Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
Shades of Turkey v. Korea, on the second goal. The first one just... what was he looking at? And I don't understand the conference with the AR, afterwards. Did anyone see what happened at half-time? Looked like a bit of a pushing-shoving match as they were heading back to teh lockers.D.Turtle wrote:Man, Mexico is damn unlucky so far.
One offside goal that wasn't called, and one massively huge mistake from their defense, passing the ball to an Argentinian.
Sarquido for one, the guy couldn't hit the broad side of the barn from the inside, looks like. Mexico's main problem throughout the match, after the first 15 minutes, was that as soon as they crossed the center line, they stopped. Forward movement ceased, full stop. They kept passing back and forth sideways, never moving forward, which is what they should have done, because every time they did, Argentina was in trouble.Master of Ossus wrote:Several of Mexico's players have quit. I don't think they would have if it was 2-1, right now.
No, I think they've just shown that England were total rubbish.weemadando wrote: Congrats to Germany though. At least you've shown that your thorough decimation of Australia wasn't just because we were total rubbish.
Admittedly, this World Cup may be the one that tilts the balance in favor of video replay. It's been nothing but bad calls left and right. I'm still cheesed at the Mali ref during the US/Slovenia matchup for some of those assed-up calls.Edi wrote:The offside goal, and the fuckup with the England-Germany match all on the same day are probably going to cause a lot of talk.
It's plain as fucking day that the so-called "best referees in the world" are a bunch of incompetent shitlicking fuckups who must be kept under surveillance and all decisions regarding questionable goals verified from video replay.
You don't need video replay verification for everything, but goals and penalty shot calls should have it.
The refs have been asinine all the way through, it seems.No wonder Rosatti has no control over the game anymore, the Mexican players are not likely to consider any of his calls in favor of Argentina valid if there is the slightest question. I know I wouldn't.
Video replay would absolutely ruin soccer; it's annoying but not destructive in American football because there are natural stoppages all the time, but in basketball, when it is used, it really disrupts the flow of the game... even more so than timeouts.Agent Sorchus wrote:Honestly a video replay wouldn't have happened then, but a system closer to Hockey where the goal posts know might work.
How are you a former ref who calls them "side refs?" Also, that call is impossible for the AR--he's tracking with the offside line, which he has to cover, and a shot comes from about 25 yards with pace, while he's about at the edge of the box. There's no way he can get down to the goal line in time to see that ball cross the line.Agent Sorchus wrote:As a former ref watching the stolen English goal, I have got to say that I would have called it the exact same way. It was the Referee on the sides fault for not being on the game and watching the goal posts. For those of you saying that there should be some instant replay, I disagree. It would not have been possible to refer to an instant replay in this case, because play was still progressing; also the referee's maxim is to call on the side of the defense when in doubt, and to keep play moving if possible. As for placing another official on the goal line, that is the job of the side ref. The sideline referee seems to be the weakest part of the UK Germany game officials.
In hockey, a video replay would've been initiated at the next stoppage in play, and they would've seen that the ball crossed the goal line. It's a much better solution than FIFA's non-answer to the issue. FIFA has also had the technology to electronically track soccer balls since the 1990's and has been testing it since 2005.Honestly a video replay wouldn't have happened then, but a system closer to Hockey where the goal posts know might work.
Honestly it has been 5 years since I have been an official at a game. I have long forgotten specific terminology, but not the rules and guidelines that are part of the game. And despite not being on the goal line itself it is still the job and it is their own judgment on where they are needed more, following the offside line or waiting for the shot. Either way the AR can make the call if they are the only ones to see the goal.Master of Ossus wrote:How are you a former ref who calls them "side refs?" Also, that call is impossible for the AR--he's tracking with the offside line, which he has to cover, and a shot comes from about 25 yards with pace, while he's about at the edge of the box. There's no way he can get down to the goal line in time to see that ball cross the line.Agent Sorchus wrote:As a former ref watching the stolen English goal, I have got to say that I would have called it the exact same way. It was the Referee on the sides fault for not being on the game and watching the goal posts. For those of you saying that there should be some instant replay, I disagree. It would not have been possible to refer to an instant replay in this case, because play was still progressing; also the referee's maxim is to call on the side of the defense when in doubt, and to keep play moving if possible. As for placing another official on the goal line, that is the job of the side ref. The sideline referee seems to be the weakest part of the UK Germany game officials.
I am more talking about the net based sensors than the video review, but hockey was never my game so while I know that there is some form of automated detection of goals I do not fully understand how.In hockey, a video replay would've been initiated at the next stoppage in play, and they would've seen that the ball crossed the goal line. It's a much better solution than FIFA's non-answer to the issue. FIFA has also had the technology to electronically track soccer balls since the 1990's and has been testing it since 2005.Honestly a video replay wouldn't have happened then, but a system closer to Hockey where the goal posts know might work.
In this thread, Bluewolf dishes it out but can't take it.Bluewolf wrote:I love the idea that posting in a thread where someone has already snapped in it with such replies is a fantastic idea.
No, he can't. The offside line is his position at all times during the game. At no point should an AR abandon that position, except to handle substitutions when there is not a Fourth Official, at the referee's direction (perhaps to set a free kick closer to his natural position), to handle the goal line on a penalty kick, or to diffuse a situation on the field involving the potential or actual violent conduct of two or more players. In this situation, though, he can't possibly keep up with the offside line because the ball can be kicked faster than anyone can run over such a distance.Agent Sorchus wrote:Honestly it has been 5 years since I have been an official at a game. I have long forgotten specific terminology, but not the rules and guidelines that are part of the game. And despite not being on the goal line itself it is still the job and it is their own judgment on where they are needed more, following the offside line or waiting for the shot.
True, that is a situation for the AR to insist. My point is that there was no way he could get himself into position to make that call in time to see it properly. As a result, he would've had a terrible angle and been in very bad position to make the call.Either way the AR can make the call if they are the only ones to see the goal.
It's not an automated detection of goals. It involves video review.I am more talking about the net based sensors than the video review, but hockey was never my game so while I know that there is some form of automated detection of goals I do not fully understand how.
Hey maybe you can just rehash this gem for me...Bluewolf wrote:Oh just fuck off you little cunt.
Oh wait, I guess that is offensive like "limeys" right?Bluewolf wrote:You fucking fags...you fucking fags.
Oh I guess not.Bluewolf wrote:Oh boo I used a mean word. Whaaaaah.
Well he obviously needs lessons in how to talk proper shit without being a complete fucking douchebag about it.Coyote wrote:Oh, Hav, that's just mean.
Poor Bluey already has a complex.
Oh so you can dish it but you can't take it? "Oh please oh please leave me alone mr mean old american... I don't want to say anything else stupid and offensive!"Bluewolf wrote:I snapped in a fit of stupid emotion. I don't claim to say that it is acceptable to say that. I am just sick of you having to interject on this.
Oh and you call me a douchebag after your little tirade a couple of posts ago? Seriously?
Look, please just stop it. I am struggling with this thread and I really don't want to get myself banned over a world cup thead. Please just stop it and let me walk away.
Hey, I hear there is this thing called free will that would allow you to not keep typing responses. Fuck off you little cumm stain. Can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen, or I guess in this case, stay off the pitch... maybe you and your team can both stop embarrassing themselves. Oh wait, you can't.