In fact it's not on the way, unfortunately Kelly. I'm totally with you that we should have it though. The sinister Swiss, Sepp Blatter and other administrators in the game believe that reviewing action replays would slow the game down too much. Others say that refereeing mistakes for and against a particular team even themselves out over the course of a season. But I'm just not buying it.
I do think that having one or more challenge per game would be too much. The danger then would be that they could be misused as a tactical ploy in order to disrupt the flow of the game.
One solution might be to give every team something like five opportunities to challenge a referee's decision per season. In that case teams would only use their reviews for serious incidents and would be unlikely to misuse them.
Q. Why do teams often bring on substitutes with only one or two minutes left?
Good question. I think the main reason is to waste time. Referees are supposed to give 30 seconds added time for every substitution, but in reality I don't think this always happens. Also, if a player walks of slowly he can waste a lot more than 30 seconds.
Added time itself has become a kind of archaic anachronism. The amount of time which is added is no more than a best guess from the referee and I don't think there is an established method for how it's calculated. In any case, referees are not even bound by the amount of added time given. There was a famous incident in 2007 where the referee ended the match two minutes into four minutes of injury time..........in the Champions League final!!
I'm sure that an algorithm could be designed to accurately calculate how much added time there should be at the end of each half. And an automatic hooter could be used to finish games. It's only the intransigence of Blatter and his corrupt cronies stopping that from happening.
Q. What is the point of making decisions on red cards retrospectively?
I agree that the way it is done currently is not good enough.
The corpulent West Ham manager Sam Allardyce has argued that a team can be doubly punished if an opposition player is not sent off during a game but is banned retrospectively. For example, if Chelsea play Leicester City and Diego Costa is not sent off but is given a three match ban afterwards that would negatively affect Leicester again if Chelsea were due to play Burnley next.
Perhaps any red card could automatically be reviewed on the action replay since there is a stoppage anyway. If not, opposition teams should be given a choice of whether an opponent be banned retrospectively or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment