This is probably the most popular argument against having replays for box-penalty replays. The argument goes like this: "If you have replay, it will slow the game down, and decrease the fluid/dynamic/free-flowing nature of the game. Soccer will become like American football."
First, let me say that I love the continuous, free flowing nature of soccer. But there are several reasons why my proposal would not slow the game down, and indeed several reasons why my proposal would actually speed the game up!
Reasons why replay will NOT slow the game down:
1) What happens after potential penalty incidents?
90% of the time, the ball goes out of play. Most often, the ball rolls out the back for a goal/corner kick, because the offensive player is unable to continue his run. Another frequent occurrence is that the ball is hastily cleared by a defender to the sidelines. Either way, PLAY HAS ALREADY STOPPED. If the 4th official jumps up and reviews the play, there will be a minimal amount of added delay.
Note: we need actual statistics about what happens after "incidents" but I'm pretty sure they'll tell the story I want them to.
-Potential rebuttal from my friend Mareike: "But quick/smart players want to take those goal kicks and throw in's quickly to counter."
--- I think this is a reasonable argument, but we have to weigh costs and benefits. How many quick counters really start after these incidents? If the offense gets a corner, this argument is moot. If it's a goal kick, this argument is moot because goal kicks aren't really the ignition points of quick counters... If the offense gets a throw in, they can attack and nothing has changed. I don't consider the cases where the defender gets a throw in because, how could that really happen? An offensive player is fouled, and somehow, it's a throw in on the side for the defense? I don't think this is very likely.
Let's also not forget the other thing that usually happens after penalty incidents... a big shouting match between the players and the referees. If this doesn't count as "slowing the game down" then I don't know what does.
For an example, let's look at how quickly Michael Ballack countered/resumed attacking after the contraversial non-call on a potential handball during the 08-09 Champions League semifinals vs Barcelona:
Really? We're worried that we'd have to sit through a replay timeout instead of watching this?
2) Replay would not happen that often. There aren't that many "reviewable incidents" in any one game. I'd be interested to see the statistics on this, but my hunch is that there would be an average of about 2. Keep in mind my argument that players will police themselves- if they don't get penalties for diving, then they won't put the ref in tough positions by diving. Also keep in mind that under my proposal, reviews are going on as play continues (booth review/4th official).
3) Replay would not add that much time- look at American football. Before you jump up and say "but American football is much slower now!" keep in mind that in American football, a lot of that is due to coaches' challenges, which I'm not proposing for soccer. Also keep in mind how many "reviewable" plays there are in football as opposed to in soccer. In football, pretty much every play is reviewable, if for nothing more than to determine the correct spot of the ball.
Please, post rebuttals or rebuttals to rebuttals or any other thoughts.
As the blog goes on, I'll pick some of the other "anti box replay" arguments and respond to them as well.
First, let me say that I love the continuous, free flowing nature of soccer. But there are several reasons why my proposal would not slow the game down, and indeed several reasons why my proposal would actually speed the game up!
Reasons why replay will NOT slow the game down:
1) What happens after potential penalty incidents?
90% of the time, the ball goes out of play. Most often, the ball rolls out the back for a goal/corner kick, because the offensive player is unable to continue his run. Another frequent occurrence is that the ball is hastily cleared by a defender to the sidelines. Either way, PLAY HAS ALREADY STOPPED. If the 4th official jumps up and reviews the play, there will be a minimal amount of added delay.
Note: we need actual statistics about what happens after "incidents" but I'm pretty sure they'll tell the story I want them to.
-Potential rebuttal from my friend Mareike: "But quick/smart players want to take those goal kicks and throw in's quickly to counter."
--- I think this is a reasonable argument, but we have to weigh costs and benefits. How many quick counters really start after these incidents? If the offense gets a corner, this argument is moot. If it's a goal kick, this argument is moot because goal kicks aren't really the ignition points of quick counters... If the offense gets a throw in, they can attack and nothing has changed. I don't consider the cases where the defender gets a throw in because, how could that really happen? An offensive player is fouled, and somehow, it's a throw in on the side for the defense? I don't think this is very likely.
Let's also not forget the other thing that usually happens after penalty incidents... a big shouting match between the players and the referees. If this doesn't count as "slowing the game down" then I don't know what does.
For an example, let's look at how quickly Michael Ballack countered/resumed attacking after the contraversial non-call on a potential handball during the 08-09 Champions League semifinals vs Barcelona:
Really? We're worried that we'd have to sit through a replay timeout instead of watching this?
2) Replay would not happen that often. There aren't that many "reviewable incidents" in any one game. I'd be interested to see the statistics on this, but my hunch is that there would be an average of about 2. Keep in mind my argument that players will police themselves- if they don't get penalties for diving, then they won't put the ref in tough positions by diving. Also keep in mind that under my proposal, reviews are going on as play continues (booth review/4th official).
3) Replay would not add that much time- look at American football. Before you jump up and say "but American football is much slower now!" keep in mind that in American football, a lot of that is due to coaches' challenges, which I'm not proposing for soccer. Also keep in mind how many "reviewable" plays there are in football as opposed to in soccer. In football, pretty much every play is reviewable, if for nothing more than to determine the correct spot of the ball.
Please, post rebuttals or rebuttals to rebuttals or any other thoughts.
As the blog goes on, I'll pick some of the other "anti box replay" arguments and respond to them as well.
Gotta love Balack's reaction :-)))
ReplyDelete