[Archived] Man Utd Vs Tottenham

[USRoverME]

ice hockey, men on ice with knives strapped to their feet, great fun!

Also, as Tris worries with the video technology in football, the technology for goal lines in hockey changes based on the level.

At the college level and below, there is only a goal line official, sits in a cage directly behind the net with two buttons, green=no goal red=goal, and they signal this at every whistle or stoppage of play) only in the NHL, (not sure about the AHL) do they have video replay, but they still have the goal official. Video still has to be used because... well, in a scrum on the ice in front of that teeny net, its easy for the view from behind to be obstructed.

Goal officials wouldn't be a bad idea in football, low-tech, keeps the "human element" involved, no real slow down to the game, manure loses a point... wait, it can't happen

[American]

Ice Hockey? What's that?

It's what they are playing over in Europe right now, but not North America!!

[BMan]

Ice Hockey? What's that? 

It's what they are playing over in Europe right now, but not North America!!

No need for the reminder, although the victory over Russia last night brought a bit of joy in this lousy lockout season

[Tris]

So Tomas Radzinski has just scored for Fulham to make it Fulham 3 Soton 2.

But 4 seconds before he scored, Redknapp was crudely fouled by Boa Morte and Graham Poll missed the foul.

The goal should certainly not have stood, it's as clear cut as last night's incident.

But technology wouldn't help - it would cause havoc and lead to more and more problems and stoppages.

Weak referees would use it constantly, strong referees would be on the end of endless criticism for not using it when Ferguson and Wenger say they should have.

It's a very dangerous road to go down.

[Tim Southampton Rover]

Does anyone remember our very own Mark Hughes scoring a goal against Leeds United but it never counted? What happened was that Hughes fired the ball into the back of the goal at The Dell but it rebounded off the advertisment boards behind the goal and came back out of the goal and play continued.

That happened 6 years ago and we've been fine without any kind of technology since then with only the rare crazy moment such as yesterdays 'goal' which has forced us to think about using video replays to review a situation.

[Tris]

Now, to complete the set, Papa Bouba Diop (?sp) has handled in the area.

After FOUR replays, neither Ian Darke or Niall Quinn can say whether or not it's a penalty (and to be fair, neither can I). Graham Poll said not.

If it were available, any referee would have called for help from elsewhere - it's human instinct (especially when you're about to get your own personalised Graham Poll chant from one set of fans or the other whatever you do).

In this case the video replays don't help anyone as the law stands (was it "deliberate"?)

The only way to tell would be to ask the player.

Maybe instead of technology we should introduce honesty.

But the officials are already honest. If people don't believe that, they may as well stop watching the game.

[Modi]

Does anyone remember our very own Mark Hughes scoring a goal against Leeds United but it never counted? What happened was that Hughes fired the ball into the back of the goal at The Dell but it rebounded off the advertisment boards behind the goal and came back out of the goal and play continued.

That happened 6 years ago and we've been fine without any kind of technology since then with only the rare crazy moment such as yesterdays 'goal' which has forced us to think about using video replays to review a situation.

Thanks for mentioning that. I was telling some friends about this 'goal' a few weeks ago and they looked at me as if I was mad. I even started to think I'd dreamt the entire the incident.

[Manchester Blue]

But the officials are already honest. If people don't believe that, they may as well stop watching the game.

Yes and if you honestly believe that all clubs get treated equally then you are extremely naive. You can post all week long about incidents that wouldn't benefit from technology you'll get no argument from me, i'd hate to see the game go down that road. However unless we get some honesty from the officials as a whole like admitting mistakes instead of having Hackett come on to defend every time we will be forced down that route.

Riley said after the Chelsea incident that he had his whistle to his mouth in anticipation of a foul that he thought was going to happen but it didn't. In that case why doesn't he keep it in his gob all game as there may be a foul at any minute. The answer of course is because he was going to give the penalty but bottled it but because he's a spinless tosser he can't come out and admit his mistake.

Hackett defended the linesman by saying that not even an olympic athlete could have got the right position to see the 'goal' yet people throughout the rest of the stadium including both managers saw it clearly. Someone said the linesman was tired after running up and down the touchline all night. Why was he doing that he should only be in his half and even then only be running when the ball is near and seeing as Man U had most of the ball he would have had about 10-15 mins of jogging to do, poor lamb.

Whilst I don't believe it's a case of them all being cheats I do believe they are not doing the job they are paid to but more importantly too many are stealing the headlines. I won't stop watching the game because I enjoy it but i've never paid to watch a referee so why do I have to keep watching a performance by one.

Incidentally I thought it was a great game tonight and I thought Poll was not too bad. A few mistakes but at least he made the decisions and the penalty was never deliberate handball.

[BRFC4EVA]

I'd just thought i'd mention that saints and fulham drew 3-3 tonight which is an excellent result for us. This thread seems the best place for it without starting a new 1, as we are discussing recent prem action!!

[Manchester Blue]

Meant to post this earlier, the FA have exonerated the poor linesman and released the following statement.

The FA Line is as follows.

An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a metre.

"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those things."

[JC4LAB]

Anyone remember Steve Kember or was it Alan Hudson Admiiting to the ref he had used his hand to score a goal and requested it be disallowed?.Carroll should have admiited it.was in...or is such honesty a silly concept ?

Edited January 5, 2005 by JC4LAB

[Tris]

But the officials are already honest.  If people don't believe that, they may as well stop watching the game.

Yes and if you honestly believe that all clubs get treated equally then you are extremely naive. You can post all week long about incidents that wouldn't benefit from technology you'll get no argument from me, i'd hate to see the game go down that road. However unless we get some honesty from the officials as a whole like admitting mistakes instead of having Hackett come on to defend every time we will be forced down that route.

Riley said after the Chelsea incident that he had his whistle to his mouth in anticipation of a foul that he thought was going to happen but it didn't. In that case why doesn't he keep it in his gob all game as there may be a foul at any minute. The answer of course is because he was going to give the penalty but bottled it but because he's a spinless tosser he can't come out and admit his mistake.

Hackett defended the linesman by saying that not even an olympic athlete could have got the right position to see the 'goal' yet people throughout the rest of the stadium including both managers saw it clearly. Someone said the linesman was tired after running up and down the touchline all night. Why was he doing that he should only be in his half and even then only be running when the ball is near and seeing as Man U had most of the ball he would have had about 10-15 mins of jogging to do, poor lamb.

Whilst I don't believe it's a case of them all being cheats I do believe they are not doing the job they are paid to but more importantly too many are stealing the headlines. I won't stop watching the game because I enjoy it but i've never paid to watch a referee so why do I have to keep watching a performance by one.

Incidentally I thought it was a great game tonight and I thought Poll was not too bad. A few mistakes but at least he made the decisions and the penalty was never deliberate handball.

I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest in this post.

You clearly don't like Mike Riley, or big clubs, or even Keith Hackett, however you think Poll has done ok tonight despite making a bigger blunder than the lino last night in missing Boa Morte's foul.

Which has changed the result.

Are you (with your "club bias" argument) suggesting that Fulham have slipped Poll a few quid to miss some decisions??

[Manchester Blue]

You're not sure what i'm trying to suggest yet you make about 4 or 5 assumptions based on my post. For the record I don't like Riley, i've feeling either way for Hackett and as for big clubs well I enjoy watching Arsenal & Chelsea so not sure about that one.

You think Poll has made a bigger blunder than last night, i've never seen a bigger blunder than last night. I didn't state that any club had bunged the ref so not sure where you have that one from. I strongly feel that certain refs are swayed by certain clubs, you can take that as meaning all refs are cheats and I hate them all and all big clubs if you want but it's no true.

One final question have you never sat ot Old Trafford and thought we're never getting anything all day here. No?

[Scotty]

I think you're being a bit harsh on the officials MB. It's human nature that a referee or linesman is going to be more influenced by 60,000+ people rather than 30,000. It shouldn't happen but it does.

I don't think the officials are biased at all, I just think they're human. And I'd rather it stayed that way than have technology ruling the games instead.

[mjs]

I don't think the officials are biased at all, I just think they're human. And I'd rather it stayed that way than have technology ruling the games instead.

Couldn't agree more.

Among the few good things left in the modern game of football are the split second joy of scoring a goal, the flow of the game and the controversy.

I fear the use of technology (which won't stop at goal line cameras) will erode some of that. I don't like the thought of a giant screen (as in Rugby) telling me whether or not we have scored, or having to have constant reviewing of decisions.

As much as we get frustrated by bad decisions, deep down we all get pleasure from moaning about them. Take away the human element and you take away alot of the pleasure.

[colin]

If only it had happened at the other end........dear god let it happen soon.

You can take your video replays and stuff them up your sphincter. This is the stuff that football is made of.

Don't forget that if refs & assistant refs make mistakes & in this case the AR didn't make one, he was physically unable to get to the right place to make the decision.

Maybe when all manager stop their players from:

diving

shirt pulling

feigning injury

asking refs to give out yellow cards

time-wasting

stealing distances at free kicks

encroaching at free kicks

spitting

deliberately fouling

then they may have the right to criticise the refs.

And maybe when managers stop being hypocrites by blaming the refs every time their team loses and never saying a word every time they win by a disputed decision then they may have a leg to stand on.

And just perhaps the next time Andy Grey or any other football commentator has to make an observation based on a split-second decision without the benefit of twelve slow motion replays, then perhaps we might just take his rant more seriously.

[Manchester Blue]

I think you're being a bit harsh on the officials MB. It's human nature that a referee or linesman is going to be more influenced by 60,000+ people rather than 30,000. It shouldn't happen but it does.

I don't think the officials are biased at all, I just think they're human. And I'd rather it stayed that way than have technology ruling the games instead.

Fully agree about the human element it is what makes the game what it is. As i've said I don't want technology I just fear it is inevitable. I don't think technology was required the other night just competence/bottle rather than Linford Christie as he suggested. Maybe i'm being harsh but it's human nature as you say however I feel certain ref's are a little bit more influenced by the home crowd than others that's my point. I'm not arguing for a robot who is 100% accurate just someone to do their job with common sense, something a good few seem incapable at present.

It was something I commented upon during the Charlton game how a good few officials seem to have lost any rapport with the players. Now of course it's partly the players fault but let's not forget they are the product we are paying to see, when the refs were not 'professional' they seemed to have a much better rapport.

[Blackburn Ender]

I've sat at Old Trafford and felt we'll get nothing all day, but that's been down to Man U being better than us on the day and Roy Keane, usually, running the show.

I don't believe referees are biased to big clubs.

With regard to penalties (just one contentious area) successful (usually big) teams get more bodies in the box and thus more opportunities for fouls.

Saying refs are biased towards big clubs just doesn't explain why they then go on to have a poor game reffing Rovers -v- Fulham, say.

[thenodrog]

You clearly don't like Mike Riley, or big clubs, or even Keith Hackett, however you think Poll has done ok tonight despite making a bigger blunder than the lino last night in missing Boa Morte's foul.

Which has changed the result.

It contributed Tris (like Spurs goal against us) but its still bad defending to let an unawarded foul in the opponants half of the pitch lead directly to a goal.

[blue phil]

Don't forget that if refs & assistant refs make mistakes & in this case the AR didn't make one, he was physically unable to get to the right place to make the decision.

So the AR , which I presume is the linesman , didn't make a mistake !! Right....

Check the video , again , Col . He was only about 3 or 4 yards at most from the 18 yard box , and yet he still didn't see the ball go over a yard past the line ? Is he blind ? How close does he need to be FFS ? There was no obstruction to him seeing what every other person with a similar vantage point in the ground saw . He bottled it pure and simple and should not be allowed near a pro game again .

[Manchester Blue]

Should I be worried that I agree word for word with you say Phil?

[AussieinUk]

Well I totally agre with your view ManchesterBlue... Technology is inevitable in some areas of sport... football will be one of them.

[philipl]

Technology is being equated to video evidence which I agree is often unreliable through being inconclusive and differs depending on the location and direction of the camera.

However, radio technology will give accurate reports on where the ball is, provided it is calibrated correctly- remember cyclops being switched off at Wimbledon when it was beeping for balls which were clearly inside the base line.

Managers fiddling with the width of the pitch could find themselves in difficulty if a radio chip ball beeped according to the previous dimensions!

Anyway, this is a fascinating article making an almost heretical case for technology by challenging the received wisdom on the corruptibility/impartiality of English referees.

[trueblue]

If they had let Carroll wear velcro gloves none of this would have happened !

[Tris]

Anyway, this is a fascinating article making an almost heretical case for technology by challenging the received wisdom on the corruptibility/impartiality of English referees.

Actually, it's just another load of absolute ###### from the Guardian.