Macros, on 05 March 2013 - 09:50 PM, said:
you really do make a compelling case for why I often wonder why anyone would want to be a ref.
I make a mistake at work I generally blow something up, sometimes its expensive shit. But I don't get death threats and only my boss calls me stupid or a piece of shit.
never been called a peasant
ETA: I know you're not a Brit Gothos, I was suggesting you become one of the horrid middle england fuckwits who blame mistakes anyone who doesn't speak english on them being a bloody stupid foreigner rather than just accepting that people make mistakes.
I haven't seen the decision yet but I have no desire to see a game where we stop for video reffing every turn around. Because make no mistake, if something like that were to come in, refs would have to use it all the time to stop them getting abuse from the whining primadonas that play the game these days.
ETA - talking to a more level headed fan there, says in honesty the ref was out of his depth for this game, but still I do not EVER want to see video reffing in football. Goalline tech I can accept as it will be (if it works how I tihnk it will) quick and painless.
The card that was called for, imho, was orange. Since that doesn't exist it can go two ways and the referee (who has a history of being quick with cards) chose red. As BrynnSatan shows in his post, that was a plausible explanation of the rules.
I think Nani had time and space to take an extra step and take it on the bounce, a much easier, less showy way of controlling the ball. Even if Arbeloa had got to it first, his pace was such that he'd have walked/kicked it over the sidelines, I'd say.
I am not against video referee-ing. Having seen it work in rugby on tries and in American Football on plays (as well as in tennis), it is very easy: X challenges per half, and only a referee's call on the field can be challenged. If your challenge is correct, you won't lose it. It won't be disruptive in any way and it would end this awful discussion about the referee that plagues modern day football. If the coach sees it better than the ref, the game becomes more honest. If the ref sees is better, his credibility is reinforced. And referee credibility is what is at stake for years now.
Face it, you let a talented hobbyist referee two teams filled with pro's on millions per year contracts. Until the referees become full time professionals with educational back-up, schooling and clout, they will never be on par and will remain easy scapegoats. Such a program is easily affordable for FIFA/ UEFA and would set standards equal.
In the current system, if something happens on the field that ought to be penalized is missed by the referee and assistants, there is already the disciplinary board that can make the call and ban a player for several games. Retroactive penalties thus do already exist. I guess the one downside to this means that referees should show advantage way more than they do, to show whether or not they miss something.
Regarding the game: Mourinho (by bringing on Modric) changed it in ways United couldn't answer. United's initial game plan was excellent albeit very defensive, and while Khedira got a surprising amount of space, he did very little with it. Rafael was imho the best man on the pitch, followed closely by Giggs, Cleverly and Carrick.
It all came apart with the red card. Yes, it had to do with being a man down, but Modric consistently found space between the lines and I think pulling Wellbeck or Van Persie off and bringing Rooney (who can sit deeper and can shadow Alonso/Modric better than either of the other two) was called for. Ferguson didn't and United paid for it.
Everyone is entitled to his own wrong opinion. - Lizrad
Help
So far, anyway! But I feel like I'm in a better position to handle the work this time.
