syhuang Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 I understand the anti-instant replay point of view. You can't start debating judgement calls but there has to be a way they can improve the policing of the game without slowing it down. To be fair, most of the instant replays used in other sports do not apply to judgment calls too. You can't challenge strike or ball by instance replay in baseball, you can't ask to review a holding penalty in NFL, referees can't review a double-dribble in NBA, and a high-stick penalty is not reviewable in hockey either. Instant replays are mainly used on non-judgment call situations where technology helps to verify if a flyball clears fence, if a puck clears goalline, if a player has both feet inbound, or if a buzzer beating shot is indeed on time. When MLB was debating to use instant replay, anit instant replay fans didn't like it because they thought it would taint baseball tradition and they were so afraid machines would call strike/ball that human factor would be lost in the game. This is just like what the soccer world is worrying right now and look what happened to MLB, instant replay doesn't use on judgment calls, just like other sports. As far as I know, people are asking for technology help on non-judgment calls in soccer like goalline technology, it's not like they want to apply instant replays to all kinds of foul calls on the field. I really can't understand why FIFA is so stubborn against instant replays on non-judgment calls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 To be fair, most of the instant replays used in other sports do not apply to judgment calls too. You can't challenge strike or ball by instance replay in baseball, you can't ask to review a holding penalty in NFL, referees can't review a double-dribble in NBA, and a high-stick penalty is not reviewable in hockey either. Instant replays are mainly used on non-judgment call situations where technology helps to verify if a flyball clears fence, if a puck clears goalline, if a player has both feet inbound, or if a buzzer beating shot is indeed on time. When MLB was debating to use instant replay, anit instant replay fans didn't like it because they thought it would taint baseball tradition and they were so afraid machines would call strike/ball that human factor would be lost in the game. This is just like what the soccer world is worrying right now and look what happened to MLB, instant replay doesn't use on judgment calls, just like other sports. As far as I know, people are asking for technology help on non-judgment calls in soccer like goalline technology, it's not like they want to apply instant replays to all kinds of foul calls on the field. I really can't understand why FIFA is so stubborn against instant replays on non-judgment calls. I think they will eventually implement it. I don't even have a problem with goal line issues. Majority of the time, they get it right. It's the offsides. The rule is clear as day yet they often get it wrong because it's difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 I think they will eventually implement it. I don't even have a problem with goal line issues. Majority of the time, they get it right. It's the offsides. The rule is clear as day yet they often get it wrong because it's difficult. Offside is an interesting topic. Does it fall into judgment call category? I'm leaning toward that instant replay can use on offside some day, maybe only when it results in a goal. To me, offside is like an out-of-bound call, it's just an invisible line created by the last defender when the ball is kicked. There isn't much "judgment" involved imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Offside is an interesting topic. Does it fall into judgment call category? I'm leaning toward that instant replay can use on offside some day, maybe only when it results in a goal. To me, offside is like an out-of-bound call, it's just an invisible line created by the last defender when the ball is kicked. There isn't much "judgment" involved imo. The only reason I see debates about offsides is the camera angles since not all stadiums have good quality cameras in the leagues. For the WC, they have cameras pretty much everywhere so it makes it very clear cut. Just remember that the technology needs to be accessible for all the leagues and there are a lot of poor teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxer Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Offside is an interesting topic. Does it fall into judgment call category? I'm leaning toward that instant replay can use on offside some day, maybe only when it results in a goal. To me, offside is like an out-of-bound call, it's just an invisible line created by the last defender when the ball is kicked. There isn't much "judgment" involved imo. I think it is and as meazza says it's difficult to get it right sometimes. I was watching the game againt Mexico with my brother and when Tevez scored I asked him, was that offside? (obviously, before the replay) And he said to me, without a doubt, no way, there are two guys behind him, it's a goal. So in a split second you have one guy questioning the call and one that would have assured the goal was legit. If the lineman was following the ball, when it reaches Tevez he has the two guys behind him, when the ball leaves Messi's foot he's clearly 2 meters ahead in illegal position. It happened so fast that I can see how the lineman got it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxer Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Offside is an interesting topic. Does it fall into judgment call category? I'm leaning toward that instant replay can use on offside some day, maybe only when it results in a goal. To me, offside is like an out-of-bound call, it's just an invisible line created by the last defender when the ball is kicked. There isn't much "judgment" involved imo. I think it is and as meazza says it's difficult to get it right sometimes. I was watching the game againt Mexico with my brother and when Tevez scored I asked him, was that offside? (obviously, before the replay) And he said to me, without a doubt, no way, there are two guys behind him, it's a goal. So in a split second you have one guy questioning the call and one that would have assured the goal was legit. If the lineman was following the ball, when it reaches Tevez he has the two guys behind him, when the ball leaves Messi's foot he's clearly 2 meters ahead in illegal position. It happened so fast that I can see how the lineman got it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 I think it is and as meazza says it's difficult to get it right sometimes. I was watching the game againt Mexico with my brother and when Tevez scored I asked him, was that offside? (obviously, before the replay) And he said to me, without a doubt, no way, there are two guys behind him, it's a goal. So in a split second you have one guy questioning the call and one that would have assured the goal was legit. If the lineman was following the ball, when it reaches Tevez he has the two guys behind him, when the ball leaves Messi's foot he's clearly 2 meters ahead in illegal position. It happened so fast that I can see how the lineman got it wrong. just my own opinion as a very casual soccer fan, but if I was in charge of FIFA, I'd simply add a goal judge whose job it is to determine 2 things: 1. Whether anyone was offsides. 2. Whether the ball crossed the goal line. What else do you need? I have to imagine any trained person could review a goal and make a decision in under 2 minutes. even less on most goals. For the most part, it wouldn't slow down the game. If the offsides call is such a big deal that it disallows a goal, then it shouldn't be considered a judgment call. I believe it's the use of judgment that has gotten us to this point in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 The only reason I see debates about offsides is the camera angles since not all stadiums have good quality cameras in the leagues. For the WC, they have cameras pretty much everywhere so it makes it very clear cut. Just remember that the technology needs to be accessible for all the leagues and there are a lot of poor teams. Indeed, cost is a concern here. I remember I read an article mentions the FA head of Wales doesn't like instant replay because of cost. However, why can't instant replay be only used in top leagues and top tournaments if money is the concern? Just like high school and college baseball do not use instant replay like MLB. EDIT: in addition to merely watch the replays, I am pretty sure there are technology to help offside calls which camera angles aren't a big issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 just my own opinion as a very casual soccer fan, but if I was in charge of FIFA, I'd simply add a goal judge whose job it is to determine 2 things: 1. Whether anyone was offsides. 2. Whether the ball crossed the goal line. What else do you need? I have to imagine any trained person could review a goal and make a decision in under 2 minutes. even less on most goals. For the most part, it wouldn't slow down the game. If the offsides call is such a big deal that it disallows a goal, then it shouldn't be considered a judgment call. I believe it's the use of judgment that has gotten us to this point in the first place. Depends on if the ref raises his flag then they stop playing. Imagine they would review false starts. They usually stop the play during when there is a false start. If they'd review it, it would change everything. The team would have to continue playing and then judge it. Sounds simple but it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Indeed, cost is a concern here. I remember I read an article mentions the FA head of Wales doesn't like instant replay because of cost. However, why can't instant replay be only used in top leagues and top tournaments if money is the concern? Just like high school and college baseball do not use instant replay like MLB. The leagues are setup in a way that every team has a chance to make it to the top. For example, in Italy you have Serie A (Top league) up until C2 (bottom league). The bottom league could be created from a regular house league in a small town. The top 4 of the C2 moves to C1 up until to the A if they finish in the top 4. It happens that bottom clubs eventually make it all the way to A and then after a bad season could drop to B. Because of relegation/promotion, you often have clubs that have small stadiums playing in the top leagues for a few years. By adding costs, you're making it difficult to nearly impossible for the bottom clubs to compete. It's not similar to what we're used to where teams are owned by billionaires. Only a few actually are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 I think it is and as meazza says it's difficult to get it right sometimes. I was watching the game againt Mexico with my brother and when Tevez scored I asked him, was that offside? (obviously, before the replay) And he said to me, without a doubt, no way, there are two guys behind him, it's a goal. So in a split second you have one guy questioning the call and one that would have assured the goal was legit. If the lineman was following the ball, when it reaches Tevez he has the two guys behind him, when the ball leaves Messi's foot he's clearly 2 meters ahead in illegal position. It happened so fast that I can see how the lineman got it wrong. I think we may have different views of what "judgment" call is. I agree every call is basically a referee making a 'judgment', either it's a foul or an out-of-bound call. But to me, "judgment call" is the calls made by referees where the rules allow them to have the flexibility to make decision, for example, a holding penalty in NFL, strike/ball in baseball, etc. However, the cases where there are clear definition, it doesn't fall into "judgment call" category. For example, an out-of-bound call, a buzzer shot, a 12-man penalty, etc. When a referee makes the call, yes, it's his judgment at the time. But since these have clear definition in the rule, they are reviewable. I mean, when a NFL referee makes the judgment and doesn't think a player is out-of-bound while the instant replay shows the player stands on the foul line, the call can be reversed. And to me, offside has a very clear definition in the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syhuang Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 The leagues are setup in a way that every team has a chance to make it to the top. For example, in Italy you have Serie A (Top league) up until C2 (bottom league). The bottom league could be created from a regular house league in a small town. The top 4 of the C2 moves to C1 up until to the A if they finish in the top 4. It happens that bottom clubs eventually make it all the way to A and then after a bad season could drop to B. Because of relegation/promotion, you often have clubs that have small stadiums playing in the top leagues for a few years. By adding costs, you're making it difficult to nearly impossible for the bottom clubs to compete. It's not similar to what we're used to where teams are owned by billionaires. Only a few actually are. I understand this part. However, it doesn't explain why every league has to have same instant replay setup and not just top leagues. The promotion/demotion is done after the season. Thus, as long as a league has the same instant replay setup for all the games within the league during the season, it's fair for all teams in the same league imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 Just getting caught up with some of the action the past two days.... Anyone who wants to see one of the best goals of the cup so far (maybe the best), go watch (or re-watch) the Ronadinho goal from yesterday against Chile. This is why Brazil is so amazing...the timing of that strike was absolutely perfect, as was the precision. Just a beautiful goal that probably very few players in the world could hit. Just now getting to see some of today's highlights, and WOW, that keeper for Portugal deserves a big hug after standing up to that BARRAGE of shots from Spain and only letting one get past him. Watch the quality of the shots Spain puts on this guy, and you'll be very, very impressed with the effort. Too bad C.Ronaldo and the rest of Portugal couldn't step up to the same level as their goalie. This was definitely some of the best goalkeeping of the tourney! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 Just getting caught up with some of the action the past two days.... Anyone who wants to see one of the best goals of the cup so far (maybe the best), go watch (or re-watch) the Ronadinho goal from yesterday against Chile. This is why Brazil is so amazing...the timing of that strike was absolutely perfect, as was the precision. Just a beautiful goal that probably very few players in the world could hit. Just now getting to see some of today's highlights, and WOW, that keeper for Portugal deserves a big hug after standing up to that BARRAGE of shots from Spain and only letting one get past him. Watch the quality of the shots Spain puts on this guy, and you'll be very, very impressed with the effort. Too bad C.Ronaldo and the rest of Portugal couldn't step up to the same level as their goalie. This was definitely some of the best goalkeeping of the tourney! Wow Ronaldhino must have some talent to be able to score from home It was Robinho And C. Ronaldo is a great player but Portugal sucks. I remember hearing the other day how they're a soccer powerhouse . A power house that has won nothing ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 I understand this part. However, it doesn't explain why every league has to have same instant replay setup and not just top leagues. The promotion/demotion is done after the season. Thus, as long as a league has the same instant replay setup for all the games within the league during the season, it's fair for all teams in the same league imo. The teams that get promoted are often very small clubs. I don't even think they can afford the technology. Often enough, they're towns with stadiums of only 10-20 000 spectators. I understand your point but I understand the reasoning for a human element but FFS, could they develop some better refs? Rosetti was sent home for that !@#$ up during the Argentina - Mexico game. This guy has reffed a shitload of big games and can't figure that offside??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 Wow Ronaldhino must have some talent to be able to score from home It was Robinho And C. Ronaldo is a great player but Portugal sucks. I remember hearing the other day how they're a soccer powerhouse . A power house that has won nothing ever. lol, thank you for the correction I knew who I meant, just had the other guy on the brain...why isn't he here again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 lol, thank you for the correction I knew who I meant, just had the other guy on the brain...why isn't he here again? Because he's old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 Because he's old. He cant be THAT old, man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted June 30, 2010 Share Posted June 30, 2010 He cant be THAT old, man 30 is up there in futbol. Not only that, but I believe Brazil moved on to a new style of attack in this WC. He probably didn't fit in as well anymore with the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted June 30, 2010 Author Share Posted June 30, 2010 30 is up there in futbol. Not only that, but I believe Brazil moved on to a new style of attack in this WC. He probably didn't fit in as well anymore with the offense. Well, I guess if there is one team that will always have enough younger talent to replace the aging talent (can't believe I'm saying "aging" about 30 lol), it's Brazil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts