Think it would be a good idea to be honest..
Remember Nani getting sent off against Real in SAF's last season?
No way was it a red, but for many you could see why they'd give a red.. in that situation a sin bin would have been the perfect call.
It wouldn't have ruined the tie like the red did
No, refs already give cards for non dives and miss shed loads of dives. You'd need video tech and diving experts (new career for Young) for it to work.
No, it'll just cause more controversy because now a new factor of punishment would be included amonst the cards and suspensions etc. Bring in video tech analysis and virtually every on field problem around football extinguishes
What are your thoughts? Could it work? Any prospective problems with it?
I wouldn't mind a trial for it, possibly in the lower leagues to begin with.
Might put more pressure on the refs though, and could prove contrversial, especially if a team scores against 10 men, then later video evidence shows the player didn't dive. Fine line.
---
Im all for it, great idea
Just a thought on what your saying about could be controversial, look at it this way a player gets booked in the first 10 mins then 10mins later the ref gets it wrong and thinks he's then dived so now he gets sent off for a second yellow and the team plays for 70mins with 10 men, where as under this idea it would only be 10mins in the bin.
It works in rugby just fine why not football. Won't cause controversy as much. For an yellow card a sin bin would be viable. Encourages more free flowing football
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Thanks Admin
Sin Bins do work in rugby, but not everything can cross over to football easily. This is why I'd like to see a rial of it first. No harm in giving it a go is there?
Sounds like an awful idea. Introducing a new punishment for only one specific infringement of the rules? It won't reduce the mistakes made by refs, it won't reduce the controversy. And when one team goes down to ten men for that length of time I can see a whole lot of boring camped in their own half football.
Yellow card is the best deterrent. Just need the refs to be a little stronger with them
I would advocate it for fouling that is bad but not THAT bad (as someone said above: Nani v RM)... for diving I think it's an "easy way out" for players and would probably encourage more diving.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I would advocate it for fouling that is bad but not THAT bad
---------------------
This would be carnage! Most controversy comes from fans not agreeing with the refs interpretation of events. Giving him even more to have to consider in calling a foul makes the job so much more difficult. This won't solve any problems, just create more
Think it would spoil the game possibly. The team down to 10 or 9 players for X number of minutes would probably just resort to all out defence thus spoiling the spectacle as is often the case now when a team goes down to ten players.
Also more scope for injuries, not warming down and up. Could see quite a increase in muscle strains and pulls. Not needed IMO
No I think it would cause to many problems. Refs get dives and non dives wrong a lot of the time. I think just punishment after the game should suffice. It's difficult for a ref to judge a dive in real time. That's why a review after the game, then punish the player after would be the best way of doing it. Would show players they can't get away with conning refs, because they'd be shown up after the game.
What about being sent to the sin bin, while the 4th official (who doesnt do anything) looks over the play on a tv which he has next to him).
If it turns out he has dived, the player is kept in the bin for 10 mins (or 15 mins)... if he is deemed to have been tripped indeed, he returns to the field as he would if he was receiving treatment for an injury.
This sounds very "FA decision" like because the player is presumed guilty until proven innocent, which is exactly what they do anyway.
Don't get why people are opposed to this..
It's either sin bin, or a straight red which more often than not is a wrong decision.
With a sin bin you'd reduce massively on the game deciding wrongly called red card rule
I like the idea but don't think it could be implemented without lots of controversy, especially with diving. Some dives look stonewallers at first view and it's too open to opinion to work well imo.
Shirt pulling however I would punish with both a sin bin and an axe to the oesophagus.
Leave it how it is. I don't understand why people want to bring in sin bins/drinks break/technology into the game. I think it'll completely ruin the fast paced games we see. Leave it how it is, it's brilliant.
I think an appeal system would be better.
In the sin bin case a team could not only miss out on a penalty they should have been given, they also lose a player for 10 minutes. Take the Diego Costa v Burnley case. He would have been binned by the ref, despite it looking a foul on replays. He also went on to score in the time he would have been binned, if memory serves.
An appeal system would not only get the correct result, but it would also help us avoid double punishment for an incorrect decision (whether it be sin-bin or a yellow card).
Don't get why people are opposed to this..
-------------
For the reasons stated in our posts
It's either sin bin, or a straight red which more often than not is a wrong decision.
-----------
straight red for what? Diving?
Sinbin for all red cards and diving.. while they're in there video reviews take place.
The one thing maybe we can learn from cricket is that giving umpires or refs a safety net of technology reduces the quality of their decision making.
If there is an easy way out then it is often the course taken.
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 minutes ago
Sinbin for all red cards and diving.. while they're in there video reviews take place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That sounds a bit mental! A lot of fouls are interpretations of the rules. was there intent, was there excessive force used, was the player in control ehen he linged in. I don't see how having an off field ref reviewing the on field refs interpretation of the rules as anything other than a way to mess the game up.
Ref makes a call. Sends guy off. Reviewed on the sideline where on field ref is told he was wrong. On field ref feels extra pressure and a bit of self doubt creeps in. On field ref has a shocker.
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 13 minutes ago
Don't get why people are opposed to this..
-------------
For the reasons stated in our posts
It's either sin bin, or a straight red which more often than not is a wrong decision.
-----------
straight red for what? Diving?
---------------------------
There is a massive grey area in today's game between a yellow and a straight red, the sin bin would be an avenue to address that grey area.
Seems quite an even split. Lots of pros and cons imo. Needs proper guidelines obviously. I think it could work, but we'll only really know if it's introduced. This is why I'd like a trial. If it works, roll it out across all the leagues (probably would have to be an international rule for it to work properly).
The way I see it, human beings (specifically football players) have changed and adapted over a hundred years to the way they play this game. Why should the rules there for stay exactly as they were a 100 years ago, 50 or even 30 years ago? Rules and technology needs to adapt alongside player progression to keep it a fair contest.
Champions League (not to mention league, international, domestic cups etc.) ties are more often than not decided by a fatal referee ERROR these days because the rules and technology does not help them.
And don't give me the 'that's what makes football exciting' crap, you may as well just put a chunk of your money on a bet you have a 100% chance of losing.
Games are exciting and entertaining because it is a contest to decide who is the best, the rules should help to decide that.
IMO a sin bin would be a small step to help that
Sign in if you want to comment
Sin bin
Page 1 of 2
posted on 6/9/14
Think it would be a good idea to be honest..
Remember Nani getting sent off against Real in SAF's last season?
No way was it a red, but for many you could see why they'd give a red.. in that situation a sin bin would have been the perfect call.
It wouldn't have ruined the tie like the red did
posted on 6/9/14
No, refs already give cards for non dives and miss shed loads of dives. You'd need video tech and diving experts (new career for Young) for it to work.
posted on 6/9/14
No, it'll just cause more controversy because now a new factor of punishment would be included amonst the cards and suspensions etc. Bring in video tech analysis and virtually every on field problem around football extinguishes
posted on 6/9/14
What are your thoughts? Could it work? Any prospective problems with it?
I wouldn't mind a trial for it, possibly in the lower leagues to begin with.
Might put more pressure on the refs though, and could prove contrversial, especially if a team scores against 10 men, then later video evidence shows the player didn't dive. Fine line.
---
Im all for it, great idea
Just a thought on what your saying about could be controversial, look at it this way a player gets booked in the first 10 mins then 10mins later the ref gets it wrong and thinks he's then dived so now he gets sent off for a second yellow and the team plays for 70mins with 10 men, where as under this idea it would only be 10mins in the bin.
posted on 6/9/14
It works in rugby just fine why not football. Won't cause controversy as much. For an yellow card a sin bin would be viable. Encourages more free flowing football
posted on 6/9/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/9/14
Thanks Admin
Sin Bins do work in rugby, but not everything can cross over to football easily. This is why I'd like to see a rial of it first. No harm in giving it a go is there?
posted on 6/9/14
Sounds like an awful idea. Introducing a new punishment for only one specific infringement of the rules? It won't reduce the mistakes made by refs, it won't reduce the controversy. And when one team goes down to ten men for that length of time I can see a whole lot of boring camped in their own half football.
Yellow card is the best deterrent. Just need the refs to be a little stronger with them
posted on 6/9/14
I would advocate it for fouling that is bad but not THAT bad (as someone said above: Nani v RM)... for diving I think it's an "easy way out" for players and would probably encourage more diving.
posted on 6/9/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 6/9/14
I would advocate it for fouling that is bad but not THAT bad
---------------------
This would be carnage! Most controversy comes from fans not agreeing with the refs interpretation of events. Giving him even more to have to consider in calling a foul makes the job so much more difficult. This won't solve any problems, just create more
posted on 6/9/14
Think it would spoil the game possibly. The team down to 10 or 9 players for X number of minutes would probably just resort to all out defence thus spoiling the spectacle as is often the case now when a team goes down to ten players.
Also more scope for injuries, not warming down and up. Could see quite a increase in muscle strains and pulls. Not needed IMO
posted on 6/9/14
No I think it would cause to many problems. Refs get dives and non dives wrong a lot of the time. I think just punishment after the game should suffice. It's difficult for a ref to judge a dive in real time. That's why a review after the game, then punish the player after would be the best way of doing it. Would show players they can't get away with conning refs, because they'd be shown up after the game.
posted on 6/9/14
What about being sent to the sin bin, while the 4th official (who doesnt do anything) looks over the play on a tv which he has next to him).
If it turns out he has dived, the player is kept in the bin for 10 mins (or 15 mins)... if he is deemed to have been tripped indeed, he returns to the field as he would if he was receiving treatment for an injury.
This sounds very "FA decision" like because the player is presumed guilty until proven innocent, which is exactly what they do anyway.
posted on 6/9/14
Don't get why people are opposed to this..
It's either sin bin, or a straight red which more often than not is a wrong decision.
With a sin bin you'd reduce massively on the game deciding wrongly called red card rule
posted on 6/9/14
I like the idea but don't think it could be implemented without lots of controversy, especially with diving. Some dives look stonewallers at first view and it's too open to opinion to work well imo.
Shirt pulling however I would punish with both a sin bin and an axe to the oesophagus.
posted on 6/9/14
Leave it how it is. I don't understand why people want to bring in sin bins/drinks break/technology into the game. I think it'll completely ruin the fast paced games we see. Leave it how it is, it's brilliant.
posted on 6/9/14
I think an appeal system would be better.
In the sin bin case a team could not only miss out on a penalty they should have been given, they also lose a player for 10 minutes. Take the Diego Costa v Burnley case. He would have been binned by the ref, despite it looking a foul on replays. He also went on to score in the time he would have been binned, if memory serves.
An appeal system would not only get the correct result, but it would also help us avoid double punishment for an incorrect decision (whether it be sin-bin or a yellow card).
posted on 6/9/14
Don't get why people are opposed to this..
-------------
For the reasons stated in our posts
It's either sin bin, or a straight red which more often than not is a wrong decision.
-----------
straight red for what? Diving?
posted on 6/9/14
Sinbin for all red cards and diving.. while they're in there video reviews take place.
posted on 6/9/14
The one thing maybe we can learn from cricket is that giving umpires or refs a safety net of technology reduces the quality of their decision making.
If there is an easy way out then it is often the course taken.
posted on 6/9/14
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 minutes ago
Sinbin for all red cards and diving.. while they're in there video reviews take place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That sounds a bit mental! A lot of fouls are interpretations of the rules. was there intent, was there excessive force used, was the player in control ehen he linged in. I don't see how having an off field ref reviewing the on field refs interpretation of the rules as anything other than a way to mess the game up.
Ref makes a call. Sends guy off. Reviewed on the sideline where on field ref is told he was wrong. On field ref feels extra pressure and a bit of self doubt creeps in. On field ref has a shocker.
posted on 6/9/14
comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 13 minutes ago
Don't get why people are opposed to this..
-------------
For the reasons stated in our posts
It's either sin bin, or a straight red which more often than not is a wrong decision.
-----------
straight red for what? Diving?
---------------------------
There is a massive grey area in today's game between a yellow and a straight red, the sin bin would be an avenue to address that grey area.
posted on 6/9/14
Seems quite an even split. Lots of pros and cons imo. Needs proper guidelines obviously. I think it could work, but we'll only really know if it's introduced. This is why I'd like a trial. If it works, roll it out across all the leagues (probably would have to be an international rule for it to work properly).
posted on 6/9/14
The way I see it, human beings (specifically football players) have changed and adapted over a hundred years to the way they play this game. Why should the rules there for stay exactly as they were a 100 years ago, 50 or even 30 years ago? Rules and technology needs to adapt alongside player progression to keep it a fair contest.
Champions League (not to mention league, international, domestic cups etc.) ties are more often than not decided by a fatal referee ERROR these days because the rules and technology does not help them.
And don't give me the 'that's what makes football exciting' crap, you may as well just put a chunk of your money on a bet you have a 100% chance of losing.
Games are exciting and entertaining because it is a contest to decide who is the best, the rules should help to decide that.
IMO a sin bin would be a small step to help that
Page 1 of 2