Derby County facing EFL investigation after Bristol City video replay controversy

[jagerbob]

Derby are quite right to face a rap over this.

Long long before VAR was even being discussed... Derby and anyone with a big screen doesnt show penalty decisions again. Its the rules.

I wasnt at the game tuesday but ive been a countless games since we had the big screen, where you would liek to take anotgher look at a contensious decision, but we cant.

It is, and always has been more difficult to filter out the replays when we take a feed on the screen from a televised game.

There has been a few times, when an employee at DCFC has had to be prety quick to change the feed so as to not show these replays.

So clearly... there is someone responsible for not doing their job on Friday, and Mel no doubt will want to make sure it nevr happens agagin. Rules are rules.

It would be bad enough, and we might face a rap anyway... but the minute Johnson highlights what happened to the worlds Media in interview, with his words reprinted in every media outlet going, only means there is absolutely no way we wont face punishment!

[StringerBell]

I mean what the hell is a ‘negative incident’?

[jagerbob]

5 hours ago, StringerBell said:

Well what happens if they show an allowed goal that was offside? That must have happened loads of times.

Shall we just not bother having replays at all in case it makes some people angry if it emerges there’s a mistake involved?

They replay goals which may or may not look offside with the original camera... whereby you cant really tell. What they don't do.... is show Skys slow mo-replay which has probably get a camera dead in line with the offside line. They dont show these, and never have done... because its a contentious decision.... we normally have to wait until we get home to see this. DCFC have normally been on the ball with their control of what gets shown on the big screen (particularly on live tv matches), but they just screwed up this time!!!

[Sith Happens]

Not allowed to show anything negative? Is that why it wasnt working at all during clements time?

[StringerBell]

2 minutes ago, jagerbob said:

Derby are quite right to face a rap over this.

Long long before VAR was even being discussed... Derby and anyone with a big screen doesnt show penalty decisions again. Its the rules.

I wasnt at the game tuesday but ive been a countless games since we had the big screen, where you would liek to take anotgher look at a contensious decision, but we cant.

It is, and always has been more difficult to filter out the replays when we take a feed on the screen from a televised game.

There has been a few times, when an employee at DCFC has had to be prety quick to change the feed so as to not show these replays.

So clearly... there is someone responsible for not doing their job on Friday, and Mel no doubt will want to make sure it nevr happens agagin. Rules are rules.

It would be bad enough, and we might face a rap anyway... but the minute Johnson highlights what happened to the worlds Media in interview, with his words reprinted in every media outlet going, only means there is absolutely no way we wont face punishment!

What penalty incident? All I saw was a really good move followed by a good tackle. 

You might think I’m being facetious, but if the FA want our money then the FA can clarify things beforehand and they haven’t to the best of my knowledge. We can’t show controversial or negative incidents. Whatever they are.

[Sith Happens]

Its a difficult one, at the stage of the game it occured it didnt really cause any issues, if however it had happened earlier in the game it would give the crowd more reason to be on the refs back.

If it had happened at say the City Ground against us and Forest fans got on the refs back for not giving a penalty, then he gave a soft one later on you would think he was trying to even things up (rightly or wrongly).

It doesnt need a big deal making of it, just give us a slap on the wrist and explain why West Ham didnt get punished when they did it.

[R@M]

Maybe they could only show instances where the decision was right.  When it isn't, the scree could just show a giant turd ? emoji. (This does not break the rules as they are set out)

[AmericanRam]

Shouldn't have done it, but doesn't imo really deserve too harsh of a punishment.More something minor  and a convo about much stricter actions being taken if it happens again in the future.

[NottsRam]

Something and nothing really, what's the big deal?  Refs have always got pelters with or without replays, it's all part of the game.  Graham Poll used to thrive on the crowd singing his anthem, used to laugh it off.  Are we now saying ref's should be protected in case we hurt their feelings? Jesus, they get well paid, grow a pair and get on with it.

[StringerBell]

6 minutes ago, NottsRam said:

Something and nothing really, what's the big deal?  Refs have always got pelters with or without replays, it's all part of the game.  Graham Poll used to thrive on the crowd singing his anthem, used to laugh it off.  Are we now saying ref's should be protected in case we hurt their feelings? Jesus, they get well paid, grow a pair and get on with it.

The suggestion that it might sway their opinion is ludicrous. Any referee who is not capable of making an objective decision and is open to being persuaded one way or the other should be sacked on the spot.  

[jono]

2 hours ago, StringerBell said:

So certain things can be shown and others can’t. The FA need to make clear what can and cant be show. They haven’t.

The FA says it’s controversial without defining controversial. The scoreboard operator simply says I don’t think it was controversial. Now what?

 

You're being pedantic. I am sure, as in every walk of life there are grey areas, but replaying a denied penalty with an alleged dive and a booking, minutes from the end of a close encounter - when the ref was already under fire - would meet any normal sports fans idea of controversial.... and provocative. 

[NottsRam]

1 minute ago, StringerBell said:

The suggestion that it might sway their opinion is ludicrous. Any referee who is not capable of making an objective decision and is open to being persuaded one way or the other should be sacked on the spot.  

Spot on

[Doodle]

2 hours ago, R@M said:

Maybe they could only show instances where the decision was right.  When it isn't, the scree could just show a giant turd ? emoji. (This does not break the rules as they are set out)

Is this the sort of thing you had in mind? 

[StringerBell]

Just now, jono said:

You're being pedantic. I am sure, as in every walk of life there are grey areas, but replaying a denied penalty with an alleged dive and a booking, minutes from the end of a close encounter - when the ref was already under fire - would meet any normal sports fans idea of controversial.... and provocative. 

Under fire?

Would an offside goal meet a normal sports fans idea of controversial? What about a goal  with a foul in the lead up to it? What about a chance that bounces on the line? A goal with a handball? An amazing save that turns out to be outside the area?

What do you think they were trying to provoke? To point out that someone could do their job better? If so, oh well.

[PistoldPete2]

2 hours ago, jagerbob said:

Derby are quite right to face a rap over this.

Long long before VAR was even being discussed... Derby and anyone with a big screen doesnt show penalty decisions again. Its the rules.

I wasnt at the game tuesday but ive been a countless games since we had the big screen, where you would liek to take anotgher look at a contensious decision, but we cant.

It is, and always has been more difficult to filter out the replays when we take a feed on the screen from a televised game.

There has been a few times, when an employee at DCFC has had to be prety quick to change the feed so as to not show these replays.

So clearly... there is someone responsible for not doing their job on Friday, and Mel no doubt will want to make sure it nevr happens agagin. Rules are rules.

It would be bad enough, and we might face a rap anyway... but the minute Johnson highlights what happened to the worlds Media in interview, with his words reprinted in every media outlet going, only means there is absolutely no way we wont face punishment!

There wasnt a penalty decision. No penalty was given. Do you show goals that should have been disallowed but werent? Or penalties that should have been given but werent? If so how do you decide what shoudl have been given and what not?   

[jono]

1 hour ago, StringerBell said:

Under fire?

Would an offside goal meet a normal sports fans idea of controversial? What about a goal  with a foul in the lead up to it? What about a chance that bounces on the line? A goal with a handball? An amazing save that turns out to be outside the area?

What do you think they were trying to provoke? To point out that someone could do their job better? If so, oh well.

I'll change pedantic to obdurate. You understand exactly the point I am making. Oh and I doubt they were trying to provoke; someone made just an error but those errors can be provocative, hence the need for a discussion with the rule makers.

You say ..."oh well" ... With that sort of attitude lets carry on with a new system of roasting employees in front of all their colleagues,  engage in a bit of ritual humiliation of those who make honest errors ? How about a tannoy announcement ... "ha ha ref .. got that one wrong didn't you ? " ...

[StringerBell]

3 minutes ago, jono said:

I'll change pedantic to obdurate. You understand exactly the point I am making. Oh and I doubt they were trying to provoke; someone made just an error but those errors can be provocative, hence the need for a discussion with the rule makers.

Because you seem to be under the impression it’s up to football teams to interpret an ill-defined rule but then conclude that that interpretation is obvious despite it not being stated as obvious in the rule itself (as far as I’m aware). You do this because you agree with the FA. I don’t. And I will look for whatever wriggle room I am allowed to get where I want to be in life. I have absolutely no problem with HD slow mo replays of every and any event. If the FA don’t want ‘negative incidents’ shown then they could start by telling everyone what one of those is.

If you want the rule enforcing you should want to see it made crystal clear and not open to interpretation. 

11 minutes ago, jono said:

You say ..."oh well" ... With that sort of attitude lets carry on with a new system of roasting employees in front of all their colleagues,  engage in a bit of ritual humiliation of those who make honest errors ? How about a tannoy announcement ... "ha ha ref .. got that one wrong didn't you ? " ...

To which he could reply, “hey FA. Wouldn’t it be nice if you could give me the tools I need to do my job? The fans are better equipped than me”

Have I woke up in a parallel universe where fans don’t give the referee stick all the time and instead generally act really politely towards them?

What happens if everyone calls the ref a ******* for what they see as a poor decision but then they seee the replay and the ref gets proven correct? Potentially 90 mins of peace and quiet the ref otherwise wouldn’t have had.

[jagerbob]

It doesnt matter if its given. If its a penalty claim of any sort the rules are not to show it.
The FA doesnt want the big screens showing replayed decisions on the big screen for anything seen as contentious. Such as penalty shouts given or not given. Offside goals allowed or not allowed. Its their call!
The big screen is not MoTD for the fans in the stadium ... theres TV for that for the fans not at the stadium. I think its to give referees greater protection for fans and managers trying to proove they were right, and the referee was wrong.

1 hour ago, PistoldPete2 said:

There wasnt a penalty decision. No penalty was given. Do you show goals that should have been disallowed but werent? Or penalties that should have been given but werent? If so how do you decide what shoudl have been given and what not?   

 

[jagerbob]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete2 said:

There wasnt a penalty decision. No penalty was given. Do you show goals that should have been disallowed but werent? Or penalties that should have been given but werent? If so how do you decide what shoudl have been given and what not?   

Ok.. so they do show goals again (that maybe shouldnt be given, but were) especialy if they are our goals.

But Friday was the first penalty shout we have had in about 5 years where they showed the penalty incident again. Whether our claim, or anotehr teams claims are given or not... the big screen NORMALLY never shows the incident that lead to the penalty/no penalty award being shown. Im sure as a forum we talked about this at other grounds such as Arsenal, long long time before we had a big screen installed.

[RamNut]

So if we score an offside goal are we not allowed to show it?

if someone scores with their hand are we not allowed to show it?

We are not allowed to show any incident in the box that may or may not be a dive, whether or not it was given?

or any handball incident in the box whether or not it was given?