Goal Line Technology.

[Easy 10]

Problem is you can't get the 3 points back on Monday morning. With the colossal amounts of money at stake, especially in the PL, clubs can't afford to be shafted by poor decision making. I'm not advocating a review of every decision, but certainly penalty decisions and handballs could be reviewed given the impact they have on a game (and potentially a season).

You're never going to have a "perfect" system though. You only have to look at the disagreements between pundits and fans on some penalty decisions to know that going to a video review to make the decision simply opens up a whole Pandoras Box of new issues. Its NOT always blatant, and its NOT always black and white. If a ref makes a call off the back of a video review, you'll inevitably STILL have plenty of fans, managers and pundits disagreeing with it - except this time its worse, because he's had time to look at it again and (maybe) still arrived at what some will interpret as the wrong decision.

You can't always rely on a correct decison, all you can ask for is an honest one. Video reviews for fouls / offsides / handballs would resolve nothing. It'd just make a whole NEW raft of controversies.

 

[Easy 10]

But, for instance, the Ukrainian 'goal' against England may or may not have crossed the line, but there was a blatant (i.e. easy to spot) offside missed in the lead up - why allow one bad decision in favour of the attacking team and then rescind one in favour of the defending team few seconds later? If justice was properly done in this case then England would have had a free-kick way outside the penalty box. This 'flow' argument is bogus when the game is stop-start anyway.

Its not always blatant though is it ? Its not always black and white, even an offside is open to interpretation when you bring in phases of play, there's plenty of examples you see where the ball ends up in the net after someone may or may not have been deemed to be offside.

Holding a game up while the ref chews that over can and will still lead to a decision that is arguable. Its just the thin end of the wedge, we'll have managers wanting every bloody incident leading up to a goal picked over and analysed to see if something can be pulled up on the video to have it scrubbed. Was there a tug on the shirt in the build-up ? Should that have been a foul when he tackled and won the ball ? Was that ball rolling a bit when he played the free kick ?

Do you REALLY want to watch a game like that ??

 

[RyFish]

Its not always blatant though is it ? Its not always black and white, even an offside is open to interpretation when you bring in phases of play, there's plenty of examples you see where the ball ends up in the net after someone may or may not have been deemed to be offside.

Holding a game up while the ref chews that over can and will still lead to a decision that is arguable. Its just the thin end of the wedge, we'll have managers wanting every bloody incident leading up to a goal picked over and analysed to see if something can be pulled up on the video to have it scrubbed. Was there a tug on the shirt in the build-up ? Should that have been a foul when he tackled and won the ball ? Was that ball rolling a bit when he played the free kick ?

Do you REALLY want to watch a game like that ??

No, and I never said I did. My point is that why introduce something of limited value when there are far more contentious issues to sort. Do those first. And it may hold play up but you demonstrably WILL get more correct decisions. Whether this is worth it or not is what is open to debate.

The 'thin end of the wedge' argument doesn't hold either - it's always trotted out as a scare tactic before any change.

 

[RyFish]

You're never going to have a "perfect" system though. You only have to look at the disagreements between pundits and fans on some penalty decisions to know that going to a video review to make the decision simply opens up a whole Pandoras Box of new issues. Its NOT always blatant, and its NOT always black and white. If a ref makes a call off the back of a video review, you'll inevitably STILL have plenty of fans, managers and pundits disagreeing with it - except this time its worse, because he's had time to look at it again and (maybe) still arrived at what some will interpret as the wrong decision.

You can't always rely on a correct decison, all you can ask for is an honest one. Video reviews for fouls / offsides / handballs would resolve nothing. It'd just make a whole NEW raft of controversies.

Are you saying that the accuracy of the ref's decision will not - on average - go up if he has a chance to see an incident from a different angle? Incredible.

 

[Mellotron]

[MENTION=70]Easy 10[/MENTION] - No one is saying it will make refereeing PERFECT. By why not give them the best chance possible to make good calls? Respect for refs would go up massively, and it would make their jobs MILES easier. No, it will never be perfect. But let's make it as fair as we possibly can. Obviously.

 

[Easy 10]

No, and I never said I did. My point is that why introduce something of limited value when there are far more contentious issues to sort. Do those first. And it may hold play up but you demonstrably WILL get more correct decisions. Whether this is worth it or not is what is open to debate.

The 'thin end of the wedge' argument doesn't hold either - it's always trotted out as a scare tactic before any change.

Goal-line technology is hardly of limited value, it will bring in the very definition of whether a goal has been scored or not - what could be more crucial than that ? And you say the thin end of the wedge argument doesn't hold, but off the back of goal-line technology coming in, you've already got folk on this thread, yourself included, wanting cameras for offsides, "blatant" handballs, penalties....the wedge is already there, and we're working our way up to the thick end of it already !

Are you saying that the accuracy of the ref's decision will not - on average - go up if he has a chance to see an incident from a different angle? Incredible.

No. I'm saying that not everyone will agree with the refs decision even after he's called a timeout to have a look at it again. And that in itself will bring about an even BIGGER controversy than if he simply missed the incident or made an honest mistake in apparently calling it wrong. Not every foul is blatant, not every call is totally obvious.

[MENTION=70]Easy 10[/MENTION] - No one is saying it will make refereeing PERFECT. By why not give them the best chance possible to make good calls? Respect for refs would go up massively, and it would make their jobs MILES easier. No, it will never be perfect. But let's make it as fair as we possibly can. Obviously.

But at what cost ? How and when do you stop the game ? Does the ball have to go dead first, or do you stop it mid-flow to check an incident ? What if a goal is scored when you have a video review to go back and check ? How often do you refer to video, whats the criteria ?

You are talking about radically altering how the game would be played, its not simply a case of a pheep on the whistle, a dash to the touchline for a quickl look at a replay, and a call being made. You need a whole RAFT of new legislation to accomodate it - and at the end of it all, you're STILL just going to have an interpretation of an incident, a judgement call, which will sometimes be easy but other times very, very difficult.

I'll live with an honest decision which results in the odd mistake. Video reviews for anything other than goal-line calls would cause far more trouble than its worth. Football is BRILLIANT as it is, lets not ruin it.

 

[Easy 10]

Quite apart from the fact its only in the Premier League that you have about 26 cameras catching every single incident. Will you get that at Rochdale ? What if the ref calls for a video review and the bloke in the gantry at Spotland was picking his nose, and missed what the ref needed to see ?

Or are we talking about a 2-tiered legislation for video reviews, different rules for different divisions, where only the top flight has it brought in and the rest of the League carries on as normal ? That makes perfect sense doesn't it.

 

[Mellotron]

Football is BRILLIANT as it is, lets not ruin it.

People would've said the same before every single rule change - 2 points for a goal, passbacks, offside rule, etc. Football has constantly evolved and improved since day one, why should that evolution suddenly be stopped?

I agree that the one issue leftover is starting/stopping the game. If they can figure that one out with minimal intrusion on the game then there's no excuse not to go with it after that. The amount of money in the game nowadays, it's not right for people's jobs to be on the line based on someone who doesn't have the best chance to make a decision.

 

[Easy 10]

People would've said the same before every single rule change - 2 points for a goal, passbacks, offside rule, etc. Football has constantly evolved and improved since day one, why should that evolution suddenly be stopped?

I agree that the one issue leftover is starting/stopping the game. If they can figure that one out with minimal intrusion on the game then there's no excuse not to go with it after that. The amount of money in the game nowadays, it's not right for people's jobs to be on the line based on someone who doesn't have the best chance to make a decision.

I don't give a toss about the money in the game - thats a side issue. The game is the game, we need it in its purest form. Just because its now played by millionaires and owned by billionaires, does not justify radically altering the fabric of the game in a vain attempt to eradicate human error.

Introducing video replays to analyse decisions on fouls, handballs and offsides would kill the game stone dead as a spectacle. Football doesn't play out in a stop-start fashion like cricket or NFL, it doesn't take place in bursts, there are no "natural" breaks at specified times. Passages of play can continue for long, long periods, and anything can happen within those spells.

What do you do - review a decision that WAS given, or one that wasn't ? Do you stop the game because Allardyce has gone spastic on the touchline at NOT getting a penalty awarded ? What if the other team breaks up the other end and scores - does the ref get called over to have a look at the pen he didn't give at the other end, then chalk the goal off and go back and award it ? There are just so many foiables and potential for chaos, it would be chilli-con-CARNAGE out there.

You've got to think this through.

 

[Mellotron]

I don't give a toss about the money in the game - thats a side issue. The game is the game, we need it in its purest form. Just because its now played by millionaires and owned by billionaires, does not justify radically altering the fabric of the game in a vain attempt to eradicate human error.

Introducing video replays to analyse decisions on fouls, handballs and offsides would kill the game stone dead as a spectacle. Football doesn't play out in a stop-start fashion like cricket or NFL, it doesn't take place in bursts, there are no "natural" breaks at specified times. Passages of play can continue for long, long periods, and anything can happen within those spells.

What do you do - review a decision that WAS given, or one that wasn't ? Do you stop the game because Allardyce has gone spastic on the touchline at NOT getting a penalty awarded ? What if the other team breaks up the other end and scores - does the ref get called over to have a look at the pen he didn't give at the other end, then chalk the goal off and go back and award it ? There are just so many foiables and potential for chaos, it would be chilli-con-CARNAGE out there.

You've got to think this through.

I'm not saying I know how it would be implemented, but it is something I do expect will come more and more into the game over the next 10-15 years, as the technology becomes smaller, smarter, faster etc. "It's purest form" has been drastically changed since day one. Football will CONTINUE to evolve.

 

[Easy 10]

What will never change though [MENTION=12101]Mellotron[/MENTION] is that when a ref gives a foul, whether it be with or without checking a video, its still ultimately going to be down to his own personal interpretation. And whilst most decisions are straightforward and obvious, many others are not. You can and often do have polar opposite opinions on the same incident - so making that call after the benefit of seeing it again is not going to bring about what everyone agrees is the "right" decision. Its still a judgement call, and it will just infuriate people even further if the ref hasn't even got the (justified) excuse of seeing it from a poor angle.

 

[Mellotron]

What will never change though [MENTION=12101]Mellotron[/MENTION] is that when a ref gives a foul, whether it be with or without checking a video, its still ultimately going to be down to his own personal interpretation. And whilst most decisions are straightforward and obvious, many others are not. You can and often do have polar opposite opinions on the same incident - so making that call after the benefit of seeing it again is not going to bring about what everyone agrees is the "right" decision. Its still a judgement call, and it will just infuriate people even further if the ref hasn't even got the (justified) excuse of seeing it from a poor angle.

But the calls he makes will be BETTER INFORMED and thus a higher percentage will be CORRECT. That's plain logic. And more correct decisions is a GOOD thing. It won't "enfuriate people further", as more often he will have gotten it right.

Compared to many other sports, football is still in the dark ages in terms of technology aiding the game. I understand a big part of that is due to the stop/start nature of the game, but I firmly believe technology will evolve to the point where this will be near a moot point.

 

[Easy 10]

But the calls he makes will be BETTER INFORMED and thus a higher percentage will be CORRECT. That's plain logic. And more correct decisions is a GOOD thing. It won't "enfuriate people further", as more often he will have gotten it right.

Compared to many other sports, football is still in the dark ages in terms of technology aiding the game. I understand a big part of that is due to the stop/start nature of the game, but I firmly believe technology will evolve to the point where this will be near a moot point.

Better informed decisions....but at what cost to the very format of the game ?

You might as well remove the referee from the pitch altogther, and just have an eye-in-the-sky making the calls. A bloke in a booth watching it all on the telly, and giving the decisons over the tannoy. Is that where we will eventually evolve to ?