Euro 2008 thread
#101
Posted 2008-June-21, 09:01
- hrothgar
#102
Posted 2008-June-21, 11:21
Codo, on Jun 20 2008, 09:44 AM, said:
That's right.
Wembley goal? OK, but no one became more referee gifts in final matches of the World Cup's than Germany, do you remember these both penalties in 1974 and 1990, "free flights" produced by Hölzenbein and Völler?

#103
Posted 2008-June-21, 15:16
1) Who is responsible that the equipment is working?
What should happen, if the camera fails?
2) What about clubs / countries that cannot afford the equipment?
Are they not allowed to compeat any more?
3) How can you prevent cheating?
Cheating will get a new dimension, it is possible that a computer grid can manipulate the video signal in real time, so that the video referee, will get a false picture of the situation.
The only methods would be that the referee team comes with their own equipment. Instead of 3 referees you will just need a few trucks full of technical equipment and 20-50 people.
#104
Posted 2008-June-21, 15:18
The teams that had their bad game in the group phase, kicked out 3 group winners (Portugal, Netherlands, Croatia) now.
#105
Posted 2008-June-21, 15:26
George Carlin
#106
Posted 2008-June-21, 15:35
We will see if Spain can win their match.
#107
Posted 2008-June-21, 15:54
But Russia was better.
- hrothgar
#108
Posted 2008-June-22, 05:55
And I disagree that the Russians played 3 levels above their usual level. They did extrtemly well against Sweden, so it was no surprise that they are so good. It was a surprise that the Netherlands and Croatia had been so bad.
It was no big surprise that Germany -Portugal was so close and I think Italies chances are not bad either.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#109
Posted 2008-June-22, 12:25

George Carlin
#110
Posted 2008-June-25, 05:51
In terms of the logistics of videoing the incident, well one only needs to look at Rugby Union where decisions on contentious tries are, at the discresion of the match referee, sent to the television match official who has a million and one camera angles to consult to determine the outcome. The integration of this into the game has been seemless and widely regarded as a success.
Can't they do something like that in American football when the coach challenges a refereeing decision? I'm sure other sports have other examples of how doable this move is. Logistics is not the problem, it's people being unwilling to change tradition that are holding it back. I for one would encourage what I believe would be a positive change.
I watched the Italy-Spain match in the Old Town Square in Prague on the big screen. It was a great atmosphere. I was half-rooting for Italy but I suppose I'm happy Spain are through as they seem to be the only out-and-out attacking football team left, what with Portugal and Netherlands out.
I also hope Turkey continues their great run. Their late comebacks have provided so much entertainment. With their 13 available men for tonight's game, I'm eager to see if the 3rd choice keeper comes on as a striker and scores the winner in injury time.

Of course I won't be watching the match because I play 5-a-side on wednesday evenings, grr...
#111
Posted 2008-June-25, 06:12

#112
Posted 2008-June-25, 07:05
brianshark, on Jun 25 2008, 12:51 PM, said:
Can't they do something like that in American football when the coach challenges a refereeing decision? I'm sure other sports have other examples of how doable this move is. Logistics is not the problem, it's people being unwilling to change tradition that are holding it back. I for one would encourage what I believe would be a positive change.
I don't think it's just logistics, it's about whether you stop the game or not. In football if the referee decides
- the challenge was not a foul; or
- the ball did not go out of play; or
- the player was not off-side,
then play continues, and indeed could continue for quite some time (and with more decisions for the ref to make) before the next stop in play. So if you can't make these decisions instantaneously you have a problem. In the sports which already have video refereeing, play has generally already stopped by the time the decision needs to be made.
I am in favour of technology for making decisions, but only for decisions of fact which can be made instantaneously (by some sort of computer), not for judgement decisions. For example:
- Did the ball cross the line?
- Was the player standing in an off-side position when the ball was played?
- Which team was the last to touch the ball before it went out of play?
In principle these things could be computerised and a signal sent to the linesman when such an event occurred, who would then flag in the normal way. A spectator wouldn't notice any difference.
But the first of these is by far the easiest to implement, since it only involves keeping track of one roughly spherical object, not 22 irregularly-shaped objects. So I'd like to see them implement technology for goal-line decisions first, and see how that goes. Automatic checking for off-sides would be of far greater benefit (they're so difficult for the linesman to get right), and I think it must be possible with sufficiently good technology, but it's so much harder to implement.
#113
Posted 2008-June-25, 08:52
cherdano, on Jun 25 2008, 07:12 AM, said:

tja Turkey has to play with Team B/C ( red, yellow cards, injuries) vs german tank

#114
Posted 2008-June-25, 09:18
cherdano, on Jun 25 2008, 02:12 PM, said:

Turkey is on the list with currently 1 vote.
#115
Posted 2008-June-25, 16:24
maybe this boils down to the saying "those who live by the sword, die by the sword"
anyway we're proud of our team for their resilience and the excitement they brought.
#116
Posted 2008-June-25, 16:43
George Carlin
#117
Posted 2008-June-26, 01:26
But all the teams which had a long pause (or even more the teams who create a long pause by playing with their B-team in the 3. game) played way worse then before.
Fot the game: It had not been the better team which won this semifinal. Just the team with more luck when they shoot at the goal. The Turks had about 8 great opportunities, we had about 4.
They played a great game, we fought. But so many lost duels, so many bad passes.
Roland
Sanity Check: Failure (Fluffy)
More system is not the answer...
#118
Posted 2008-June-26, 02:14
George Carlin
#119
Posted 2008-June-26, 02:25
gwnn, on Jun 26 2008, 12:43 AM, said:
Seems that the player feel that the confidence from the last victory is fading, while the pressure to win the next KO-match is growing. If the pause is to long, the confidence is gone and they start the game too nervous.
During the KO-phase of championships good games have been rare and will be rare in future.
#120
Posted 2008-June-26, 03:40
bb79, on Jun 25 2008, 05:24 PM, said:
maybe this boils down to the saying "those who live by the sword, die by the sword"
anyway we're proud of our team for their resilience and the excitement they brought.
There exists a truth, in the past quite often proved to be false:
"Soccer is a simple game: 11 men chase the ball for 90
minutes and at the end the german win." By Gary Lineker
Hopefully this truth is valid on Sunday.
With kind regards
Marlowe
Uwe Gebhardt (P_Marlowe)