AC Milan Forums - Unofficial

Full Version: Serie A
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
I never really understood the point of the goal-line officials. They don't help make any decisions and are usually nothing more than a point of irritation for players.
(04-13-2015, 12:59 PM)Mystik Wrote: [ -> ]



These goal-line officials are a waste of time. Just introduce goal-line technology already!

Didn't they say that the main reason was financially? It is too expensive.
No, the main reason is that they wouldnt be able to fix games any more. "The football would lose its humanity" they said.

fuck uefa.
Icon_lol2

Always wonder which is eviler, UEFA or FIFA? :d
Say what you want about video reviews..I don't think there is a good way at the moment to implement it. But goal-line technology should be implemented 100% to avoid things like that happening. If Napoli didn't win 3-0, I can only imagine how crazy the newspapers would have gone.
I agree. Video review is complex due to the much more fluid nature of football compared to most other sports that use video reviews.
Here's an interesting article about the whole situation with the Roma fans and their recent banners and actions against Antonella Leardi:

http://www.goal.com/en/news/1717/editori...to?ICID=OP

I've followed this situation with general interest and must say it really exemplifies why I'm not a supporter or ultras or ultras culture and if anything, am strongly against them.
(04-14-2015, 09:53 AM)ACMILAN1983 Wrote: [ -> ]I agree. Video review is complex due to the much more fluid nature of football compared to most other sports that use video reviews.

But it doesnt have to be the problem. We usually have the replays within seconds of the foul, goal, or whatever. They could just hire another referee who would watch the game on TV and be in radio contact with the referee on the pitch.

They dont even to do that for the whole game, they could, for example, give every team the chance to"challenge" the main referees decision 3 times a game, and only then the referee who watches the game on tv could tune in to pitch referee's radio and tell him what happened

Even if all "challenges" were used it wouldnt prolong the game for more than 2 minutes.

But hey, how would they fix games then?
On the ultras issue, after my post yesterday, now it's the Cagliari ones:

http://www.football-italia.net/65309/ult...iari-squad

(04-18-2015, 03:37 AM)Stitch Wrote: [ -> ]But it doesnt have to be the problem. We usually have the replays within seconds of the foul, goal, or whatever. They could just hire another referee who would watch the game on TV and be in radio contact with the referee on the pitch.

They dont even to do that for the whole game, they could, for example, give every team the chance to"challenge" the main referees decision 3 times a game, and only then the referee who watches the game on tv could tune in to pitch referee's radio and tell him what happened

Even if all "challenges" were used it wouldnt prolong the game for more than 2 minutes.

But hey, how would they fix games then?

I'm not going to say it's impossible, or I have the answers, but it is very complicated, as it could significantly impact the game.

Using video evidence isn't necessarily an issue imo. Possibly one of the most famous examples was when Zidane was sent off in the 2006 world cup, where it's said the fourth official informed the ref after seeing the video. To this level, or for example where it's used to check if a goal ruled offside is actually offside or not is beneficial to the game.

Challenging the ref and that sort of thing is where it can be messy. First it's having those breaks in play will be disruptive to the flow of the game. More than that though, it introduces opportunities to take advantage of the system, such as if a team is winning has challenges left towards the end of the game, then coaches can use their challenges to waste time, a bit like how subs are often used.

I also think that 6 potential challenges could disrupt the game a lot, as a challenge would at minimum take a minute to assess and review (from the time a challenge is made to the point where the decision is communicated among officials), probably moreso when factoring in the time that individuals will use either to continue a debate and waste time. Even if we're looking at a minimum 6 minutes delay in a football match, a game where the flow and continuity of the game is key, then that's a huge disruption added to numerous disruptions already in the game (i.e. with subs, ball going out of play etc.). This in effect can harm the quality and entertainment of games, as games with a lot of disruptions tend to end up being rather disappointing matches.

I'm not saying I'm against technology per say (many of my posts advocate its use), but there needs to be clear ideas on how it should be implemented.
Inter 2-1 Roma?! Did anyone see this game? How did this even happen