The first was started by Pep Guardiola, who used his post-match remarks to make a philosophical point. Players such as those on his team, the Manchester City manager http://www.dolphinsshopfootballonline.com/Charles-Harris-Jersey said, were “artists” who needed “protection” in order to play the style of football so many viewers enjoy. Cardiff’s Neil Warnock, meanwhile, insisted such challenges were part of the game. He was more concerned with a second tackle from Bennett that got the player sent off. In Warnock’s opinion it was the latter challenge Authentic Patrick Onwuasor Jersey that was unprofessional, as it incurred a suspension and was therefore “disrespectful” to Bennett’s team-mates. This is an interesting argument that articulates conflicting ideas of modern football. The first describes a form of entertainment that needs strong rules in order to flourish, the second a more traditional idea of sport as competition with the most important (perhaps only) objective being victory. For the record, it has been observed that Guardiola is capable of practising the latter while arguing the former. The Bennett incident also tapped into another current debate. VAR technology was trialled during another FA Cup match this weekend; the Latavius Murray Youth jersey tie between Liverpool and West Bromwich Albion at Anfield. Referee Craig Pawson’s use of video replays caused controversy as, while apparently ensuring correct decisions were made, they disrupted the flow of the match and even denied West Brom fans the chance to properly celebrate a goal. For some, this was too much technology. For others, however, it was not enough. VAR can decide whether Jake Livermore fouled Mo Salah in the area for a penalty. Why can’t it decide whether Bennett was guilty of serious foul play in tackling Sané (and thus deserving of a straight red card)? The consensus after the Cardiff match was that Bennett should indeed have been sent off. A retrospective ban is impossible under the current laws of the game, however, as referee Lee Mason saw the incident at the time and ruled on it. Players cannot be punished twice for the same foul, though exceptions are not without precedent. Ben Thatcher’s 2006 elbow on Pedro Mendes was adjudged to http://www.officialbroncosfootball.com/WOMENS_YOUTH_GARETT_BOLLES_JERSEY.htmlbe so far beyond the pale that a separate charge was brought after the then-Manchester City player had been booked. VAR Britton Colquitt Jersey could conceivably eliminate (inevitable) oversight on the part of officials. It might help to minimise dangerous tackles within the game. Extending video technology to acts where the consequences could be substantial (the image of Sané’s leg bending under Bennett’s challenge is eye-watering) seems logical. But it also goes against one of the founding principles of VAR: namely that it is used for decisions not subject to interpretation. A player is either onside or off in scoring a disputed goal; the referee has booked the wrong http://www.seahawksofficialfootballonline.com/WOMENS_YOUTH_NAZAIR_JONES_JERSEY.htmlplayer or has not. Already, as with the case of penalty-box fouls, there is a grey area – Livermore’s tug on Salah was real but was it enough for the Egyptian to lose his footing? Trying to rule on whether a foul involves “excessive force or brutality” is surely also subjective and, what is more, highly emotive. It is the stuff that not only angers coaches but fans in the stands. Research conducted during VAR trials has found that referees are more likely to deem a tackle dangerous if they have seen it replayed in slow motion. Should the technology be extended, controversy and confusion would seem inevitable. A clamour for just such an extension would seem inevitable too, however, simply because the technology exists. A game in which dangerous tackles are less frequent is possible. The differing views of Guardiola and Warnock show there is an argument whether such a goal is desirable. But even if it were, the outcome would likely add further complication to a game whose beauty lies in simplicity. As football embraces technology, it is a quandary we will have to become used to. jerseys from china wholesale nfl jerseys nikecheap jerseys free shipping jerseys wholesale cheap nfl jerseys usa mlb jerseys chinafootball’s technology quandary | Forum
xiaolan
Jan 30 '18
Joe Bennett’s challenge on Leroy Sané has left the winger injured for up to a month. It was late and it was deliberate, an attempt to stop the Germany international from giving Manchester City a three-goal lead before half-time in their FA Cup tie with Cardiff. It is the sort of tackle that looks worse the more you see it and would always have provoked a debate. On this occasion, however, it has provoked more than one. The first was started by Pep Guardiola, who used his post-match remarks to make a philosophical point. Players such as those on his team, the Manchester City manager http://www.dolphinsshopfootballonline.com/Charles-Harris-Jersey said, were “artists” who needed “protection” in order to play the style of football so many viewers enjoy. Cardiff’s Neil Warnock, meanwhile, insisted such challenges were part of the game. He was more concerned with a second tackle from Bennett that got the player sent off. In Warnock’s opinion it was the latter challenge Authentic Patrick Onwuasor Jersey that was unprofessional, as it incurred a suspension and was therefore “disrespectful” to Bennett’s team-mates. This is an interesting argument that articulates conflicting ideas of modern football. The first describes a form of entertainment that needs strong rules in order to flourish, the second a more traditional idea of sport as competition with the most important (perhaps only) objective being victory. For the record, it has been observed that Guardiola is capable of practising the latter while arguing the former. The Bennett incident also tapped into another current debate. VAR technology was trialled during another FA Cup match this weekend; the Latavius Murray Youth jersey tie between Liverpool and West Bromwich Albion at Anfield. Referee Craig Pawson’s use of video replays caused controversy as, while apparently ensuring correct decisions were made, they disrupted the flow of the match and even denied West Brom fans the chance to properly celebrate a goal. For some, this was too much technology. For others, however, it was not enough. VAR can decide whether Jake Livermore fouled Mo Salah in the area for a penalty. Why can’t it decide whether Bennett was guilty of serious foul play in tackling Sané (and thus deserving of a straight red card)? The consensus after the Cardiff match was that Bennett should indeed have been sent off. A retrospective ban is impossible under the current laws of the game, however, as referee Lee Mason saw the incident at the time and ruled on it. Players cannot be punished twice for the same foul, though exceptions are not without precedent. Ben Thatcher’s 2006 elbow on Pedro Mendes was adjudged to http://www.officialbroncosfootball.com/WOMENS_YOUTH_GARETT_BOLLES_JERSEY.htmlbe so far beyond the pale that a separate charge was brought after the then-Manchester City player had been booked. VAR Britton Colquitt Jersey could conceivably eliminate (inevitable) oversight on the part of officials. It might help to minimise dangerous tackles within the game. Extending video technology to acts where the consequences could be substantial (the image of Sané’s leg bending under Bennett’s challenge is eye-watering) seems logical. But it also goes against one of the founding principles of VAR: namely that it is used for decisions not subject to interpretation. A player is either onside or off in scoring a disputed goal; the referee has booked the wrong http://www.seahawksofficialfootballonline.com/WOMENS_YOUTH_NAZAIR_JONES_JERSEY.htmlplayer or has not. Already, as with the case of penalty-box fouls, there is a grey area – Livermore’s tug on Salah was real but was it enough for the Egyptian to lose his footing? Trying to rule on whether a foul involves “excessive force or brutality” is surely also subjective and, what is more, highly emotive. It is the stuff that not only angers coaches but fans in the stands. Research conducted during VAR trials has found that referees are more likely to deem a tackle dangerous if they have seen it replayed in slow motion. Should the technology be extended, controversy and confusion would seem inevitable. A clamour for just such an extension would seem inevitable too, however, simply because the technology exists. A game in which dangerous tackles are less frequent is possible. The differing views of Guardiola and Warnock show there is an argument whether such a goal is desirable. But even if it were, the outcome would likely add further complication to a game whose beauty lies in simplicity. As football embraces technology, it is a quandary we will have to become used to. jerseys from china wholesale nfl jerseys nikecheap jerseys free shipping jerseys wholesale cheap nfl jerseys usa mlb jerseys china
The first was started by Pep Guardiola, who used his post-match remarks to make a philosophical point. Players such as those on his team, the Manchester City manager http://www.dolphinsshopfootballonline.com/Charles-Harris-Jersey said, were “artists” who needed “protection” in order to play the style of football so many viewers enjoy. Cardiff’s Neil Warnock, meanwhile, insisted such challenges were part of the game. He was more concerned with a second tackle from Bennett that got the player sent off. In Warnock’s opinion it was the latter challenge Authentic Patrick Onwuasor Jersey that was unprofessional, as it incurred a suspension and was therefore “disrespectful” to Bennett’s team-mates. This is an interesting argument that articulates conflicting ideas of modern football. The first describes a form of entertainment that needs strong rules in order to flourish, the second a more traditional idea of sport as competition with the most important (perhaps only) objective being victory. For the record, it has been observed that Guardiola is capable of practising the latter while arguing the former. The Bennett incident also tapped into another current debate. VAR technology was trialled during another FA Cup match this weekend; the Latavius Murray Youth jersey tie between Liverpool and West Bromwich Albion at Anfield. Referee Craig Pawson’s use of video replays caused controversy as, while apparently ensuring correct decisions were made, they disrupted the flow of the match and even denied West Brom fans the chance to properly celebrate a goal. For some, this was too much technology. For others, however, it was not enough. VAR can decide whether Jake Livermore fouled Mo Salah in the area for a penalty. Why can’t it decide whether Bennett was guilty of serious foul play in tackling Sané (and thus deserving of a straight red card)? The consensus after the Cardiff match was that Bennett should indeed have been sent off. A retrospective ban is impossible under the current laws of the game, however, as referee Lee Mason saw the incident at the time and ruled on it. Players cannot be punished twice for the same foul, though exceptions are not without precedent. Ben Thatcher’s 2006 elbow on Pedro Mendes was adjudged to http://www.officialbroncosfootball.com/WOMENS_YOUTH_GARETT_BOLLES_JERSEY.htmlbe so far beyond the pale that a separate charge was brought after the then-Manchester City player had been booked. VAR Britton Colquitt Jersey could conceivably eliminate (inevitable) oversight on the part of officials. It might help to minimise dangerous tackles within the game. Extending video technology to acts where the consequences could be substantial (the image of Sané’s leg bending under Bennett’s challenge is eye-watering) seems logical. But it also goes against one of the founding principles of VAR: namely that it is used for decisions not subject to interpretation. A player is either onside or off in scoring a disputed goal; the referee has booked the wrong http://www.seahawksofficialfootballonline.com/WOMENS_YOUTH_NAZAIR_JONES_JERSEY.htmlplayer or has not. Already, as with the case of penalty-box fouls, there is a grey area – Livermore’s tug on Salah was real but was it enough for the Egyptian to lose his footing? Trying to rule on whether a foul involves “excessive force or brutality” is surely also subjective and, what is more, highly emotive. It is the stuff that not only angers coaches but fans in the stands. Research conducted during VAR trials has found that referees are more likely to deem a tackle dangerous if they have seen it replayed in slow motion. Should the technology be extended, controversy and confusion would seem inevitable. A clamour for just such an extension would seem inevitable too, however, simply because the technology exists. A game in which dangerous tackles are less frequent is possible. The differing views of Guardiola and Warnock show there is an argument whether such a goal is desirable. But even if it were, the outcome would likely add further complication to a game whose beauty lies in simplicity. As football embraces technology, it is a quandary we will have to become used to. jerseys from china wholesale nfl jerseys nikecheap jerseys free shipping jerseys wholesale cheap nfl jerseys usa mlb jerseys china
Share:
