I would go along with that. Whilst IFAB attempted to learn things from rugby, they were the wrong things. Moving play forward 10 yards following dissent by the offending team was always going to have difficulties outside of the penalty area etc, though the one I thing they could have introduced they didn’t viz penalty goal. If a player on the goal line handles it to prevent the ball from entering the goal net, although he would be sent off, the resulting penalty could be missed - so doesn’t really fit the crime, though a penalty goal would.
Aston Villa v Newcastle
- Thread starter ladbroke8745
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
one
RefChat Addict
I am
and it won't be a new idea. For example Futsal has 2 referees for the pitch, a third for the benches and a timekeeper at highest level but a lone referee at grassroots. Even football goes from one official (well official is not the same as referee) in grassroots to more than a handful in the higher levels. Obviously system has to adapt depending on the number of officials.
penalty goal makes a lot of sense
genuinely very few scenarios where it would be enacted (and you'd need some very prescriptive wording around its implementation in law) however each one would add a positive impact to the game
i actually really liked the 10 yards/dissent trial - would suggest the implementation could change to the team can move the ball anywhere they want in a 10 radius from the position of the ball rather than a strict 10 yards towards goal application
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Adding a whistle (or whistles)is going to suffer from the fact it was trialed in the past (2 whistles plus 2 linesman—I’m pretty sure the trials were before we moved to “AR”) and were considered an abysmal failure such that I believe the trial was stopped early.
That said, the trial was in the era when ITOOTR was a core philosophy of the Game. (For those with less gray hair, the definition of fouls used to include “if in the opinion of the referee.”) As the powers that be have tried more and more to turn the subjective into the objective, there may well be less variation in foul thresholds when the trials took place, and the existence of voice activated comms can matter too—each ref would know exactly what warnings had been given, etc. So a trial might look very different today. In the U.S. today, I’m pretty sure there are still high schools and colleges (not around me) that use a three whistles system with, roughly, the ARs coming onto the field with whistles—in some places they rotate rolls a third of the way through the game. And there are many places in the U.S. where high school and college are done with the dual system (two Rs, no ARs). Done improperly, each R stops at or about the halfway line; done properly, the lead R advances in position akin to an AR and the trail R has a position akin to a single R—much better coverage, but brutal in transition, which is why many refs are lazy and stop at the halfway line. (Many rec leagues, especially ones not affiliated with USSF use the dual system as well; affiliated leagues are prohibited from doing so, but some do anyway.) Most refs I’ve talked to who have tried these (or worked extensively in them)much prefer the R/2AR model. My experience with the dual system (rec and high school) is that it isn’t terrible at that level so long as the 2 Rs are on the same page. But when they aren’t (different foil thresholds, different views on what “deliberate means on HB), different dissent thresholds), one wants to run the dual properly and the other doesn’t, it’s a hot mess.
That said, the trial was in the era when ITOOTR was a core philosophy of the Game. (For those with less gray hair, the definition of fouls used to include “if in the opinion of the referee.”) As the powers that be have tried more and more to turn the subjective into the objective, there may well be less variation in foul thresholds when the trials took place, and the existence of voice activated comms can matter too—each ref would know exactly what warnings had been given, etc. So a trial might look very different today. In the U.S. today, I’m pretty sure there are still high schools and colleges (not around me) that use a three whistles system with, roughly, the ARs coming onto the field with whistles—in some places they rotate rolls a third of the way through the game. And there are many places in the U.S. where high school and college are done with the dual system (two Rs, no ARs). Done improperly, each R stops at or about the halfway line; done properly, the lead R advances in position akin to an AR and the trail R has a position akin to a single R—much better coverage, but brutal in transition, which is why many refs are lazy and stop at the halfway line. (Many rec leagues, especially ones not affiliated with USSF use the dual system as well; affiliated leagues are prohibited from doing so, but some do anyway.) Most refs I’ve talked to who have tried these (or worked extensively in them)much prefer the R/2AR model. My experience with the dual system (rec and high school) is that it isn’t terrible at that level so long as the 2 Rs are on the same page. But when they aren’t (different foil thresholds, different views on what “deliberate means on HB), different dissent thresholds), one wants to run the dual properly and the other doesn’t, it’s a hot mess.
betterlatethannever
New Member
Where do you find stuff from Graham Scott? I’ve seen him mentioned a few times as being well spoken but cannot find any of his quotes anywhere (I’m not on social media!)
He writes an article in the telegraph but you have to pay to see that! Otherwise he's been on podcasts and other bits recently I believe.
t
talkSPORT seem to have dropped both Keith Hackett and Mark Halsey in favour of him when they want to talk refereeing, and that is one of the better decisions any broadcaster has ever made.
Example here
He
i used to like Mike Halsey as a Referee but my estimation has gone down with him seeking for Howard W to step down. One thing GS has over KH & MH is relevance with him only coming off the PL in 2025.
Agree, I liked him as a referee but as a refereeing "expert" he speaks absolute nonsense. Has developed the Hackett trait of almost always going against whatever the referee did, even if doing so contradicted what he had said previously in the season for a near identical incident.
Shame talksport dropped the 'men in black' feature with Sam Matterface and Chris Foy as I think Sam actually asked the right type of questions and bring up his own arguments in a fair way unlike Jeff Stelling the other day when they talked about this incident and how Jeff shouted down at Chris when explaining how VAR has made refs scared, the fact Chris was seen rolling his eyes says it all.
I also seen Graham Scott speaking on the Rooney podcast about this incident and the fact the presenter admitted they kept Graham on longer than planned suggests he must of been interesting articulate to listen too so I think other broadcasters may definitely look at him in the future potentially.
ladbroke8745
Censorship
Like Suarez in the World Cup?