past. That’s how it should be now, if we’re talking about changing the rules that is.
If you’re behind the last man in defence, then you’ll be offside. Simple as that so that would solve the argument on ‘interpretation’.
I’m all for goal line technology. It’s about time imo.
I’d also use technology for the offside rule.
Unlike a foul, which one ref will interpret differently from another, with the offside rule, you are either onside or offside.
That’s simply not true though, is it? With this daft passive/not interfering with play business, offside is almost as much down to interpretation as a foul is.[/quote]
If you’re on the field, you’re interfering with play. That was always the theory in the past. That’s how it should be now, if we’re talking about changing the rules that is.
If you’re behind the last man in defence, then you’ll be offside. Simple as that so that would solve the argument on ‘interpretation’.[/quote]
I understand what you’re saying, but the current rule does allow for interpretation so using a camera to determine a player’s position relative to the last defender won’t help at all.
I agree they should make the rule simpler. My suggestion has always been to have a line across each end of the pitch about 30 yards out (like a Subbuteo pitch) inside of which (“inside” being between the line and half-way) you can’t be off-side. It would be like defending the half-way is now, in terms of off-side, just closer to each goal. It would stretch the play and make the game more open – as teams would have to defend the new ‘off-side’ line to protect against goal-hanging – and at the same time make your video ruling workable.
Simples!
The problem with saying just make offside anyone beyond the 2nd last defender is it creates instances where a team can be punished for having a bloke down injured nowhere near play but in an offside position.
Or a player over the other side of the pitch doin nowt but picking his nose whilst in an offside positionThe offside law used to be very cut & dried & the interpretations of “interfering with play” were introduced as the above regularly happened & everybody complained. They were also brought in due to teams constantly playing for offside & ruining the game. The idea behind the various interpretations introduced was to benefit the attacking teams. Personally I think they work
If technology does go further than goals then it will probably be for offsides but as Griff has said it wouldn’t completely solve arguments as one teams interpretation of interfering with play would be different from their opponents
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
