Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Is a Fourth Official needed ?
- Thread starter Gullster
- Start date
Silent Bob
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
- Dec 6, 2004
- 22,172
No, the second offical should have been quite sufficient if it wasn't for his spectacular cowardice.
Just have refs that can see will do. 1. it was well outside the area 2. it wasn't even a foul.
How he could book a player for a non challenge beats me.
He really should be totally ashamed and its about time the clubs forced the FA/league to get the officials to explain their decisions to the press, post match.
How he could book a player for a non challenge beats me.
He really should be totally ashamed and its about time the clubs forced the FA/league to get the officials to explain their decisions to the press, post match.
GoldWithFalmer
Seaweed! Seaweed!
Hello & welcome from a supporter since 1988.
Yes to some degree,but mainly No from me-football is not all about television (for all levels of the game)....the ref got in the way,made a bad decision,etc...he is part of the game.
Yes i agree with goal line camera replays but that would be it.
I say do away with interpretation aspects such as the non sense off side rule we have,let him & her concentrate/ officiate on the things that really matter.
1) Adding an official with instant replays would be a fifth official.
2) One of the basic tenets of football is that the referee is the ultimate authority of any given match. If you give instant replay to any other official, you are undermining him and going against the laws of the game, most of which include the phrase "in the opinion of the referee". Even if you have a fifth official who watches the game and then interjects to tell the ref he might want to look at a replay, you're taking away the ref's authority. That replay ref won't know if the ref saw it and didn't think it was a foul, thus calling him over to review something he has already ruled on, or if he missed it. Should he err on the side of caution and always question the ref's competency, or should he just assume every incident has been caught and deemed legal by the ref?
3) How did the ref turn the game around? We were losing before he gave the penalty, we had failed to get a shot on target (or at least one that troubled the keeper) before it, we didn't look like scoring, we were behind, before the penalty, after it we were behind and didn't look like scoring. Seems to me the game carried on it's course despite the terrible decisions.
2) One of the basic tenets of football is that the referee is the ultimate authority of any given match. If you give instant replay to any other official, you are undermining him and going against the laws of the game, most of which include the phrase "in the opinion of the referee". Even if you have a fifth official who watches the game and then interjects to tell the ref he might want to look at a replay, you're taking away the ref's authority. That replay ref won't know if the ref saw it and didn't think it was a foul, thus calling him over to review something he has already ruled on, or if he missed it. Should he err on the side of caution and always question the ref's competency, or should he just assume every incident has been caught and deemed legal by the ref?
3) How did the ref turn the game around? We were losing before he gave the penalty, we had failed to get a shot on target (or at least one that troubled the keeper) before it, we didn't look like scoring, we were behind, before the penalty, after it we were behind and didn't look like scoring. Seems to me the game carried on it's course despite the terrible decisions.
Freddie Goodwin.
Well-known member
The ref can't see everything or every angle.
I'd like to see retired refs, who know how the game works, micked up and with access to TV who would be able to see things that the ref couldn't especially in incidents like v Saints and Bournemouth.
The officials got it wrong and had to follow through having got it wrong (the sending off) whereas a word from the 5th official and nobody else would need to know about it, you wouldn't call the ref over to see the replay.
The man in the middle would still have the final word but no way would that ref have given a pen if somebody had told him it was defo outside.
It would also cut down on dissent if the ref could tell players that his decisions were being backed up by TV evidence.
I'd like to see retired refs, who know how the game works, micked up and with access to TV who would be able to see things that the ref couldn't especially in incidents like v Saints and Bournemouth.
The officials got it wrong and had to follow through having got it wrong (the sending off) whereas a word from the 5th official and nobody else would need to know about it, you wouldn't call the ref over to see the replay.
The man in the middle would still have the final word but no way would that ref have given a pen if somebody had told him it was defo outside.
It would also cut down on dissent if the ref could tell players that his decisions were being backed up by TV evidence.
Kuipers Supporters Club
Well-known member
He wasn't a coward at all, the referee over ruled him .
But in most cases you would know. You see the ref give a penalty, then suddenly without discussing with the lino he changes his mind. You'd know it was the fifth official. If nothing is given then a short while later the ref calls it back for a foul or whatever, you know the 5th official has had a word.
But the problem with that is that the ref is relying on someone else, whose vantage point he doesn't know. With his linesmen, he has an appreciation for what their view of the incident is, and can use that to judge how reliable his input is. If the fifth official is looking at a video replay, how does the ref know a) what angle he is looking at, b) how clear it is (is the 5th official 75% sure, 80%, 100%? Does the Ref agree with his degree of certainty?) c) whether it is something he would agree with - perhaps in the replay the fifth official sees nothing more than what the referee saw, he just disagrees with his interpretation?
klaaturberada
New member
- Jan 2, 2011
- 347
There would still have been two penalties given to Southampton - just not the ones the ref gave.
Brownstuff
Well-known member
No is the answer
There is some instances where with replays you still couldn't be 100% sure about a decision
This would therefore slow the game down
Football is more entertaining with dubious decisions, refs are not deliberately making errors, they are just human
The biggest waste of time,money and effort is those lino's behind the goal-line during European cup games (what a rubbish job to have, and they only get in the way of supporters views behind the goal)
Actual goal-line technology is a possibility though
bn1&bn3 Albion
Well-known member
If not video replays then can we have goal line referees.
Exactly. Think of all the times in televised matches when they endlessly replay an incident in the studio and analyse it from umpteen different angles - and still can't agree. If it's a potential penalty Shearer or Lineker, being forwards, will say it is and Lawrenson and Hansen will say it isn't. Goal-line technology is about the only era when you could end up with a clear yes/no as even offsides are open to interpretation nowadays.
Let the refs do their best and we can all moan about them afterwards. It's what football's all about!
cloud
Well-known member
I think we're long overdue getting an ex-referee as a TV pundit.
Interesting to hear commentary from someone like David Elleray rather than the usual suspects.
Interesting to hear commentary from someone like David Elleray rather than the usual suspects.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,878
I've never seen the need for the introduction of technology. Only possibly in the world cup where so much is at stake.
Slowing the game up and players asking for a video reply really worries me.
All you need is more officials, probably some static ones strategically placed off pitch.
Three men trying to run around a pitch chasing shadows appears somewhat old fashioned.
Slowing the game up and players asking for a video reply really worries me.
All you need is more officials, probably some static ones strategically placed off pitch.
Three men trying to run around a pitch chasing shadows appears somewhat old fashioned.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,878
But football isn't cricket.
It would stamp out cheating like diving.
It can't be that old fashioned.
There were quite a few in black/green doing that for 90 mins