Video replay refs

[Timbo]

I think everyone id getting far too carried away with a series of nightmare scenarios where play is stopped while someone looks at a screen to see if there was a foul 10 minutes before. That is NOT what I would use TV monitoring for.

In the same way as they do for Rugby (both codes) the video ref would only be used when the ref called for him - which would only be when there was doubt over the validity of a goal or where there were claims that a goal had been scored but not given.

In these circumstances play would already have been stopped (either for a goal or a kick) and it wouldn't take long for the decision to be made. In the case of the Henry handball goal they hadn't even kicked-off when TV showed the handball. Even in the case of the ball crossing the line but being cleared and play continuing (as in the Spurs 'goal' v Man U) it would only be seconds before the ref was informed and blew for the goal.

Every second of every game is different. I dont think these are nightmare scenarios but things that are very likely to happen in games. You need to have some real hard and fast rules regarding when it can be used. Just saying when the ref needs it and in special cases only is way too ambiguous.

Any replay takes at least 10 seconds to come up on the screen, so much can happen in 10 seconds.

 

[Easy 10]

the video ref would only be used when the ref called for him - which would only be when there was doubt over the validity of a goal or where there were claims that a goal had been scored but not given.

Or when he's surrounded by six or seven irate players SCREAMING at him to get a video referral. You think refs get aggro from players now ? Just wait till they can start calling for him to watch a replay of the bloody thing. They'll be all over him like flies on shit for every damn incident.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

thats such a massive 'if' though. where do you stop once the genie is out?

if he'd been the other side of the pitch/blocked from main TV view by a player, would it have been so clear cut?

For the first, depends on the 3rd (4th? 5th?)ref. A qualified ref should quickly work it out. There will be controversy, of course, but it won't be as insane as the Henry handball controversy, it will be over more minor things (he was just ahead of the last defender, or, he just got the ball before the man) the kind of stuff we live with all the time.

As for your second example. Unlikely with the number of camera's, but if the ref can't make the call, he can't make the call. I just think we make the game better with camera's, doubt it will make it perfect.

 

[Acker79]

In the same way as they do for Rugby (both codes) the video ref would only be used when the ref called for him

But the problem with this is that the laws of the game state that the ref has ultimate authority on the game. Not his assistance, teh ref. Not some mysterious figure hidden away in a both with a bank of tv, the ref.

It's why FIFA et al are so opposed to overturning decisions, "re-refereeing the game" after the fact.

If you have someone else watching the game and making decisions, they are undermining the referee's authority.

 

[Jim D]

Unfortunately it doesn't work if a penalty is incorrectly NOT given. So I still favour having an independent official on the side, if it was an obvious pen then he radio's down, tells the ref, who awards it.

Video refs should not be allowed for pens or any other 'on field' type of incident. They should only be allowed if the ref has doubts about the awarding of a goal.

 

[Jim D]

Any replay takes at least 10 seconds to come up on the screen, so much can happen in 10 seconds.

If the ref will only consult the video ref over the awarding of a goal then play will have been stopped already. In the case where a 'goal' was scored but play continued then I would say it is only right that the ref stops play and blows for the goal as soon as he is told - which shouldn't take long.

 

[Jim D]

Or when he's surrounded by six or seven irate players SCREAMING at him to get a video referral. You think refs get aggro from players now ? Just wait till they can start calling for him to watch a replay of the bloody thing. They'll be all over him like flies on shit for every damn incident.

If the players know that the video ref will only be consulted over a goal then they will have no need to surround him over other matters. If it was over a goal then I would expect he would already be referring it to the video ref. If the behaviour continues then he can show them yellow or red cards depending on the amount of abuse levelled at him - that should stop them.

 

[Timbo]

If the ref will only consult the video ref over the awarding of a goal then play will have been stopped already. In the case where a 'goal' was scored but play continued then I would say it is only right that the ref stops play and blows for the goal as soon as he is told - which shouldn't take long.

Now that is almost workable. As easy says though, there will be players surrounding the ref after every goal scored and you could probably pick out a bit of holding or some sort of foul in 50% of goals if you look long and hard enough.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Video refs should not be allowed for pens or any other 'on field' type of incident. They should only be allowed if the ref has doubts about the awarding of a goal.

OK, but does that make refs more likely to award a penalty, knowing it can be over-ruled if wrong, rather than waving play on and risk being crucified later?

 

[Jim D]

But the problem with this is that the laws of the game state that the ref has ultimate authority on the game. Not his assistance, teh ref. Not some mysterious figure hidden away in a both with a bank of tv, the ref..

I don't think anyone is questioning the ref's authority in all other areas. However, if there is doubt over the awarding of a goal then surely if a TV replay will clear it up (and play has already stopped) there can be little harm done and the game will be better for it.

 

[Jim D]

OK, but does that make refs more likely to award a penalty, knowing it can be over-ruled if wrong, rather than waving play on and risk being crucified later?

It makes no difference as decisions on the awarding of a pen would not be subject to a video review. If the pen goes into the net but through a hole in the netting and out then the ref could ask for a review to see if it really was a goal.

 

[Easy 10]

I don't think anyone is questioning the ref's authority in all other areas. However, if there is doubt over the awarding of a goal then surely if a TV replay will clear it up (and play has already stopped) there can be little harm done and the game will be better for it.

But you will inevitably attract video appeals almost every time a goal is scored, just out of desperation on the offchance of getting it overturned. The rarity value of a goal will dictate this. They might as well use up an appeal on it. Just look at the number of times a defender or goalie starts berating a lino or a ref, appealing for a pull here, a tug there, just out of desperation, or blame. Are you going to allow appeals for offside decisions if a goal is scored ? Because you might even have to go back a long way in the move that led to the goal. And THEN you've got the whole "was he interfering with play ?" malarky to deal with on a replay.

Good luck sorting THAT lot out in 10 seconds.

 

[Brovion]

Video refs should not be allowed for pens or any other 'on field' type of incident. They should only be allowed if the ref has doubts about the awarding of a goal.

What about a defensive handball in the area? Say as clear-cut as Henry's was and the referee waves play on. That's just as much a miscarriage of justice, so are you saying that won't be covered under your proposed rules?

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

It makes no difference as decisions on the awarding of a pen would not be subject to a video review. If the pen goes into the net but through a hole in the netting and out then the ref could ask for a review to see if it really was a goal.

OK, but then you do away with 90% of controversial decisions requiring a video replay

 

[Jim D]

But you will inevitably attract video appeals almost every time a goal is scored, just out of desperation on the offchance of getting it overturned. The rarity value of a goal will dictate this. They might as well use up an appeal on it. Just look at the number of times a defender or goalie starts berating a lino or a ref, appealing for a pull here, a tug there, just out of desperation, or blame. Are you going to allow appeals for offside decisions if a goal is scored ? Because you might even have to go back a long way in the move that led to the goal. And THEN you've got the whole "was he interfering with play ?" malarky to deal with on a replay.

Good luck sorting THAT lot out in 10 seconds.

The players wouldn't be allowed to appeal - only the ref would be allowed to ask the video ref. He would only do this if, in his opinion, there was doubt over the validity of the goal (or vice-versa). Obviously, in the case where the whole team was disputing (as in the France goal) he would probably want to consult even if he thought it was a valid goal. Following on from that, supposing Gallas missed the chance setup by Henry's handball and the ball was cleared outside the area but immediately fired back into the goal. I would say that was a valid goal as the ball had been cleared and the video ref would only be alowed to review the action from the time France regained the ball.

One area where you could well find people leaving it to the video ref is in the marginal offside decisions. These often happen too quickly for the lino to immediately judge where the player was when the ball was struck (especially if you have a player in an offside position but going back). I would think that lino's may well decide to keep their flags down and let the video ref decide. But I can't think this is necessarily a bad way to behave - the game is so quick and the margins are so tiny that it is probably beyond the capabilities of most people to say with any accuracy if it was offside or not. If it's a goal then why not let the video ref decide?

 

[Jim D]

What about a defensive handball in the area? Say as clear-cut as Henry's was and the referee waves play on. That's just as much a miscarriage of justice, so are you saying that won't be covered under your proposed rules?

Yes - that would be down to the decision of the ref

 

[Jim D]

OK, but then you do away with 90% of controversial decisions requiring a video replay

Possibly, but that's what the ref is there for.

 

[Easy 10]

The players wouldn't be allowed to appeal - only the ref would be allowed to ask the video ref. He would only do this if, in his opinion, there was doubt over the validity of the goal (or vice-versa). Obviously, in the case where the whole team was disputing (as in the France goal) he would probably want to consult even if he thought it was a valid goal. Following on from that, supposing Gallas missed the chance setup by Henry's handball and the ball was cleared outside the area but immediately fired back into the goal. I would say that was a valid goal as the ball had been cleared and the video ref would only be alowed to review the action from the time France regained the ball.

One area where you could well find people leaving it to the video ref is in the marginal offside decisions. These often happen too quickly for the lino to immediately judge where the player was when the ball was struck (especially if you have a player in an offside position but going back). I would think that lino's may well decide to keep their flags down and let the video ref decide. But I can't think this is necessarily a bad way to behave - the game is so quick and the margins are so tiny that it is probably beyond the capabilities of most people to say with any accuracy if it was offside or not. If it's a goal then why not let the video ref decide?

Holy hell. You are setting up a whole new catalogue of potential disputes with that. Now we're looking at how far back the video ref is allowed to rewind the tape, depending on if/when its cleared ?! And lino's giving up on offsides to let the video ref decide instead....sheeesh, I wouldn't fancy picking over the bones of that AFTER a match, let alone DURING one !

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Possibly, but that's what the ref is there for.

Hmmmm, very circular argument.

Hey, I want video replays, but I want them to stop players like Ngog diving in the box.

 

[Easy 10]

I want AAR's behind the goal-line
And I want BIG retrospective punishments for players who cheat. Mandatory 4 match bans, then 8 for a repeat offender, then 12 and so on.

That'll do for now.