The Dunk "Handball"

[Diego Napier]

And that's football ruined, right there.

That sounds like a reasonable approach.

 

[stss30]

Can anyone clarify how many yellows Dunk has that counts towards suspension? I believed it was 13 but may be wrong looking at other replies.

 

[drew]

Can anyone clarify how many yellows Dunk has that counts towards suspension? I believed it was 13 but may be wrong looking at other replies.

http://origin-www.football-league.co.uk/page/Discipline/0,,10794~201610433~7,00.html

This seems to show 11 plus 1 red.

Not sure how accurate that is as doesn't seem to include some of the penalties we've conceded!!

 

[stss30]

http://origin-www.football-league.co.uk/page/Discipline/0,,10794~201610433~7,00.html

This seems to show 11 plus 1 red.

Not sure how accurate that is as doesn't seem to include some of the penalties we've conceded!!

You would hope the football league website is correct, but who knows! Cheers.

 

[Audax]

And that's football ruined, right there.

Many people said the same when video reviews were introduced to other sports. Turned out those folks were wrong just about every single time (I actually can't think of any sports that did get ruined. The closest I can think of would be Formula 1, but even there it's not 'ruined' the sport; just changed the focus of controversy occasionally).

In cricket, India held out for a long time (refusing to allow video decisions for LBW's as they felt the technology wasn't precise enough). But they've recently caved in, because they've eventually realised that the technology *is* beneficial to the sport.

I believe rugby's experience with the technology has been positive as well.

The only way that using video technology in football could "ruin" the sport is if the implementation gets effed up, and I think at this point with so many examples of implementation in other sports to look at, effing it up would take more effort than getting it right would.

I think, from what I've seen, they're doing it right so far - a phased approach, learning as they go.

 

[nwgull]

Can anyone clarify how many yellows Dunk has that counts towards suspension? I believed it was 13 but may be wrong looking at other replies.

Dunk was suspended (10 yellows) for Preston away and the FAC against Lincoln. He's since picked up 2 bookings (Ipswich and Forest), so any site that says 11 is definitely wrong.

As far as I know, the 2 bookings he got against Hudds aren't accumulated, as he already got suspended for the resulting red card. This corresponds with the FA's official disciplinary site, so it's probably correct: 12 bookings 1 red card.

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...nsions/clubdiscipline?league=31&club=10551704

 

[narly101]

No mention of Joel Lynch's chop of Hemed as he was running through either. Both the ref and the linesman missed it even tho he was poleaxed - ref was atrocious.

 

[brightn'ove]

If video replays came in would they look at that or just focus on the handball incident? Good example of why it it might not work very well?

I think they would certainly pick that up.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Them's are the breaks that teams at the top end of the table get and finally we seem to be getting some decisions go our way that would not normally..

Hoops owed us one for the Calde challenge.

Is that one finally chalked off now?

 

[trueblue]

Many people said the same when video reviews were introduced to other sports. Turned out those folks were wrong just about every single time (I actually can't think of any sports that did get ruined. The closest I can think of would be Formula 1, but even there it's not 'ruined' the sport; just changed the focus of controversy occasionally).

In cricket, India held out for a long time (refusing to allow video decisions for LBW's as they felt the technology wasn't precise enough). But they've recently caved in, because they've eventually realised that the technology *is* beneficial to the sport.

I believe rugby's experience with the technology has been positive as well.

The only way that using video technology in football could "ruin" the sport is if the implementation gets effed up, and I think at this point with so many examples of implementation in other sports to look at, effing it up would take more effort than getting it right would.

I think, from what I've seen, they're doing it right so far - a phased approach, learning as they go.

I disagree. Football is a free-flowing sport by nature, hugely different to rugby, cricket or indeed any other that heavily uses technology.

For line decisions, it's a no-brainer. For offsides, helpful, although even then there are serious questions about how it can be implemented and, with a goal like Glenn Murray's against Blackburn, it'll take the edge off the joy of scoring. Muted celebrations until everyone knows 45 seconds later that it stands, by which time the moment has passed. For penalties and red cards that have been given, technology could be useful in avoiding real howlers as there is generally enough of a delay anyway - but many decisions are borderline, look worse in slow motion when it's harder to gauge the force applied and would be judged differently depending on the official.

It's good that football wants to iron out the absolute stinkers - like Lampard's 'goal' v Germany or players getting punched off the ball - but scrutinising every marginal call with 20+ angles to choose from threatens to take away the essence of the sport.