Pardon this stupid question from one who does not really understand football. Why can't they add 2 more linesmen near the penalty box to assist the refree in his decisions?
If a tennis match which often involves only 2 players and a couple of thousand spectators at most can have an umpire and countless linesmen, and in badminton they have one guy who job solely is to check the low service, why can't they just appoint 2 guys solely to check for fouls in the penalty box? If it is a problem of cost, then just have it in the finals. Just think of all the agonies and problems it can prevent.
It is easy for the jounalists to criticize the Thai players for being unsporting and so on; but certainly it is possible to empathize with the sportsmen who train and fight so hard only to see victory slip away through someone else's human error.
10 comments:
Adding more linesmen would increase the chances of disagreements amongst themselves - my own personal opinion only.
Because human error is part of the game.
This is the lame excuse FIFA (the body governing football) gives every time someone brings up the topic of using video replays to help in critical decisions.
I suspect they just like the controversy that bad decisions create. Sells newspapers and football tickets.
So definitely no extra linesmen.
I think this is a case of 'If it is not broken, don't fix it'. Today football is big business enriching a lot of people and enterprises that goes with it - be it fifa, clubs,sponsors, advertisers, players and a host of others. The game is over a hundred years, started off in England, and big money is still gushing in, inspite of few changes made to the game. So far so good, hence nobody dare to mettle with its success and momentum. In fact the referee is sometime the centre of attraction, creating controveries, and a colourful love-hate relation with the fanatical fans. Remember the good old days when he was locally lambasted with the 'referee kayu' mantra, and became the live-wire to the game. He is in fact doing good to the society by being a safety valve where stressful fellows are able to let off their steam. With a river of fans' adrenaline flowing, who want changes ?
quite agree that more linesmen might just increase the chance of either disagreement or the need for lengthy discussions among the 'refereeing team' which would slow the game down. The game of rugby (just about to start watching the 'Six Nations' competition here in the UK) has a 'fourth official' who watches the recorded replays when asked and tells the ref. what the cameras show - all very well but it can take several minutes of waiting around - sometimes for a decision which the commentators at least have no doubt about.jzsrjqyg
i think 2 linesmen would be ok + refree, so even got disagreement, majority prevails
A Dutch friend of mine, a former sailor, told me this: "You know when we are in port, we behave very well, following all the rules of that country. As soon as we leave the port into international water, the usual practice is to pump all the accumulated rubbish toxic or otherwise, including dirty oil, into the sea". Now many world leaders call for environmental control but who are going to enforce compliant - green peace?
Sorry for posting the above comment in the wrong column. It is meant to be in tragedays.
Referee supposed to be professional,he is trained to be sharp and decisive in his judgement.Some players can be intentional or fake a foul.He has to use his judgement.He already has two linesman who he can check with. adding more linesman may not help.
Well, well, well. UEFA might experiment with five referees.
Does Michel Platini read your blog, Chun See? :P
I think Michel Platini also interested to know about Spore kampong life. And he must have read your comment.
Post a Comment