The English Premier League Discussion Thread

[rony31]

Why not just make it like in NHL, if the ball crosses the line the red lights inside the net come on. It doesn't have to be the most advanced thing a human created, just something that does the trick.

That's not how it works in the NHL, they actually have a "goal judge" sitting directly behind the net who turns the light on when he deems the puck to have crossed the line. If it's dubious the referees go upstairs and the play is reviewed from multiple video angles and then they are told whether or not it's a goal. Only takes a few minutes but hockey has breaks anyways so it doesn't make too much of a difference, but implementing the same technique in football would be "taking away from the flow of the game". The chip in the ball connected to a vibrating device somewhere on the referee really cant be that difficult of a technological concept in this day and age, it really should just be implemented worldwide already if they want to avoid implementing video replays into the mix.

 

[VanTheMan]

every team gets goodcalls and bad calls..
doesnt matter.
live as its going on...

p.s. young's dive was a disgrace and heshould have his balls tied hard and pulled

 

[Mandieta6]

I suppose part of the problem with a chip in the ball is that it wouldn't show when the WHOLE ball has crossed the line? Just wherever the chip is?

 

[ShiftyPowers]

You can program the chip to be where it is +10cm dummy.

 

[Sir Calumn]

Well the other argument against introducing goal line technology is one I do have a bit of sympathy with, that it will act as a "gateway drug" to bringing in more video replay technology into the game...... this happened with cricket, initially VT was brought in for adjudicating run-outs, which was as obvious and clear cut a thing to do as goal line technology seems for football, but then it came in for lbws, which is a bit more controversial, and then for catches, which is arguably counter productive. Also, cricket is not a game which suffers so badly from "breaks in flow", but football would be. If we bring in goal line technology this summer, next year will people be calling for video adjudication for offsides? Then penalties\dives the year after? I think there is a strong argument for just keeping such technology out of football completely.

 

[ShiftyPowers]

I think you have to live with bad foul calls because they're such a judgment call, but why shouldn't there be video adjudication for offsides? There should be. If its not obvious you let play continue until a goal and then check. If they don't score, no big deal.

 

[Sir Calumn]

Do you check for every goal? From now on, do the player have to wait for "GOAL!" to appear on a big screen before they can celebrate?

 

[ShiftyPowers]

They can celebrate all they want, but I don't think it's the worst thing to review every goal. You don't have to stop the game, celebrations last about a minute, and the official can check during that time. I'd rather the call be right than live with poor calls in the interest of flow. Think about after the game; there is endless talk about wrong calls, but would people really say "those 30 seconds waiting for the correct call ruined the game"? Come on.

 

[Sir Calumn]

You're such an American

 

[ShiftyPowers]

Yes, I realize this position is completely the result of the American sports I grew up watching.

 

[Back Door Skip]

I always use booth reviews in football to take a piss. Quite handy.

 

[1966+2006]

I really enjoyed watching these: http://www.espn.co.uk/football/sport/site/season20.html
It's difficult to find highlights of old seasons without any crappy music being dubbed over the commentary.

 

[ShiftyPowers]

That's cool. Here's my team

 

[clash]

My team was United of 98/99 with Shearer, Cantona and Adams

 

[Sir Calumn]

That's cool. Here's my team

Ooooooo that's fun. Objectively, I agree with your team except I would have Schmeichel instead of Friedel and Terry instead of Campbell.

Also, my heart wants me to put in Zola ahead of Rooney

But, looking at the list shows what a PHENOMENAL amount of central midfield talent the EPL has seen - Fabregas, Gerrard, Makelele, Ince, Keane, Lampard, Scholes, Vieira - I think you could reasonably make a case for any two of those. The shortlist is completed by poor old Matt Le Tissier who I'm not quite sure is up there

 

[1966+2006]

Those 4-4's are also a joy to watch. All of them involving Arsenal. The one at Anfield made Arshavin my favourite player of another team for a while. Magic display.

 

[itsbeenpickedup]

I think Le Tissier is a legitimate inclusion. If only considering Premiership games, he has 102 goals from 270 games from central midfield, many of them stunningly good. In terms of being a creative goalscoring midfielder he's got the stats and highlight reel to merit inclusion. His goals per games is a VERY impressive ratio (it's even higher than Lampard, the only midfielder who comes close) and I'm sure he also got a fair share of assists. Looking at his goal stats and obvious talent it seems ludicrous that he didn't get more of a chance for England, but I guess he wasn't the kind of ambitious player associated with winning trophies due to his decision to remain at a relegation candidate.

 

[Sir Calumn]

Yes, I think that is why I am critical of his inclusion, because unlike all the other options he never really proved his ability at a top club or in the national team. I always liked him as a player, but never thought he was all that spectacular. Mind you, I didnt realize his stats were quite that good...

 

[ShiftyPowers]

Ooooooo that's fun. Objectively, I agree with your team except I would have Schmeichel instead of Friedel and Terry instead of Campbell.

Also, my heart wants me to put in Zola ahead of Rooney

But, looking at the list shows what a PHENOMENAL amount of central midfield talent the EPL has seen - Fabregas, Gerrard, Makelele, Ince, Keane, Lampard, Scholes, Vieira - I think you could reasonably make a case for any two of those. The shortlist is completed by poor old Matt Le Tissier who I'm not quite sure is up there

Well, Friedel is 100% pure American bias. Although he has assumed a fake accent like Madonna since moving over there which I don't like.

In midfield the one guy I really wanted to put in there was Vieira, but I think you can make a case that Gerrard is the most interesting player (on the pitch) of all those CMs and Lampard's goal scoring record is probably too good to see him left off. I'm not a fan of Scholes, but some fanboys would probably lobby for him as well.

Terry over Campbell.... yeahhhhhhh, I think it's close. But I remember several great years of Sol at Arsenal, and that's before realizing that he had twice as many appearances for Spurs as he did Arsenal! Essentially stretching back to the beginning of the Premiership. I think Terry would probably be the choice in 5 years, but then maybe I'd have him replace Adams who did play just as much of his career in the Football League.

 

[Sir Calumn]

Yeah I really wanted to have either Vieira or Makelele too, because I love them both as players, think they made a huge contribution to their teams and also I think it would make the "all time eleven" much more balanced as a whole (we know Gerrard and Lampard cant play together from the national team!). Makelele even invented his own position - how many times do you hear top pundits refer to "The Makelele Role"? However, you just cant drop either Gerrard or Lampard.

I went more on who, at their peak, were the better players, rather than who had the better premier league record. I think Terry at his best was considerably better than Campbell at his best, and also, despite Campbell's long and distinguished career, the less than glamorous end has unfortunately tarnished it. I'm also not sure that Adams was quite of the standard as a defender that we have all elevated him to, but he is an absolutely iconic Premier League player.