Video Reviews

[selby]

I honestly think that it will take up to 15 goals a season off top clubs like Man.U.
   Thats how many the average of dodgy decisions they must have had in past years.
   Van Nistolroy used to get away with murder,and Paris would be in the semis instead of Barca this year.And years ago Tottenham and not Benefica  would have won in europe,and Derby would have beaten Juventus.
   History changeing decisions that if it does go ahead the big clubs will scrap within 4yrs.
  The years of bent refs towards foreign and fans of Man.U.reffing with one eye closed over.
   Even Weeds would have won in europe against Milan,cant wait to hear the screams of the big clubs.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Wish we would just leave it as it is.

[DaveDRFC]

I agree, wrong decisions are part of the game. Even if they are infuriating at times!

[Bentley Bullet]

It has its plus points, for instance, had it been used in the Championship the season before last Rovers might not have been cheated out of the league.

On the negative side, it would deter the celebrating of goals because everyone would have to wait with bated breath for the jury to come out.

[Syme]

That was my impression from the France Spain highlights Bentley. France were basically ready to restart the game before it got chalked off, then Spain didn't really celebrate when they scored.

I think it's alright in a sport like rugby where there are usually a lot of points scored in a game, so you don't really get over excited about one try in itself. But in football, where games regularly end 1-0, then I think you lose a bit of the spontaneous elation if you have to wait, even for only 30 seconds, to see if the video truck says it's ok.

There'd also be half as much to talk about if there was no controversy.

[nightporter]

I agree, wrong decisions are part of the game. Even if they are infuriating at times!

Agreed, but sometimes it seems the big clubs get most of the wrong decisions.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Take Rowe's dive on Sunday. A replay would have resulted in him being booked and being made to look a tw*t. Likely he wouldn't do it again.

Players antics will not change unless video reviews either during the game or retrospective punishment is applied.

[Donnywolf]

Agreed. It will take some of the spontaneity out of it all but when the aim of the game is to score and you  surely do need THAT to be a decision they get right each and EVERY time

So video gets a 10 from me (and Len)

Talking of 10's Plymouths 10 would also have been Yellow Carded if the Ref got a replay of that and some of the Teams we have been "physically assaulted by" just this Season just would not have got away with most of it

[selby]

Wolfie,I hope it  does not interfere with your betting coups too bad.

[Drover]

Im all for videos reviews,it works well in Rugby and I think the ability to cut down the majority of disappointments,of the majority of wrong decisions going against us,outways the smugness of profiting from bad decisions going our way,But I do know what you mean,when some of you say,about the wrong decisions being part of the game.Im just glad there was'nt video review technology in 1966!

[Glyn_Wigley]

I agree, wrong decisions are part of the game. Even if they are infuriating at times!

Believe me, even though the officials will use video technology it ain't going to stop fans arguing about it afterwards.

[Herman Hessian]

it's a crap idea, and means that the only people involved with the game who are able to get away with mistakes are the players - missing a sitter from three yards out or fumbling stuff in to the back of the net like joe hart is no better or worse a mistake than a wrong call for a penalty or an offside, and has just as much impact on the outcome of the game - how are you supposed to legislate for that sort of thing ?

if you're going to remove human error from the game, jack it all in and play out entire seasons on champ manager or FIFA where it's all decided beforehand by the number crunching to decide who's the best team and who should therefore win each match if all the intangibles are taken away

truest thing ever said about football is that things even out over the course of a season - shut up whining and get on with it...

[Wiltshire Exile]

The years of bent refs towards foreign and fans of Man.U.reffing with one eye closed over.

A few meanings of the word "bent": corrupt, venal, fraudulent.....etc.. What evidence do you have that says referees are bent? As an ex-referee myself I would take great offence if I was accused of being bent. Crap, fair enough, but bent, never!

[selby]

Wiltshire exile the one in the semi final of the F.A.cup semi with Chesterfield was bent.
  It was then I realised 3rd division teams were not meant to get to a cup final no matter what.

[Syme]

Wiltshire exile the one in the semi final of the F.A.cup semi with Chesterfield was bent.
  It was then I realised 3rd division teams were not meant to get to a cup final no matter what.

Do you mean the first game? It was David Ellary in charge for that one. He gave Chesterfield a pen and sent off a Boro player in the first half, so if you mean that one he certainly went about it in an odd way. The decision not to give the goal, which the lino gave, was a shocker though.

[selby]

Not only did he disallow the goal he was cheating at the same time.

[Wiltshire Exile]

Not only did he disallow the goal he was cheating at the same time.

Do you know the meaning of cheating? Here is one definition: To act dishonestly in order to gain an advantage. If he was cheating as you suggest, then what did he have to gain? Did he have an 'arrangement' with someone or others, whereby he would be rewarded if he allowed or disallowed a goal? What evidence do you have that he was involved in such a conspiracy? For crying out loud! 

He might have made some bad decisions but that didn't make him bent or a cheat.

[Bentley Bullet]

Wiltshire Exile;

Mick Russell, 14 April 2012.

[Wiltshire Exile]

Wiltshire Exile;

Mick Russell, 14 April 2012.

Yes, BB, by all accounts he made some extraordinary decisions.......I can't comment as I wasn't there. But was he cheating? Was he bent? Was he fraudulent? Did he stand to gain from the result? Answer: No....x 4!

[Bentley Bullet]

WE

 I was there and I do think he was cheating. I'm not suggesting he cheated for financial gain, but more likely that he cheated through intimidation.

Dave K*ts*n came on and took command of the officials. He completely dictated Russell's decisions. I dare suggest that Russell was also intimidated by the Portsmouth fans.

Years ago, in the 70's I think, a top referee who had recently retired came out and admitted that he tended to favour the home team because they usually had the most intimidating support. I can't recollect his name but I'll try to find the article.

[Filo]

Although the correct decisions prevailed last night, I thought it spoiled the game a lttle as a spectacle and also the talking points

[The Red Baron]

WE

 I was there and I do think he was cheating. I'm not suggesting he cheated for financial gain, but more likely that he cheated through intimidation.

Dave K*ts*n came on and took command of the officials. He completely dictated Russell's decisions. I dare suggest that Russell was also intimidated by the Portsmouth fans.

Years ago, in the 70's I think, a top referee who had recently retired came out and admitted that he tended to favour the home team because they usually had the most intimidating support. I can't recollect his name but I'll try to find the article.

I don't think any money changed hands, but I do think the official concerned might have had something against us, for reasons unknown. It was not the first time he had made controversial decisions against us, although nothing on that level.

That was the thrust of JR's comments after the match, and although he was given a token fine, it is interesting that the referee was never put in charge of another Rovers game.

[The Red Baron]

By the way, it has been suggested that the EFL Cup could be used to trial the Video Assistant next season.

[Donnywolf]

Great bring it on . Less injustice would be great

Geoff Hurst / Maradonna / Kitson / Lampard / Thierry Henry all games could have had different outcomes

The worrying thing is watching TV when Rovers are away brings Howard Webb and others into "play" and Robbie Savage or Chris Sutton ask him to review something and almost always they look 5 or 6 times and still dont agree so there will still be "interpretation" featuring

If the replay is shown on the Big Screen or later on TV it could cause even more conversation not less.

[RedJ]

Aye but Howard Webb always agrees with the referee anyway the f**king toss pot.

[drfchound]

.......which is why the ref assessor never really reports the likes of Mick Russell in a way which would undermine the "refs club".

[Glyn_Wigley]

Great bring it on . Less injustice would be great

Geoff Hurst / Maradonna / Kitson / Lampard / Thierry Henry all games could have had different outcomes

The worrying thing is watching TV when Rovers are away brings Howard Webb and others into "play" and Robbie Savage or Chris Sutton ask him to review something and almost always they look 5 or 6 times and still dont agree so there will still be "interpretation" featuring

If the replay is shown on the Big Screen or later on TV it could cause even more conversation not less.

Exactly - there will always be incidents that are still not clear-cut even after video examination and be open to interpretation, and will still provide talking points in exactly the same way they do when they're seen on Match Of The Day as they are now. The important thing that this technology will bring is the eradication of the absolutely blatent crap decisions.

[bobjimwilly]

The important thing that this technology will bring is the eradication of the absolutely blatent crap decisions.

exactly!