|
|
Post by SamTheLost on Jun 23, 2011 20:57:21 GMT
Right after watching quite a lot of Wimbledon this week I've been looking at the way hawkeye has been introduced into tennis and the way it's been used to massive effect.
The amount of wrong decisions that get over turned and they even have a system to re-play a point.
I see no reason why something similar, however I will admit I don't know the specifics of how hawkeye itself works and the sort of distances it's applicable to, could not be applied to football.
Instead of Hawkeye however it could be renamed Blattersjapeye. Just to make it individual like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Jun 23, 2011 20:59:37 GMT
In cricket and tennis is works so perfectly.
No one can argue with it because its always right and it takes just seconds.
Absolutely no reason why goal line technology can't be our hawkeye, just Blatter showing he knows fuck all about football.
|
|
|
|
Post by PenkhullStokie on Jun 23, 2011 21:10:52 GMT
The issue is teams would appeal every decision.
Have 2 decisions per team each half. If the team call it right they keep that decision/appeal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sonko's Head on Jun 23, 2011 21:27:32 GMT
Rugby way would work better...we can all agree we need something
|
|
|
|
Post by SamTheLost on Jun 23, 2011 21:35:18 GMT
The issue is teams would appeal every decision. Have 2 decisions per team each half. If the team call it right they keep that decision/appeal. I meant to add that in but I forgot after I went for a shower. At the tennis they use a 3 challenge system. And I think if your challenge is right then you get your challenge back. Either 2 per half or 3 through out the game and an extra 1 in extra time would work perfectly. |
|
|
|
Post by One-Two on Jun 23, 2011 22:05:55 GMT
It's really added something to cricket, the referral system is great.
With football, hawkeye could be used so quickly that play could just carry on as usual, and stopped if it actually was a goal.
|
|
|
|
Post by BusterHighman on Jun 24, 2011 23:49:43 GMT
In cricket and tennis is works so perfectly. No one can argue with it because its always right and it takes just seconds. Absolutely no reason why goal line technology can't be our hawkeye, just Blatter showing he knows fuck all about football. The reason it works so well in Cricket and Tennis is because there's a natural break in play every few seconds. This doesn't happen in football and all the stop starting and fucking about goes completely against what makes football what it is. I'm a great believer in 'you win some, you lose some' now just get on with it and stop moaning like a bitch. |
|
|
|
Post by SamTheLost on Jun 25, 2011 0:07:39 GMT
In cricket and tennis is works so perfectly. No one can argue with it because its always right and it takes just seconds. Absolutely no reason why goal line technology can't be our hawkeye, just Blatter showing he knows fuck all about football. The reason it works so well in Cricket and Tennis is because there's a natural break in play every few seconds. This doesn't happen in football and all the stop starting and fucking about goes completely against what makes football what it is. I'm a great believer in 'you win some, you lose some' now just get on with it and stop moaning like a bitch. That's a fair point, and altogether a fair opinion. However, tennis has a system to deal with that. And some tennis rallies go on for 10 mins+, and yet they can still pull it back to a challenge without a problem. I think it'd have to be change quite a lot to fit into football to allow the game's flow but it wouldn't be too much hard work and then it wouldn't be a case of "win some, lose some" which on no basis is logically fair it's more random pot luck as to whether you get the decision which isn't right. Implementation of this sort of technology would eradicate "win some, lose some" in favour of the correct decision EVERY TIME (obviously only when the team challenged). This would mean that no one could realistically moan about decisions since the team have the option to challenge. |
|
|
|
Post by BusterHighman on Jun 25, 2011 0:21:26 GMT
The reason it works so well in Cricket and Tennis is because there's a natural break in play every few seconds. This doesn't happen in football and all the stop starting and fucking about goes completely against what makes football what it is. I'm a great believer in 'you win some, you lose some' now just get on with it and stop moaning like a bitch. That's a fair point, and altogether a fair opinion. However, tennis has a system to deal with that. And some tennis rallies go on for 10 mins+, and yet they can still pull it back to a challenge without a problem. I think it'd have to be change quite a lot to fit into football to allow the game's flow but it wouldn't be too much hard work and then it wouldn't be a case of "win some, lose some" which on no basis is logically fair it's more random pot luck as to whether you get the decision which isn't right. Implementation of this sort of technology would eradicate "win some, lose some" in favour of the correct decision EVERY TIME (obviously only when the team challenged). This would mean that no one could realistically moan about decisions since the team have the option to challenge. I know what you mean but if we go down the route of every decision has to be fair then before you know it we'll be rewinding tapes for offsides aswell. I can cope with goal line technology but i'm against everything else. I just think it might set a precedent and there's too much wasted time in football already. |
|
|
|
Post by PenkhullStokie on Jun 25, 2011 0:49:21 GMT
I don't think it'd take that long.
Think of the time when a keeper goes to fetch the ball for a goal kick, or the same for a corner.
And then goal celebrations usually take up to a minute, until the restart anyway.
And only having 2 each half would stop so many, unless you got them right every time of course, then it'd be the shit refs fault.
|
|
The Zone
Kyle Lightbourne
Posts: 24
Likes: 1
|
Post by The Zone on Jun 25, 2011 11:26:50 GMT
I don't think it'd take that long. Think of the time when a keeper goes to fetch the ball for a goal kick, or the same for a corner. And then goal celebrations usually take up to a minute, until the restart anyway. And only having 2 each half would stop so many, unless you got them right every time of course, then it'd be the shit refs fault. What if the ball bounces off underneath of the crossbar dont know if its gone in or not, keeper gets it kicks it up field to the striker who runs up and scores. What time you going stop the play, soon as it happens? Then if it didnt go in your stopping that other team from scoring. After the other team scores? Then most the players might of been else where complaining/celebrating or what ever. In mean time players could get injured stretching for balls they wouldnt have to go for if it went in and they didnt stop it until the previous attack, costing millions.  |
|
|
|
Post by BusterHighman on Jun 25, 2011 13:05:12 GMT
I don't think it'd take that long. Think of the time when a keeper goes to fetch the ball for a goal kick, or the same for a corner. And then goal celebrations usually take up to a minute, until the restart anyway. And only having 2 each half would stop so many, unless you got them right every time of course, then it'd be the shit refs fault. What if the ball bounces off underneath of the crossbar dont know if its gone in or not, keeper gets it kicks it up field to the striker who runs up and scores. What time you going stop the play, soon as it happens? Then if it didnt go in your stopping that other team from scoring. After the other team scores? Then most the players might of been else where complaining/celebrating or what ever. In mean time players could get injured stretching for balls they wouldnt have to go for if it went in and they didnt stop it until the previous attack, costing millions. Exactly. People are always assuming the ball has gone out of play. If it comes back in the game will carry on. When do you suggest the referrals/ challenges are done and who decides they want to use them if you only have a limited number per team? It's not as if the manager can decide because they all have no idea from the halfway line anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Bayernoatcake on Jun 25, 2011 14:49:45 GMT
Maybe it's just me (and the Indians) but I really hate the referral system in cricket.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Jun 25, 2011 15:17:00 GMT
Maybe it's just me (and the Indians) but I really hate the referral system in cricket. What's to hate? Stops players getting given out even though they shouldn't of been. |
|
|
|
Post by Bayernoatcake on Jun 25, 2011 15:22:44 GMT
It takes away the excitement of a wicket for me. And imperfections are part of sport, shit happens, have a moan then get on with it. And barring Steve Bucknor, cricket umpires tend to be right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Jun 25, 2011 15:30:39 GMT
It takes away the excitement of a wicket for me. And imperfections are part of sport, shit happens, have a moan then get on with it. And barring Steve Bucknor, cricket umpires tend to be right. I think it adds to the excitement, the umpire signals for a 2nd opinion and then the whole stadium waits, just watching the big screen for an opinion. Then it shows the decision and everyone goes mental. Its brilliant in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by Bayernoatcake on Jun 25, 2011 15:34:09 GMT
I don't like it, You go mental thinking we've got a wicket and then 20 seconds the twat of a batsman signals to the umpire he wants it reviewing killing the joy instantly. I bloody hate it.
|
|
|
|
Post by BusterHighman on Jun 25, 2011 15:47:10 GMT
It takes away the excitement of a wicket for me. And imperfections are part of sport, shit happens, have a moan then get on with it. And barring Steve Bucknor, cricket umpires tend to be right. I think it adds to the excitement, the umpire signals for a 2nd opinion and then the whole stadium waits, just watching the big screen for an opinion. Then it shows the decision and everyone goes mental. Its brilliant in my opinion. I don't mind it in cricket but i don't want this at the football. I don't want to be sitting there waiting 30 seconds for a screen to tell me what's happening. Football should be quick and non-stop as much as possible. That's partly what makes it the biggest sport in the world. I get pissed off waiting for throw ins and corners to be taken so i don't need more reasons to be annoyed. As i said earlier, it will set a precedent and before you know it the game will be stopped every 5 minutes to review an offside decision. It's a very slippery slope and this idea that the game and all it's decisions have to be just is the cause. Life isn't fair and neither is sport but the smugness of getting away with it when you shouldn't makes up for when you get screwed over. |
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Jun 25, 2011 15:54:04 GMT
I think it adds to the excitement, the umpire signals for a 2nd opinion and then the whole stadium waits, just watching the big screen for an opinion. Then it shows the decision and everyone goes mental. Its brilliant in my opinion. I don't mind it in cricket but i don't want this at the football. I don't want to be sitting there waiting 30 seconds for a screen to tell me what's happening. Football should be quick and non-stop as much as possible. That's partly what makes it the biggest sport in the world. I get pissed off waiting for throw ins and corners to be taken so i don't need more reasons to be annoyed. As i said earlier, it will set a precedent and before you know it the game will be stopped every 5 minutes to review an offside decision. It's a very slippery slope and this idea that the game and all it's decisions have to be just is the cause. Life isn't fair and neither is sport but the smugness of getting away with it when you shouldn't makes up for when you get screwed over. I only think hawkeye should be used in football for dubious goals, Lampard's against Germany last year for example. If a captain of either team thinks it is a goal or shouldn't be a goal he approaches the ref and he asks a man in the stands. With goals that may or may not have crossed the line it is very simple and if it means stopping instances like Lampard's against Germany I'm willing to wait as long as it takes. Are you saying that you wouldn't want to wait 30 seconds for Walters' disallowed goal against Spurs last season to be reviewed? |
|
|
|
Post by BusterHighman on Jun 25, 2011 16:02:39 GMT
I don't mind it in cricket but i don't want this at the football. I don't want to be sitting there waiting 30 seconds for a screen to tell me what's happening. Football should be quick and non-stop as much as possible. That's partly what makes it the biggest sport in the world. I get pissed off waiting for throw ins and corners to be taken so i don't need more reasons to be annoyed. As i said earlier, it will set a precedent and before you know it the game will be stopped every 5 minutes to review an offside decision. It's a very slippery slope and this idea that the game and all it's decisions have to be just is the cause. Life isn't fair and neither is sport but the smugness of getting away with it when you shouldn't makes up for when you get screwed over. I only think hawkeye should be used in football for dubious goals, Lampard's against Germany last year for example. If a captain of either team thinks it is a goal or shouldn't be a goal he approaches the ref and he asks a man in the stands. With goals that may or may not have crossed the line it is very simple and if it means stopping instances like Lampard's against Germany I'm willing to wait as long as it takes. Are you saying that you wouldn't want to wait 30 seconds for Walters' disallowed goal against Spurs last season to be reviewed? Nope, i've already said i don't mind the goal line ones but if it works i can't see it stopping there and that's what worries me. I would have been happy to wait 30 seconds to allow Walters' or Lampard's goals but i'm just as happy to accept 'shit happens' and get on with it. The shoe will be on the other foot in the end we can all enjoy discussing the injustices in the meantime. If possible i'd much prefer the same system they use in ice hockey where when the puck crosses the line a light comes on immediately but i understand that's a lot more complicated with an air-filled football. |
|
