Bolton Wanderers Forum The-Wanderer.co.uk

New Uefa president Michel Platini is ready to revolutionise the "outmoded" world of refereeing by using two more officials in each match.

Platini, who was elected to office in January, wants to put an official behind each goal to help rule on penalty box infringements. The former France attacking midfielder believes that would be better than using technology, which he claims would "dehumanise" football.

"My idea is to increase the number of officials," he told France Football. "To referee with just three people, it is outmoded. Three officials cannot see everything. I am proposing two extra officials, over-45s who don't need to run because they would stay behind the goals.

For me that's a great idea, thoughts?

You mean Kev Davies might get a few freekicks/pens? Bring it on. Wonder how much power they'll have though? If only used when the ref wasn't sure then Poll, Riley and co are just going to carry on as.

Sack of shite, and unworkable. Do you still have one ref in charge of the penalty area, only it isn't the ref who's in charge of the rest of the pitch? Or is he an extra eye for the ref? In which case, what happens when one disagrees with the other - who overrules? And where does the linesman come into this?

Balls, balls and balls. Leave football alone.

fatshaft wrote:

New Uefa president Michel Platini is ready to revolutionise the "outmoded" world of refereeing by using two more officials in each match.

Platini, who was elected to office in January, wants to put an official behind each goal to help rule on penalty box infringements. The former France attacking midfielder believes that would be better than using technology, which he claims would "dehumanise" football.

"My idea is to increase the number of officials," he told France Football. "To referee with just three people, it is outmoded. Three officials cannot see everything. I am proposing two extra officials, over-45s who don't need to run because they would stay behind the goals.

For me that's a great idea, thoughts?

surely their eyesight will be failing as they're old?

More nonsense from the crazy frog. So if they're on the left side of the box and something happens over on the right what use are they? Then are they refs or "boxmen", just there to wave a flag?

The shying away from technology is a little "outmoded" , while other sports want to embrace it football runs scared. More officials= more incompetence.

Platini wants penalty box refs.

Platini needs a red hot poker inserting in him. Sorry to be brutal, but it's all Johnny Foreigner understands.

Being a highly qualified & vastly experienced 'people manager' and knowing something about these sort of things I think I am in a good position to say, with some authority, that Michel Platini is a fecking idiot.

don't agree with this idea as ultimately its the ref that makes the decisions. 50% of the time its nothing to do with not seeing what happened, its a case of unwitting bias towards some teams or being afraid to make a decision.

I would prefer to see more of a basketball type ref situation. Keep your linesmen but have 2 refs reffing zonally. Both have a whistle and both can use it. This means it potentially tempers in bias and means that one of them is watching for things say around the ball and the other is watching whats going on up ahead. Meanwhile the linesmen are watching for offsides, ball out of play etc.

If one ref doesn't see it (Essien and his coward tackles whilst ref following the ball) then the other ref should.

Might sound a bit over the top this but having played basketball to a very high level in my younger days I can tell you it works...

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:don't agree with this idea as ultimately its the ref that makes the decisions. 50% of the time its nothing to do with not seeing what happened, its a case of unwitting bias towards some teams or being afraid to make a decision.

I would prefer to see more of a basketball type ref situation. Keep your linesmen but have 2 refs reffing zonally. Both have a whistle and both can use it. This means it potentially tempers in bias and means that one of them is watching for things say around the ball and the other is watching whats going on up ahead. Meanwhile the linesmen are watching for offsides, ball out of play etc.

If one ref doesn't see it (Essien and his coward tackles whilst ref following the ball) then the other ref should.

Might sound a bit over the top this but having played basketball to a very high level in my younger days I can tell you it works...

What happens if there's an incident in one half and teh ref in the other half blows but the ref in the half it happened doesn't agree?

Stick with it as it is and get goal-line monitoring. The rules state "if in the referees opinion", that's the way it's always been for fouls and so it should stay. Ball crossing the line is a fact that can be determined with technology, as could offside, both with no confusion or delay to the game.

Just stop fecking fiddling with this game!!

communistworkethic wrote:
What happens if there's an incident in one half and teh ref in the other half blows but the ref in the half it happened doesn't agree?

Stick with it as it is and get goal-line monitoring. The rules state "if in the referees opinion", that's the way it's always been for fouls and so it should stay. Ball crossing the line is a fact that can be determined with technology, as could offside, both with no confusion or delay to the game.

Just stop fecking fiddling with this game!!

It works well because of the zonal system. For example when in a particular half of the court 1 ref goes to the baseline and one sticks further back nearer the half way line. The ref near the baseline is covering whats happening there and the other at the top side of the court. Therefore they are looking at different things and apply the same rules in the same way. its consistent. Of course, they may not always agree with each other but thats interpretation in the same way a ref doesn't always agree with a linesman. They cover their own areas and not each others so conflict doesn't happen.

Maybe AT and Montreal Wanderer could comment because they will have experience of this system and with some small differences I think it would work

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:don't agree with this idea as ultimately its the ref that makes the decisions. 50% of the time its nothing to do with not seeing what happened, its a case of unwitting bias towards some teams or being afraid to make a decision.

I would prefer to see more of a basketball type ref situation. Keep your linesmen but have 2 refs reffing zonally. Both have a whistle and both can use it. This means it potentially tempers in bias and means that one of them is watching for things say around the ball and the other is watching whats going on up ahead. Meanwhile the linesmen are watching for offsides, ball out of play etc.

If one ref doesn't see it (Essien and his coward tackles whilst ref following the ball) then the other ref should.

Might sound a bit over the top this but having played basketball to a very high level in my younger days I can tell you it works...

That's basically just a different version of what Platini said, except he prefers the NFL style to the NBA style.

fatshaft wrote:

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:don't agree with this idea as ultimately its the ref that makes the decisions. 50% of the time its nothing to do with not seeing what happened, its a case of unwitting bias towards some teams or being afraid to make a decision.

I would prefer to see more of a basketball type ref situation. Keep your linesmen but have 2 refs reffing zonally. Both have a whistle and both can use it. This means it potentially tempers in bias and means that one of them is watching for things say around the ball and the other is watching whats going on up ahead. Meanwhile the linesmen are watching for offsides, ball out of play etc.

If one ref doesn't see it (Essien and his coward tackles whilst ref following the ball) then the other ref should.

Might sound a bit over the top this but having played basketball to a very high level in my younger days I can tell you it works...

That's basically just a different version of what Platini said, except he prefers the NFL style to the NBA style.

a little different as in both refs would be mobile. I don't think standing behind the goals would benefit much!

communistworkethic wrote:

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:don't agree with this idea as ultimately its the ref that makes the decisions. 50% of the time its nothing to do with not seeing what happened, its a case of unwitting bias towards some teams or being afraid to make a decision.

I would prefer to see more of a basketball type ref situation. Keep your linesmen but have 2 refs reffing zonally. Both have a whistle and both can use it. This means it potentially tempers in bias and means that one of them is watching for things say around the ball and the other is watching whats going on up ahead. Meanwhile the linesmen are watching for offsides, ball out of play etc.

If one ref doesn't see it (Essien and his coward tackles whilst ref following the ball) then the other ref should.

Might sound a bit over the top this but having played basketball to a very high level in my younger days I can tell you it works...

What happens if there's an incident in one half and teh ref in the other half blows but the ref in the half it happened doesn't agree?

Stick with it as it is and get goal-line monitoring. The rules state "if in the referees opinion", that's the way it's always been for fouls and so it should stay. Ball crossing the line is a fact that can be determined with technology, as could offside, both with no confusion or delay to the game.

Just stop fecking fiddling with this game!!

Agree with all of that - the idea of refereeing by quango is horrifying. Recruit and train referees better by all means, but then accept what goes on on the field has to be a matter of one man's interpretation, and that the game is all the better for a bit of disagreement. I agree that the factual question of whether the ball has crossed the line could be dealt with by the appropriate technology.

And then, off the field, I would have a video panel to review simulation and violent conduct, with powers to hand out punishments retrospectively.

Blatter Mark II

blurred wrote:Sack of shite, and unworkable. Do you still have one ref in charge of the penalty area, only it isn't the ref who's in charge of the rest of the pitch? Or is he an extra eye for the ref? In which case, what happens when one disagrees with the other - who overrules? And where does the linesman come into this?

Balls, balls and balls. Leave football alone.

But wouldn't you be happy if there were two more sets of eyes ignoring Gerrard's diving?

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:

communistworkethic wrote:
What happens if there's an incident in one half and teh ref in the other half blows but the ref in the half it happened doesn't agree?

Stick with it as it is and get goal-line monitoring. The rules state "if in the referees opinion", that's the way it's always been for fouls and so it should stay. Ball crossing the line is a fact that can be determined with technology, as could offside, both with no confusion or delay to the game.

Just stop fecking fiddling with this game!!

It works well because of the zonal system. For example when in a particular half of the court 1 ref goes to the baseline and one sticks further back nearer the half way line. The ref near the baseline is covering whats happening there and the other at the top side of the court. Therefore they are looking at different things and apply the same rules in the same way. its consistent. Of course, they may not always agree with each other but thats interpretation in the same way a ref doesn't always agree with a linesman. They cover their own areas and not each others so conflict doesn't happen.

Maybe AT and Montreal Wanderer could comment because they will have experience of this system and with some small differences I think it would work

court? Baseline???

Anyway, I'll repeat - incident at half way i.e. equi-distant between the two officials? Who's call is it? See it's a nonsense situation to have two refs.

communistworkethic wrote: court? Baseline???

Anyway, I'll repeat - incident at half way i.e. equi-distant between the two officials? Who's call is it? See it's a nonsense situation to have two refs.

Easy. If Ref 1 is in charge of the goal end of the side of the pitch to your left then it is Ref 2. If at the other end of the pitch then its ref 1. Basic ref/umpire mechanics as used in basketball and other sports that use multiple refs. I've experienced it 1st hand and even umpired games using it and it works...as crazy as it sounds.

Open your mind...look into my eyes...1-2-3

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:

communistworkethic wrote: court? Baseline???

Anyway, I'll repeat - incident at half way i.e. equi-distant between the two officials? Who's call is it? See it's a nonsense situation to have two refs.

Easy. If Ref 1 is in charge of the goal end of the side of the pitch to your left then it is Ref 2. If at the other end of the pitch then its ref 1. Basic ref/umpire mechanics as used in basketball and other sports that use multiple refs. I've experienced it 1st hand and even umpired games using it and it works...as crazy as it sounds.

Open your mind...look into my eyes...1-2-3

No no no no . Tosh and poppycock. Football's not a 40 yard long court with 5-a-side played at a brisk jog with no physical contact per se.

communistworkethic wrote:

Abdoulaye's Twin wrote:

communistworkethic wrote: court? Baseline???

Anyway, I'll repeat - incident at half way i.e. equi-distant between the two officials? Who's call is it? See it's a nonsense situation to have two refs.

Easy. If Ref 1 is in charge of the goal end of the side of the pitch to your left then it is Ref 2. If at the other end of the pitch then its ref 1. Basic ref/umpire mechanics as used in basketball and other sports that use multiple refs. I've experienced it 1st hand and even umpired games using it and it works...as crazy as it sounds.

Open your mind...look into my eyes...1-2-3

No no no no . Tosh and poppycock. Football's not a 40 yard long court with 5-a-side played at a brisk jog with no physical contact per se.

Plenty of contact in basketball, just technically there isn't supposed to be!

Platini can suck my cheesy bell-end

cowdrill wrote:Platini can suck my cheesy bell-end

I concur, platini can suck your cheesy bell-end