Blatter to stand down in 2015
- Thread starter HC
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
[quote author=Krump link=topic=44646.msg1303651#msg1303651 date=1300794907]
What's going to be so much better if he steps down?
The one thing he has protected the game from is the stupid stop start techno bollocks that all the armchairs seem to want.
[/quote]
Club Foot is starting, well not starting, it's been twatting my bongo in since it started getting use lad.
What's going to be so much better if he steps down?
The one thing he has protected the game from is the stupid stop start techno bollocks that all the armchairs seem to want.
[/quote]
Club Foot is starting, well not starting, it's been twatting my bongo in since it started getting use lad.
Natives might actually be afford to go watch the world cup after he's gone?/ all the tickets wont have been sold by his family to various corporations
The entire bidding process might not be so fubar'd
Im sure there's a gazillion things that could be improved onces he's fucked off.
The entire bidding process might not be so fubar'd
Im sure there's a gazillion things that could be improved onces he's fucked off.
I reckon whoever gets in is going to do so on a prospectus of additional technology and more transparency for voting for shit.
The former I'm actively against and the latter I don't care about.
But I'm ready to be shot down because everyone hates him so I must have missed something.
By the way, ticket prices won't come down EVER no matter who is in charge. So forget about that.
The former I'm actively against and the latter I don't care about.
But I'm ready to be shot down because everyone hates him so I must have missed something.
By the way, ticket prices won't come down EVER no matter who is in charge. So forget about that.
I largely agree Krump.
And I care not one jot about international football so they may as well let Burma have the next world cup.
And I care not one jot about international football so they may as well let Burma have the next world cup.
[quote author=Fallon link=topic=44646.msg1303975#msg1303975 date=1300830570]
How can anyone be against goal-line technology? It wouldn't disrupt the game anymore than Rooney and his shower berating a ref for 2 minutes every time they disagree with a decision.
[/quote]
The GAA in Ireland were in discussions with Hawkeye about introducing the goalline technology.
The major stumbling block turned out to be Hawkeye's insistence that any TV replay involving the use of Hawkeye became their intellectual property - entitling Hawkeye to royalties when a replay is shown I'd imagine.
I'd be willing to bet there is a massive reluctance in FIFA and UEFA to allow Hawkeye have a big slice of the TV money pie. There is no strong justifiable argument against having refereeing decisions made correctly.
How can anyone be against goal-line technology? It wouldn't disrupt the game anymore than Rooney and his shower berating a ref for 2 minutes every time they disagree with a decision.
[/quote]
The GAA in Ireland were in discussions with Hawkeye about introducing the goalline technology.
The major stumbling block turned out to be Hawkeye's insistence that any TV replay involving the use of Hawkeye became their intellectual property - entitling Hawkeye to royalties when a replay is shown I'd imagine.
I'd be willing to bet there is a massive reluctance in FIFA and UEFA to allow Hawkeye have a big slice of the TV money pie. There is no strong justifiable argument against having refereeing decisions made correctly.
I'll do it.
[quote author=Fallon link=topic=44646.msg1303990#msg1303990 date=1300831883]
That's very understandable, they may be open to negotations again now though as they've just been bought out (by Sony I think), if not I'm sure there must be a similar technology available where the company wouldn't be such divvys.
[/quote]
Yup Sony completed the take over a few weeks back.
Possibly my ultimate nightmare, football being ran by Sony and Sky!
That's very understandable, they may be open to negotations again now though as they've just been bought out (by Sony I think), if not I'm sure there must be a similar technology available where the company wouldn't be such divvys.
[/quote]
Yup Sony completed the take over a few weeks back.
Possibly my ultimate nightmare, football being ran by Sony and Sky!
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=44646.msg1303964#msg1303964 date=1300829589]
The new president is apparently some bloke from Qatar, Blatter is only standing so there has to be an election but it's expected the Qatari fella will win.
[/quote]
Who, when interviewed on TV yesterday , insisted there will be a lot more international friendlies :🙂
I have no issue with technology, it seems to be natural progress to me, and has been a success in other sports.
regards
The new president is apparently some bloke from Qatar, Blatter is only standing so there has to be an election but it's expected the Qatari fella will win.
[/quote]
Who, when interviewed on TV yesterday , insisted there will be a lot more international friendlies :🙂
I have no issue with technology, it seems to be natural progress to me, and has been a success in other sports.
regards
Goal line technology would solve about three issues a year... The problem I have with that one is it's the thin end of the wedge. I don't want it to ever get like rugby where the ref ends up giving every major decision to the TV. It kills the live spectacle, and in football it would change the professional game from the kids on the park for the first time ever.
[quote author=Krump link=topic=44646.msg1304006#msg1304006 date=1300833254]
Goal line technology would solve about three issues a year... The problem I have with that one is it's the thin end of the wedge. I don't want it to ever get like rugby where the ref ends up giving every major decision to the TV. It kills the live spectacle, and in football it would change the professional game from the kids on the park for the first time ever.
[/quote]
I dont know a single serious rugby fan who wasnt pro introduction of video technology. The players like it, the fans like it.
Don't see why it has to have a negative impact on football either, overpaid cheating fags are ruining the game on the pitch, perhaps a stick approach could see a return to honest football being played.
Football is a far more flowing sport than rugby so itd obviously be implemented differently. At present we see players surrounding the ref and rolling around on the floor for a minute plus. Instead of that, 10 seconds can be spent whilst the ref makes a fair decision minus the hysterics. I don't see the problem..
Goal line technology would solve about three issues a year... The problem I have with that one is it's the thin end of the wedge. I don't want it to ever get like rugby where the ref ends up giving every major decision to the TV. It kills the live spectacle, and in football it would change the professional game from the kids on the park for the first time ever.
[/quote]
I dont know a single serious rugby fan who wasnt pro introduction of video technology. The players like it, the fans like it.
Don't see why it has to have a negative impact on football either, overpaid cheating fags are ruining the game on the pitch, perhaps a stick approach could see a return to honest football being played.
Football is a far more flowing sport than rugby so itd obviously be implemented differently. At present we see players surrounding the ref and rolling around on the floor for a minute plus. Instead of that, 10 seconds can be spent whilst the ref makes a fair decision minus the hysterics. I don't see the problem..
I could think of at least a dozen goals/no goals, that would have benefited from such tech, this year alone. I can understand (to an extent, as I think people vastly undertime the stoppages currently in the game) not wanting it to ever get like Rugby/NFL, but something like that which can be flashed to a video board 10 seconds later (while the celebrations are going on) can only be helpful in the long run, especially with the potential for a £50Million game or two a season (relegation/promotion situations).
If it stops the players being cunts, then I'm in favour of almost anything.
I don't know about most rugby fans but I do know that I've stopped going to internationals because of it. To be fair, the live spectacle was always a lot harder to follow than footy anyways - you've got no chance of seeing what's going on in a scrum or maul, but the crowd doesn't know when to cheer now. When something happens or when the TV ref approves it. It seems farcical to me.
And as for the argument that it would help the players behave... How exactly? That was not a problem that rugby had to cure. The players never gave the ref any shit pre TV replays because they'd be sent off. That's all football needs to do, send off a few moaning bastards as soon as they opened their mouths and the whole thing stop virtually overnight. Nothing to do with TV replays, it's a simple matter of punishment.
The other thing is, I reckon a lot of football's appeal is down to the fact that it all happens to so quickly and later on we can feel like we got a lucky one or we got robbed. It makes for most of the talking points. It is unfair, it relies on quick decisions that can go either way, and it mirrors life perfectly. I'd argue it's why many billions more people round the globe love it over rugby, which is another very good reason for not taking any tips off a comparatively minority sport.
People mentioning the massive screen that everyone could see. Have you ever even been to Anfield? We don't have one. The majority of people who I meet who want technology aren't regular matchgoers. They just see the injustices replayed 30 times on sky, but when you're at the game you see it once like the ref and take a view. Seconds later the game had moved on and it's done. I personally love that. If it had to stop all the time it would kill it for me.
And as for the argument that it would help the players behave... How exactly? That was not a problem that rugby had to cure. The players never gave the ref any shit pre TV replays because they'd be sent off. That's all football needs to do, send off a few moaning bastards as soon as they opened their mouths and the whole thing stop virtually overnight. Nothing to do with TV replays, it's a simple matter of punishment.
The other thing is, I reckon a lot of football's appeal is down to the fact that it all happens to so quickly and later on we can feel like we got a lucky one or we got robbed. It makes for most of the talking points. It is unfair, it relies on quick decisions that can go either way, and it mirrors life perfectly. I'd argue it's why many billions more people round the globe love it over rugby, which is another very good reason for not taking any tips off a comparatively minority sport.
People mentioning the massive screen that everyone could see. Have you ever even been to Anfield? We don't have one. The majority of people who I meet who want technology aren't regular matchgoers. They just see the injustices replayed 30 times on sky, but when you're at the game you see it once like the ref and take a view. Seconds later the game had moved on and it's done. I personally love that. If it had to stop all the time it would kill it for me.
I with Krump on this.... Bollox to technology. If you took away the controversial decsions made by refs what would people talk about. Thats the beauty of the game.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
[quote author=Krump link=topic=44646.msg1304215#msg1304215 date=1300876968]
I don't know about most rugby fans but I do know that I've stopped going to internationals because of it. To be fair, the live spectacle was always a lot harder to follow than footy anyways - you've got no chance of seeing what's going on in a scrum or maul, but the crowd doesn't know when to cheer now. When something happens or when the TV ref approves it. It seems farcical to me.
And as for the argument that it would help the players behave... How exactly? That was not a problem that rugby had to cure. The players never gave the ref any shit pre TV replays because they'd be sent off. That's all football needs to do, send off a few moaning bastards as soon as they opened their mouths and the whole thing stop virtually overnight. Nothing to do with TV replays, it's a simple matter of punishment.
The other thing is, I reckon a lot of football's appeal is down to the fact that it all happens to so quickly and later on we can feel like we got a lucky one or we got robbed. It makes for most of the talking points. It is unfair, it relies on quick decisions that can go either way, and it mirrors life perfectly. I'd argue it's why many billions more people round the globe love it over rugby, which is another very good reason for not taking any tips off a comparatively minority sport.
People mentioning the massive screen that everyone could see. Have you ever even been to Anfield? We don't have one. The majority of people who I meet who want technology aren't regular matchgoers. They just see the injustices replayed 30 times on sky, but when you're at the game you see it once like the ref and take a view. Seconds later the game had moved on and it's done. I personally love that. If it had to stop all the time it would kill it for me.
[/quote]
i agree
the only change i'd want in our game is the temp spray paint to measure out 10 yards. that really fucks me off
I don't know about most rugby fans but I do know that I've stopped going to internationals because of it. To be fair, the live spectacle was always a lot harder to follow than footy anyways - you've got no chance of seeing what's going on in a scrum or maul, but the crowd doesn't know when to cheer now. When something happens or when the TV ref approves it. It seems farcical to me.
And as for the argument that it would help the players behave... How exactly? That was not a problem that rugby had to cure. The players never gave the ref any shit pre TV replays because they'd be sent off. That's all football needs to do, send off a few moaning bastards as soon as they opened their mouths and the whole thing stop virtually overnight. Nothing to do with TV replays, it's a simple matter of punishment.
The other thing is, I reckon a lot of football's appeal is down to the fact that it all happens to so quickly and later on we can feel like we got a lucky one or we got robbed. It makes for most of the talking points. It is unfair, it relies on quick decisions that can go either way, and it mirrors life perfectly. I'd argue it's why many billions more people round the globe love it over rugby, which is another very good reason for not taking any tips off a comparatively minority sport.
People mentioning the massive screen that everyone could see. Have you ever even been to Anfield? We don't have one. The majority of people who I meet who want technology aren't regular matchgoers. They just see the injustices replayed 30 times on sky, but when you're at the game you see it once like the ref and take a view. Seconds later the game had moved on and it's done. I personally love that. If it had to stop all the time it would kill it for me.
[/quote]
i agree
the only change i'd want in our game is the temp spray paint to measure out 10 yards. that really fucks me off
I think there should be a sysyem of retrospective punishment for blatant cheating.
If a player dives to get a penalty, that wins a match, the outcome of the game might not be changed but it might make any player think twice about diving if he knew there was a strong possibility of retrospective punishment, say a three game ban
If a player dives to get a penalty, that wins a match, the outcome of the game might not be changed but it might make any player think twice about diving if he knew there was a strong possibility of retrospective punishment, say a three game ban
[quote author=Krump link=topic=44646.msg1304242#msg1304242 date=1300878556]
See that's another example of inequality. Say we're playing Arsenal and they've got Manure the next week.
Van Herpes dives and wins a pen, scores it and they win. We suffer. Next week Van Herpes is banned. Manure gain.
It maka no sensa
[/quote] That's very valid Krump but the point of the exercise would be to reduce cheating in such incidences, so as this wouldn't arise in the first case.
I stand by what I say about retrospective punishment for cheating although there may have to be a more subtle way of administering the punishment.
See that's another example of inequality. Say we're playing Arsenal and they've got Manure the next week.
Van Herpes dives and wins a pen, scores it and they win. We suffer. Next week Van Herpes is banned. Manure gain.
It maka no sensa
[/quote] That's very valid Krump but the point of the exercise would be to reduce cheating in such incidences, so as this wouldn't arise in the first case.
I stand by what I say about retrospective punishment for cheating although there may have to be a more subtle way of administering the punishment.
I think that being robbed by a ref via a bad decision and not being able to moan at length about the injustice/good fortune of it all is an intrinsic part of football.
Before we start sticking snickometer and thermal wotsits everywhere to make sure the game is perfect I think we should start by insisting that the players shut the fuck up when a decision is made against them and get on with the game instead of berating/harrassing the ref, that for me would be a far better addition to our game, dissent automatic yellow, getting in the refs face straight red no arguments. I'm not saying that the ref is always right but i am saying that the ref should always be respected regardless, what we have at the minute is a blight on the game.
As for Blatter the fact that the world cup is such a crooked money spinner for a kleptocracy, it will not change for the better if the Sheikh takes over, at least it wont in my little Englander mind which objects to my national game being run by foriegners generally.
The governance of football is a disgrace IMO.
Before we start sticking snickometer and thermal wotsits everywhere to make sure the game is perfect I think we should start by insisting that the players shut the fuck up when a decision is made against them and get on with the game instead of berating/harrassing the ref, that for me would be a far better addition to our game, dissent automatic yellow, getting in the refs face straight red no arguments. I'm not saying that the ref is always right but i am saying that the ref should always be respected regardless, what we have at the minute is a blight on the game.
As for Blatter the fact that the world cup is such a crooked money spinner for a kleptocracy, it will not change for the better if the Sheikh takes over, at least it wont in my little Englander mind which objects to my national game being run by foriegners generally.
The governance of football is a disgrace IMO.
[quote author=El Pistolero link=topic=44646.msg1304224#msg1304224 date=1300877479]
I with Krump on this.... Bollox to technology. If you took away the controversial decsions made by refs what would people talk about. Thats the beauty of the game.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
[/quote]
Nonsense. The beauty of the game it's not the incompetent refereeing of it and the subsequent "punditry" that Sky provide on bad decisions that they fill hours of their programming with while ignoring what is the beautiful part of the game. The skill and strategy involved.
I with Krump on this.... Bollox to technology. If you took away the controversial decsions made by refs what would people talk about. Thats the beauty of the game.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
[/quote]
Nonsense. The beauty of the game it's not the incompetent refereeing of it and the subsequent "punditry" that Sky provide on bad decisions that they fill hours of their programming with while ignoring what is the beautiful part of the game. The skill and strategy involved.
S
Squiggles
Guest
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=44646.msg1304273#msg1304273 date=1300880994]
[quote author=El Pistolero link=topic=44646.msg1304224#msg1304224 date=1300877479]
I with Krump on this.... Bollox to technology. If you took away the controversial decsions made by refs what would people talk about. Thats the beauty of the game.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
[/quote]
Nonsense. The beauty of the game it's not the incompetent refereeing of it and the subsequent "punditry" that Sky provide on bad decisions that they fill hours of their programming with while ignoring what is the beautiful part of the game. The skill and strategy involved.
[/quote]
Spot on.
FIFA clearly know what they're doing.
[quote author=El Pistolero link=topic=44646.msg1304224#msg1304224 date=1300877479]
I with Krump on this.... Bollox to technology. If you took away the controversial decsions made by refs what would people talk about. Thats the beauty of the game.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
[/quote]
Nonsense. The beauty of the game it's not the incompetent refereeing of it and the subsequent "punditry" that Sky provide on bad decisions that they fill hours of their programming with while ignoring what is the beautiful part of the game. The skill and strategy involved.
[/quote]
Spot on.
FIFA clearly know what they're doing.
[quote author=Rosco link=topic=44646.msg1304273#msg1304273 date=1300880994]
[quote author=El Pistolero link=topic=44646.msg1304224#msg1304224 date=1300877479]
I with Krump on this.... Bollox to technology. If you took away the controversial decsions made by refs what would people talk about. Thats the beauty of the game.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
[/quote]
Nonsense. The beauty of the game it's not the incompetent refereeing of it and the subsequent "punditry" that Sky provide on bad decisions that they fill hours of their programming with while ignoring what is the beautiful part of the game. The skill and strategy involved.
[/quote]
Can't agree to be honest, the perfect game would be boring. There nothing better than having a convio in the boozer after the game talking about controversial moments. If they brought tech in the game would be completly sanitaised. Yes its not good when decsions go against you, but it makes it sweeter when it happens against the oppo. Would the champs leauge semi have been sweeter had the "ghost goal" been adjudicated by tech. Would we get the chance to see maureen repeatedly spit feathers for poor decsions, likewise with fergie. What would be the point of end of match interviews, they are normally to discuss these very moments. Nah it would be fooking shite!
[quote author=El Pistolero link=topic=44646.msg1304224#msg1304224 date=1300877479]
I with Krump on this.... Bollox to technology. If you took away the controversial decsions made by refs what would people talk about. Thats the beauty of the game.
66 was it wasn't it.
Maureen ghost goal.
Sunderland pen last week.
All these things wouldnt be talked about at all after a game if technology would have been avaliable.
[/quote]
Nonsense. The beauty of the game it's not the incompetent refereeing of it and the subsequent "punditry" that Sky provide on bad decisions that they fill hours of their programming with while ignoring what is the beautiful part of the game. The skill and strategy involved.
[/quote]
Can't agree to be honest, the perfect game would be boring. There nothing better than having a convio in the boozer after the game talking about controversial moments. If they brought tech in the game would be completly sanitaised. Yes its not good when decsions go against you, but it makes it sweeter when it happens against the oppo. Would the champs leauge semi have been sweeter had the "ghost goal" been adjudicated by tech. Would we get the chance to see maureen repeatedly spit feathers for poor decsions, likewise with fergie. What would be the point of end of match interviews, they are normally to discuss these very moments. Nah it would be fooking shite!
- Status
Similar threads
