Suarez handball

[matmat]

But when was this? Do you agree that goal line decisions are a rarer problem than the other three I mentioned?

certainly less common, but, imo, more important than any of them with the possible exception of resolving dives in the box.

 

If FIFA does not feel it has the authority or the guts to change decisions post-facto, I think that they should still review certain types of behaviour and make it unprofitable for things like diving to happen -- maybe extended (monthsworth of games, rather than one or two matches) suspensions, or reducing the number of substitutions a team can make in the following match.

[jjbrr]

agree with matmat.

 

I like in American sports that tapes of the games are scrutinized by some officials after the game is over and suspensions or fines can be given out to players for calls the refs missed or for things the refs don't enforce (like a game suspension after the 7th technical foul in basketball). The Kaka red card from a few games ago is a great example of the need for someone to review the tapes, reverse the red card, and impose a penalty on the cheater on the other team.

 

Obviously refereeing professional sports is a very challenging profession and it's impossible to be perfect. I don't think that's a reason for the players not to be held accountable when they egregiously break the rules.

[cherdanno]

Wow there is a lot of non-sense in this thread.

- You can't disallow intentional rule breaking, without opening the can of distinguishing between intentional and unintentional rule breaking. (And if you think intentional fouls at basketball only occur in the last 2 minutes, then you apparently haven't watched basketball, or you think the defenders are just so much more likely to bump into an offensive player who is about to score from close range. And if you think free-throws restore equity, I guess you haven't heard of Shaq.) Although I have to say football has been getting better in that respect, with more yellow cards handed out - e.g. automatic cards for a foul in many situations where it is clearly beneficial (stopping a counter-attack, stopping

- I don't get the distinction between an automatic suspension for a red card and an automatic suspension for a flagrant (flagrant 2/3?), xth technical etc. in basketball--ok I know flagrants/techincals get reviewed by the NBA, but it is still an automatic suspension unless

- In cases of flagrant misconduct football players can also be sanctioned when the referee missed their action (and red cards do get reviewed to see whether a longer suspension would be adequate).

- Restoring equity? Now for every handball we want the referee to judge whether the ball would have gone in without the handball? All while everyone is complaining about refs being unable to see whether a ball has gone in? Better keep with a simple, easily enforceable rule.

 

Anyway, to me this whole thing is quite comparable to bidding 5D w/r over their 4S even though you know you can't make 5D, and the opponent complaining that it was unfair he didn't get to play his cold 4S contract.

 

Btw, whether video replays can be used in football without too losing some of the flow to the game is really a difficult quesiton. Experimenting with it at the world cup would rather idiotic, and I don't understand the criticism of FIFA in that respect.

[matmat]

Btw, whether video replays can be used in football without too losing some of the flow to the game is really a difficult quesiton. Experimenting with it at the world cup would rather idiotic, and I don't understand the criticism of FIFA in that respect.

I agree with this, but I do think that if the technology for goal-line calls exists, it should be implemented above a certain level of the game (though it does need trials before it is used at the WC, of course).

 

As to the problem between distinguishing between intentional and unintentional rule breaking...

 

things that certainly deserve review are things like the kaka red card, or the incident at the last (or maybe the one before that) world cup when there was a ball kicked at a guy's shins out of the ref's view. the dude grabbed his face and started writhing in pain. the person who kicked the ball got sent off. stuff like that needs to be looked at and sanctioned, else there is incentive to break the rules.

 

Another thing that greatly irks me when i watch football is the number of times that an "injured" player jumps up and starts screaming to be let back onto the field when the stretcher they were being carried off on is put on the ground. I really think that there should be some sort of mandatory period, idk, maybe 60 or 90s for which this player cannot come back on. In the case of actual injuries this should be about the right time for the treatment, in the case of people faking it would be a sort of a mini-penalty.

[pooltuna]

[snip]- Restoring equity? Now for every handball we want the referee to judge whether the ball would have gone in without the handball? [snip]

 

That's not what I meant! I meant if there is a handball an assumption of scoring without the hand block is given. The referee only has to decide if it was a handball block.

[Phil]

- Restoring equity? Now for every handball we want the referee to judge whether the ball would have gone in without the handball? All while everyone is complaining about refs being unable to see whether a ball has gone in? Better keep with a simple, easily enforceable rule.

Not an exact parallel, but do you think every basketball within the cylinder where there is goaltending falls in for a field goal?

[cherdanno]

So what is your football equivalent of the cylinder? And how do you distinguish between a cross and a shot?

 

In football, you have to score a goal to be awarded a goal. I kind of like that rule.

[jdonn]

So what is your football equivalent of the cylinder? And how do you distinguish between a cross and a shot?

Don't worry about it, just make the rule apply to handballs committed (intentionally?) inside the small box directly in front of the goal.

[Phil]

So what is your football equivalent of the cylinder? And how do you distinguish between a cross and a shot?

 

In football, you have to score a goal to be awarded a goal. I kind of like that rule.

Others can opine on where to draw the line.

 

In the end, it does seem to me that if a player uses illegal means to stop a goal that there should be rectification.

 

It already seems there are ways to negate a goal when the offense scores and violates certain rules, so I (and others) are only asking that the reverse be true.

 

2-1 now Holland.

 

And another offsides not called. I dont think I know of a sport where so the result is at the mercy of the competency of the refs.

 

3-1 - beautiful header. Maybe before I finish this post they'll score again.

[pooltuna]

So what is your football equivalent of the cylinder? And how do you distinguish between a cross and a shot?

 

In football, you have to score a goal to be awarded a goal. I kind of like that rule.

my interpretation of that would be if it doesn't hit the net the goal doesnt count.

[RMB1]

... my interpretation of that would be if it doesn't hit the net the goal doesnt count.

That explains why England's second goal against Germany did not count. :(

 

How about awarding two penalties for a deliberate handball in the "six yard" box: that would remove the incentive but still only award goals for balls that go in the goal.

[Cascade]

... my interpretation of that would be if it doesn't hit the net the goal doesnt count.

That explains why England's second goal against Germany did not count. :(

 

How about awarding two penalties for a deliberate handball in the "six yard" box: that would remove the incentive but still only award goals for balls that go in the goal.

i like it.

 

Or 3 to score a maximum of 2

[cherdanno]

And another offsides not called. I dont think I know of a sport where so the result is at the mercy of the competency of the refs.

How about basketball? There are many close decisions between an offensive foul or calling for a 3-point play, which effectively makes a difference of about 2.7 points (or an offensive foul versus free throws. It's just that psychologically it doesn't make as big of a difference as in football, as in basketball the players still seems to have the game in their own hands (and we forget about the 3 more points they could have had). In other words, I think in football it's just more obvious than in basketball which games were unfairly decided by the referees.

[jdonn]

How about baseball? Some umpires seem to take pride in having their own personal strike zone even though it's specifically defined in the rules, and likewise take offense at not being able to call them the way they want.

[hotShot]

I have to point out one thing.

 

In the top leagues in Europe wrong decisions like the ones seen at the WC are extremely rare.

Unfortunately the top European referees are not allowed in games that involve their team or direct contenders of their teams.

So English, Spanish, German, Italian or French Top referees usually have no chance to be allowed to referee games after the group stage.

 

The same applies to the top South American referees.

 

So the quality of the referees at the WC is not as good as it could be.

[Free]

In the top leagues in Europe wrong decisions like the ones seen at the WC are extremely rare.

LOL

[Fluffy]

LOL referees in soccer suck worldwide

 

so far the "liniers" (assistant referees on the sides) are doing a great job in WC in the offsides, much better of what we are used to see in the top leagues.

 

worst part about referees in the top leagues is that they have an awful tendency towards helping the big teams. Of course the big teams don't even notice and think it is normal LOL. Then when they move to continental soccer and face an even bigger team start to complain about referees :)

[gwnn]

It's a little bit natural. If Sergio Busquets, the reputable Catalan defender, who would never dive, falls down and almost dies, he must have been seriously hit. If Diego Forlan, some obscure South American player with red and white stripes on his shirt, falls, who knows what happened? :)

[TimG]

How about baseball? Some umpires seem to take pride in having their own personal strike zone even though it's specifically defined in the rules, and likewise take offense at not being able to call them the way they want.

See this article for an analysis of MLB umpires and strike zones.