TV Replays ? Extra officials ? NSC DECIDES

[Easy 10]

OK its an old chestnut, but last nights incident with Henry playing basketball in the 6 yard box inevitably raises the age-old question once again: Does Henry shave his legs, or do they just look really shiney under floodlights ? However, once past that conundrum, we are left with the other debate - should TV replays be used to help with decisions ?

Despite the huge miscarriage in justice last night, I still say NO. Last nights handball was as blatant as you like obviously, and a TV replay would make the decision quite straightforward to disallow the goal. But most of the time, incidents are nowhere near as clear-cut as that, and even after several replay reviews, it can often be difficult to arrive at a decision that is definitely "correct". Had TV replays been used last night, perhaps Anelkas penalty claim a few minutes earlier would have been scrutinised again as well, and that was a lot less clear-cut.

I fear allowing replays would be the thin end of the wedge, and we'd have players and managers appealing every bloody thing that goes on in the box, only to argue the toss over a questionable TV replay that doesn't irrefutably prove a decision one way or the other - it would still be open to interpretation.

What I think I WOULD now like to see rolled out is the additional goal-line officials they are experimenting with in the Europa Cup at the moment. That incident last night would have happened right under the NOSE of the additional official. He would have had an unobscured view of it from a couple of yards away, and I'm almost certain Henry wouldn't have got away with it. In fact with the extra ref standing right there, he may not even have ATTEMPTED it.

What says the sages of this board ?

 

[CHAPPERS]

I can't see anything wrong with extra goal line officials. Might clean the game up a bit.

 

[Mendoza]

Extra officials is a big no no for me.

People want to erradicate human error on the pitch with officials, so why put more humans on the pitch to combat this?

I kind of like the controversy as it gives us something to talk about. If every decision was questioned and made correct, the game would be a bit more boring.

 

[Curious Orange]

Yes.

 

[Mellotron]

If having an extra official BEHIND the goal line doesn't really slow the game at all, and allows for more accurate calls on the big decisions, there is absolutely NO reason not to use them.

Go on, give me a reason not to.

 

[Ecosse Exile]

I think we should use the technology that is available, ie using a sensor in the ball married up with sensors in the goalposts to determine whether the ball crosses the goal line or not, therefore doing away with the scenarios of Watford v Reading last season and Bristol City v C. Palace this season. Yes we can all laugh at palace but imagine that happening in the last game of the season to us and meaning we missed the play offs or got relegated.
I also think replays are a good thing, it hasnt slowed down rugby. I do agree that it could be open to abuse so i would suggest limiting the amount of times each club can call for a replay to, say two per half.

 

[Fourteenth Eye]

I think a video official like they have in rugby is the answer.

its only used in a referal way so it doesnt infringe on play.

 

[The Wizard]

TV replays would turn football into a farce.

Referee behind the goal (like in Uefa cup) is the only viable option.

 

[Scoffers]

Extra officials is a big no no for me.

People want to erradicate human error on the pitch with officials, so why put more humans on the pitch to combat this?

I kind of like the controversy as it gives us something to talk about. If every decision was questioned and made correct, the game would be a bit more boring.

What she said

 

[drew]

I think a video official like they have in rugby is the answer.

its only used in a referal way so it doesnt infringe on play.

Exactly how doesn't it infringe on play? The ball is dead and they stand around waiting for the decision. Remember the last world cup final where we had a try that wasn't given.

The answer is to weed out the cheats. Ban them for 8-10 games if they are shown to cheat by diving, handball etc. If players can't play for almost a quarter of the season their clubs won't be too pleased in the fact that they are paying their wages for no return. It's only when the players are deterred from cheating that they will then stop doing it. If Henry knew that he would be banned from the world cup finals if he cheated, he wouldn't have done it as he would rather take his chances in a penalty shoot out with him going to the finals as opposed to watching his team mates go and him stay at home.

 

[Muzzman]

I think a video official like they have in rugby is the answer.

its only used in a referral way so it doesn't infringe on play.

Could be a good idea, especially if they show the slow motion replay on the big screens whilst they are making their decision, then everyone in the ground knows what the referral is for and also shows up the player caught cheating there and then, this in turn could lend itself to some kind of deterrent.

However, I think it would be unfair to use video replays in league football because there are clubs who don't have the facilities.

Replay Referees only for Continental and World Cups.

 

[Mellotron]

If having an extra official BEHIND the goal line doesn't really slow the game at all, and allows for more accurate calls on the big decisions, there is absolutely NO reason not to use them.

Go on, give me a reason not to.

Anyone?

 

[Johnny Crumplin Football]

TV replays would turn football into a farce.

Referee behind the goal (like in Uefa cup) is the only viable option.

Whose to say that they would not be in on the fiddle as well though? I mean, you have to ask questions if both the ref and the linesman fail to see two clearly offside players and then a Harlem Globetrotters tribute act. I thought Henry had more class than that.

 

[The Wizard]

Anyone?

I agree with you on something for once.

 

[Man of Harveys]

I think the point never gets made that the perma-whining managers like Colin Wanker or Alex Ferguson or Mark Hughes don't genuinely think that the referee got it wrong when they whine about them: they're just shamelessly applying pressure on them to favour them next time, to correct some fictitious wrong that they've suffered.

It's with this in mind that I don't doubt for one second that they'd simply turn their moaning towards the perceived inadequacies of video referees if they were introduced..."I mean, he's had a look at it on the video and still he doesn't give the penalty, what's wrong with him?" etc etc, ad infinitum.

So I don't like the idea of them because I simply don't think they'd be the miracle cure that gobby pundits and bad-loser managers make them out to be. I'm in the extra official on each goal-line CAMP personally.

 

[Mellotron]

I agree with you on something for once.

Yesssss.....feel that anger burn through you....

 

[ali jenkins]

TV replays are a BIG no-no for me! I dont care what anyone says they WILL slow down the game! In Rugby, Cricket or Tennis there is a break in play where a TV replay could be used. In Football, if the ball hits the bar and bounces down on the line and then bounces out when is a TV replay looked at? The defending team could break down the pitch and score, or the ball could just go loose and the game playing on for another 5 mins!

I dont think there needs to be any changes to the game, I like the talking points and every team benifits from the 'dodgy decisions'.

IF however there was going to be some changes Id go for the extra Refs over the TV, the game wouldnt get slowed down as they could just have a buzzer thing like the linos do to get the Refs attention.

 

[Acker79]

Extra officials is a big no no for me.

People want to erradicate human error on the pitch with officials, so why put more humans on the pitch to combat this?

If one bracket won't keep a shelf up, why add more?

If the linesman makes a human error, there's the referee there to say "hang on a minute".

If the referee doesn't have the right view to second guess the linesman who would? An extra official.

More officals mean more second opinions, more chance that one human's error is prevented. If there'd been a touchline official in last night's game, he would have seen the handball, the human error in the match would have been lessened.

 

[Acker79]

It's with this in mind that I don't doubt for one second that they'd simply turn their moaning towards the perceived inadequacies of video referees if they were introduced..."I mean, he's had a look at it on the video and still he doesn't give the penalty, what's wrong with him?" etc etc, ad infinitum.

Or they'd criticise them for slowing the game down "we were all over them, pressuring them, and we lost our momentum when the game stopped for a video replay"

 

[Gazwag]

Anyone?

The main problem I see is his position.

Some ground like ours for example has plenty of space behind the goal so the official can fairly easily get to the correct position to get the best view. Bearing in mind the goal itself can be an obstruction.

However, you will not get the same at Anfield or Old Trafford for example due to the lack of space behind the goals.

Therefore it could be argued that some teams will have an advantage over others.