PDA

View Full Version : No Need For Vanishing Spray In Scotland



Gettin' Auld
30-07-2014, 10:27 AM
Despite the success of the spray at the World Cup, according to John Fleming (The head of Referee Operations at the SFA) there is no real need to use the spray in Scotland.

Aye, because getting players to stay 10 yards away from the ball at a free kick has never been a problem here, has it?.........FFS

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11781/9398891/scottish-premiership-the-sfa-is-investigating-the-costs-of-introducing-vanishing-spray-for-referees

Jpdhfc
30-07-2014, 10:33 AM
It's harder for the reff to cheat with spray not that they would

lapsedhibee
30-07-2014, 10:35 AM
Picture of Craig Thomson with caption underneath "SFA ponder vanishing spray for referees".

If only.

JimBHibees
30-07-2014, 10:39 AM
Despite the success of the spray at the World Cup, according to John Fleming (The head of Referee Operations at the SFA) there is no real need to use the spray in Scotland.

Aye, because getting players to stay 10 yards away from the ball at a free kick has never been a problem here, has it?.........FFS

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11781/9398891/scottish-premiership-the-sfa-is-investigating-the-costs-of-introducing-vanishing-spray-for-referees

A complete joke IMO. Thought it was a great innovation at the World cup though of course the standard of reffing in Scotland is of such a wonderful standard it needs no improvement. No need at all to copy something that works.

Anyone remember the Scottish cup tie at ER v Rangers when McGregor was sent off with a couple of mins to go. Our favourite ref, yes it was he :greengrin allowed Davie Weir to tell him where the wall should be, I think it was about 6 yards away.

Last season also think it was St Johnstone, may be wrong when the arrogant ref refused to walk out the yards and when Scott Robertson walked out the 7 yards he was promptly booked. Yep no reason at all this should be brought in. :rolleyes::greengrin

truehibernian
30-07-2014, 10:39 AM
It's not the spray that is the issue in Scotland......it's the fact that ref's here measure in Liliputian yards and not human ones, so the spray is the least of our worries.

DarrenSQH
30-07-2014, 10:40 AM
Vanishing spray may actually mean scottish refs would have to do something rather than just letting the players do what they like.

GreenCastle
30-07-2014, 10:44 AM
No goal line technology in our top league either.

Gap between Scotland and England continues to grow daily.

Argylehibby
30-07-2014, 10:46 AM
Was it Peter Grant that was sent off in a cup final for encroaching? Obviously against Rangers as no other team would have got a free kick that close to goal.

The Green Goblin
30-07-2014, 10:52 AM
The funny thing about the spray is that apparently (although i've never seen it in about 8 years of living here!) my brasilian friends all tell me refs in south america have been using this for about four decades. Maybe they're pulling my leg. Anyway, it seems a silly decision to me. The refs dont even have to use it every time theres a free kick, just when its needed and I would have thought it was especially useful in bad tempered games or derbies. The decision not to use it feels a bit like the "we know better" close-minded and unapproachable mentality of many scottish refs we often see in games.

Gettin' Auld
30-07-2014, 10:54 AM
It's the reluctant 'I'll investigate the costs' part that gets me.

How expensive does he think the friggin stuff is? and what is there to investigate?

Try picking up a phone - "Hey big yin, how much does yon wanishing spray cost if we buy in bulk....innat?" = Investigation over.

Just step out of the dark ages and implement it FFS.

ekhibee
30-07-2014, 10:57 AM
Anything new or innovative that benefits the sport should be encouraged. Unfortunately the footballing authorities in Scotland will probably listen to the likes of Fleming and ignore any attempts to introduce more fairness into the game.

buktapurple79
30-07-2014, 11:10 AM
Great innovation at the WC. SFA response is just the tip of the Craig Thomson iceberg. Unless forced they'll do nothing that might compromise their hiding of the ineptitude of their wee clique of officials.

KeithTheHibby
30-07-2014, 11:33 AM
Farcical. Nothing worse than watching players edge forward at free kicks only for refs to allow or not to notice it. Along comes a simple idea which eliminates players cheating and assist refs yet we get this pish.
No wonder our game is still in the dark ages.

poolman
30-07-2014, 11:34 AM
Despite the success of the spray at the World Cup, according to John Fleming (The head of Referee Operations at the SFA) there is no real need to use the spray in Scotland.

Aye, because getting players to stay 10 yards away from the ball at a free kick has never been a problem here, has it?.........FFS

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11781/9398891/scottish-premiership-the-sfa-is-investigating-the-costs-of-introducing-vanishing-spray-for-referees



I agree with Fleming here


I mean, why use anything that will improve the game up here :rolleyes:

blackpoolhibs
30-07-2014, 11:41 AM
If we had it, Thompson would only take 4 steps and draw the line if it was against the gimps.

PatHead
30-07-2014, 11:45 AM
If we had it, Thompson would only take 4 steps and draw the line if it was against the gimps.

He would just stop giving free kicks against them in dangerous positions.

Argylehibby
30-07-2014, 11:48 AM
He would just stop giving free kicks against them in dangerous positions.

I must have missed when he started giving us free kicks against them in dangerous positions

green&left
30-07-2014, 12:10 PM
It's the reluctant 'I'll investigate the costs' part that gets me.

How expensive does he think the friggin stuff is? and what is there to investigate?

Try picking up a phone - "Hey big yin, how much does yon wanishing spray cost if we buy in bulk....innat?" = Investigation over.

Just step out of the dark ages and implement it FFS.

It's £6 a bottle apparently.

Didn't know to either laugh or greet when some FA numpty down south said the cost could be a hurdle. £120 per team per season, sure the multi billion pound TV could almost cover it for them...

Not surprised the SFA aren't interested. Auld f&*%rs are stuck in the stone age.

TRC
30-07-2014, 12:12 PM
Why are these people in office honestly can't believe how anyone can see this in bad light. I can understand goal line tech not being implemented as the cost are high but surely a couple of cans of Gillette aren't going to cost the earth.

lord bunberry
30-07-2014, 12:20 PM
Why are these people in office honestly can't believe how anyone can see this in bad light. I can understand goal line tech not being implemented as the cost are high but surely a couple of cans of Gillette aren't going to cost the earth.

That's what I was thinking, if it costs a fortune then I could understand it. Does anyone know how much a can of vanishing spray costs?

Gettin' Auld
30-07-2014, 12:21 PM
Why are these people in office honestly can't believe how anyone can see this in bad light. I can understand goal line tech not being implemented as the cost are high but surely a couple of cans of Gillette aren't going to cost the earth.

The costs are so low, it wouldn't take too much work to get a sponsor for it either.

givescotlandfreedom
30-07-2014, 12:33 PM
The responses on here show the arrogance of those in charge and the contempt they hold us supporters in pretty well.

Pretty Boy
30-07-2014, 01:01 PM
£6.99 a can apparently.

So lets assume a bulk buy discount of £3 a can. £3 a game a week times the number of games (6 in the Premier, 5 in Champ, 5 in League 1, 5 in League 2) so 21 gives £24 a week, times that by 5 for the monthly cost is £120 a month and say 10 months of football is £1200 a year.

Obviously cup games are additional but is a cost of about £3k or £4K a year unrealistic. The blazers could probably knock that off their hospitality budget and never miss it.

PatHead
30-07-2014, 01:09 PM
£6.99 a can apparently.

So lets assume a bulk buy discount of £3 a can. £3 a game a week times the number of games (6 in the Premier, 5 in Champ, 5 in League 1, 5 in League 2) so 21 gives £24 a week, times that by 5 for the monthly cost is £120 a month and say 10 months of football is £1200 a year.

Obviously cup games are additional but is a cost of about £3k or £4K a year unrealistic. The blazers could probably knock that off their hospitality budget and never miss it.

Sure a bottle would last more than one match so that is worst case scenario.

SanFranHibs
30-07-2014, 01:11 PM
If they can't see when an LG free kick is a yard over a nicely painted, thick white goalline what chance have they got of noticing a defenders size 10's creeping over a disappearing piece of graffiti?

Dashing Bob S
30-07-2014, 01:12 PM
No need for any changes or innovations in the Scottish game. With 3 or our top 5 clubs in the lower division, its perfect as it is.

Gettin' Auld
30-07-2014, 01:14 PM
£6.99 a can apparently.

So lets assume a bulk buy discount of £3 a can. £3 a game a week times the number of games (6 in the Premier, 5 in Champ, 5 in League 1, 5 in League 2) so 21 gives £24 a week, times that by 5 for the monthly cost is £120 a month and say 10 months of football is £1200 a year.

Obviously cup games are additional but is a cost of about £3k or £4K a year unrealistic. The blazers could probably knock that off their hospitality budget and never miss it.

:tee hee: 21 x 3 isn't 24.

Regardless of that. The costs to implement it is still very small.

surreyhibbie
30-07-2014, 01:15 PM
They're probably worried about complaints from certain of our rivals if they try and introduce anything resembling soap to the game...

:greengrin

Onion
30-07-2014, 01:22 PM
It's £6 a bottle apparently.

Didn't know to either laugh or greet when some FA numpty down south said the cost could be a hurdle. £120 per team per season, sure the multi billion pound TV could almost cover it for them...

Not surprised the SFA aren't interested. Auld f&*%rs are stuck in the stone age.

Need to accept they've done their sums and are much more in touch with reality than us. Armageddon II, apparently :greengrin

jacomo
30-07-2014, 02:19 PM
That's what I was thinking, if it costs a fortune then I could understand it. Does anyone know how much a can of vanishing spray costs?

To be fair, there's also the natty holsters to think about, so that the refs can have the can easily accessible at all times. That could cost another £100 or so.

Probably best if the SFA act on this with their usual urgency and efficiency, and convene a special working group to meet for regular long lunches over the next 3 and a bit years to discuss the innovation. They can then produce a report just in time for the next World Cup.

Geo_1875
30-07-2014, 02:53 PM
To be fair, there's also the natty holsters to think about, so that the refs can have the can easily accessible at all times. That could cost another £100 or so.

Probably best if the SFA act on this with their usual urgency and efficiency, and convene a special working group to meet for regular long lunches over the next 3 and a bit years to discuss the innovation. They can then produce a report just in time for the next World Cup.

They are against it as it could be used as an empirical measure of the incompetence of their employees.

And they'd rather keep that as a conspiracy theory.

Finbar
30-07-2014, 03:34 PM
Every now and then somebody comes up with a really simple idea that solves a problem that people have been struggling with for years. And you think why did nobody think of that before? The free kick spray was definitely one of those.

SanFranHibs
30-07-2014, 03:53 PM
In the 1980s the first version was developed by a company consisting, amongst others, of Sir Bobby Charlton and FA referee, Neil Midgely. The English FA rejected the idea, failing even to attend field trials. Approaches to Adidas's English office to develop the product were rejected. The first use in a professional level was in the 2000 Brazilian Championship, Copa João Havelange. A successful commercial version was invented in 2002 by Argentinian entrepreneur Pablo Silva and called it "9-15". The spray has been patented by Brazilian inventor Heine Allemagne since October 29, 2002 although it is not the version FIFA uses. Since then, the spray has been used in many international football competitions. In June 2014 the spray's latest commercial version, "9-15", made its debut in the FIFA 2014 World Cup.

The 2011 Copa América tournament was the first tournament for national teams to use the spray. Its success caused it to be adopted by several national leagues in 2011 in the America's including the North American MLS association. It has also been used in the 2013 FIFA U-20 World Cup in Turkey, the 2014 UEFA European Under-17 Championship in Malta and Gozo, and the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil.

The first World Cup match to feature the vanishing spray was the opening game of the 2014 FIFA World Cup between Brazil and Croatia on 12 June, used by referee Yuichi Nishimura.

Source: Wikipedia.

DAVE1875
30-07-2014, 04:15 PM
Going to be used in the Premier League this coming season

Michael
30-07-2014, 04:51 PM
Don't forget that you'll have to train the referees to use the can. I'm not sure of the level of training required, but let's assume its roughly the level of a bachelor honours degree. Such degrees cost around 36k, so if you consider that cost for 10 referees it equates to 360k.

No way could we afford to do this.

3pm
30-07-2014, 05:18 PM
No need for any changes or innovations in the Scottish game. With 3 or our top 5 clubs in the lower division, its perfect as it is.

Don't forget Hearts as well DBS.

southern hibby
30-07-2014, 06:18 PM
Done a lot of brazilian games and they also use chalk dust if it's to wet to use the cans. As for bringing it I'n to Scottish football the SFA will need to ask the Ugly sisters for permission. GGTTH

Dashing Bob S
30-07-2014, 06:39 PM
Don't forget Hearts as well DBS.

My mistake - stuck in all this Hibs-Rangers-Falkirk nonsense.

1950's hibbie
30-07-2014, 06:43 PM
They have been using it in the MLS for a long time. Its just accepted and players just seem to accept it without too much comment.

Glory Lurker
30-07-2014, 07:23 PM
I'd like to see linesmen using it, too, to mark out where the throw in should be taken from.

Bill Milne
31-07-2014, 07:47 AM
Given that I can't recall Sellik of The Huns ever retreating 10 yards at a free kick, referees would be terrified of offending them and, thereby, jeopardising their cances of landing a cup final.

The Green Goblin
31-07-2014, 10:15 AM
EPL are going to use it...

Jack Hackett
31-07-2014, 06:29 PM
They have been using it in the MLS for a long time. Its just accepted and players just seem to accept it without too much comment.

What's for them to comment on..."There's a line, the correct distance from the ball. Stay behind it". To reject something so universally acclaimed as a step forward, is a complete disgrace. These dinosaurs need an extinction level event

eastterrace
31-07-2014, 08:46 PM
Given that I can't recall Sellik of The Huns ever retreating 10 yards at a free kick, referees would be terrified of offending them and, thereby, jeopardising their cances of landing a cup final.

maybe celtic football club and the new huns players could have a canister each and tell the ref were they should stand at free kicks.

Bill Milne
01-08-2014, 08:04 AM
maybe celtic football club and the new huns players could have a canister each and tell the ref were they should stand at free kicks.

Not much different from what they do already, frankly!!

Crops73
01-08-2014, 11:26 AM
It's not the spray that is the issue in Scotland......it's the fact that ref's here measure in Liliputian yards and not human ones, so the spray is the least of our worries.


No, the refs measure in Glaswegian yards.

Leith_Hibee
01-08-2014, 04:02 PM
If the decision is being made purely on cost then charge the clubs and extra £10 for officiating each game.

We need some innovative individuals running the Scottish game.

...WentToMowAnSPL
01-08-2014, 04:17 PM
Apparently, it's to do with potential allergies - it's contains some substances similar to soap which several west coast teams may not have come up against .... :agree:

GoldenEagle
01-08-2014, 05:29 PM
I'd like to see linesmen using it, too, to mark out where the throw in should be taken from.

That would really help make watching football much better, a linesman running back 15 yards to mark where a throw in should be taken just in case a player steals a couple of yards, do we hold up the game until he's back in position?.....How would it work in the half where the linesman doesn't go past the half way line?

Glory Lurker
01-08-2014, 05:34 PM
That would really help make watching football much better, a linesman running back 15 yards to mark where a throw in should be taken just in case a player steals a couple of yards, do we hold up the game until he's back in position?.....How would it work in the half where the linesman doesn't go past the half way line?

Ok, apart from all that, what makes it a poor suggestion? :-)

Eyrie
01-08-2014, 06:19 PM
Maybe the referees should just enforce the rules and not allow players to steal five or ten yards at a throw in?

I can understand turning a blind eye to a yard or two when a throw in is taken quickly as it keeps the game moving but not when it takes several seconds for the full back to arrive, then several more whilst he edges up the line before finally throwing the ball in.

Albion Hibs
01-08-2014, 06:57 PM
I am not surprised, it would just confirm what we already know...none of them can count to ten!

Deansy
01-08-2014, 08:07 PM
Despite the success of the spray at the World Cup, according to John Fleming (The head of Referee Operations at the SFA) there is no real need to use the spray in Scotland.

Aye, because getting players to stay 10 yards away from the ball at a free kick has never been a problem here, has it?.........FFS

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11781/9398891/scottish-premiership-the-sfa-is-investigating-the-costs-of-introducing-vanishing-spray-for-referees


TRANSLATED : 'Celtic and Rangers have told us NO as the '10 yard-rule' has never applied to them and both clubs see no reason for that to change now or in the future'

nonshinyfinish
02-08-2014, 09:29 AM
So let's see... it's simple, cheap, and easy to implement, it doesn't slow the game down, and, as anyone watching the World Cup could see, it's effective.

Absolutely no place for this foreign nonsense in the Scottish game. We taught them to play in the first place. Who do they think they are, with their tactics, and their innovations, and their coherent development strategies? I fully support the SFA's brave campaign to KEEP SCOTTISH FOOTBALL S***E.