Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Video technology in football - is it needed?
- Thread starter theacademic
- Start date
Rookie
Greetings
- Feb 8, 2005
- 12,324
Finally some one who sees it.
The shift in the number of people who are for technology in the game is a concern though, once it comes in and changes the game (not for the better in my view) we will never be able to go back
Last edited:
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
Because in the NFL they are black or white decisions. In the NFL, you can challenge whether a player was in bounds or not, or whether there were the correct number of players on the pitch, etc. You cannot challenge a decision to award (or not) a penalty for physical foul play.
If you are talking about bringing in a challenge for things like fouls then that would be completely unworkable, IMHO.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Most other sports don't have (potentially) long, unbroken passages of play, so to go back and review an incident at the next break in play has the potential to cause all kinds of carnage.
This debate has done the rounds on here a number of times, and what always becomes apparent is that the introduction of video technology to challenge / change referees decisions would require a whole RAFT of rule changes to accomodate them into football. It would utterly change the game as we know it.
It is NOT simply a process of popping over to a monitor for 20 seconds to have another look to clear something up.
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
This depends entirely on exactly what is bought in. I'm with Easy, a decision review system would require a complete change to the rule book, which would make a massive difference between the amateur and professional game. However, the NFL, rugby, tennis and cricket all have various review systems that don't massively effect the game and the amateur game is still completely playable without them.
I think something BIG will happen at a World Cup or something in the next 10 years, that will mean it comes in, regardless of how many rule changes are required. Football is miles behind a number of sports now in this respect.
Also, when people's jobs are on the line sometimes, isn't it important that things are as fair as humanly possible?
Also, when people's jobs are on the line sometimes, isn't it important that things are as fair as humanly possible?
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
What, you mean something like a ball being three foot over the line but the goal not being given ?
Yes, something exactly like that. In a World Cup final. With millions of pounds involved, and perhaps people's jobs on the line.
Can you understand why I was embarrassed on behalf of football when watching Mexico Argentina in the WC, and people who weren't into football were asking me why they didn't just obviously overrule the original and give the right decision?
What would your answer to them have been? I'd genuinely be interested to hear your response on this one.
"Oh, they can't because....they just can't."
ali jenkins
Thanks to Guinness Dave
"Correct" being entirely subjective of course. Unlike a line call, a decision is not always black and white, and will often still boil down to interpretation. You can guarantee a last minute goal would be challenged every bloody time if the manager still had his challenge in hand.
"In the build-up to their goal there was a tug on our defender..."
"No there wasn't"
"Yes there was"
A system in place for officially challenging refs decisions during the game. Yeah, that'd be fun to sort out.
I think you have misunderstood what my viewpoint is.
I am 100% against any form of technology in Football.
I was only saying that IF it HAS to happen then that is the only way Id like to see it. I would MUCH rather it didnt happen.
For every incident that goes against a team, there will be one that goes for them.
Rookie
Greetings
- Feb 8, 2005
- 12,324
Because the ref made a mistake it happens. Much like when a striker misses a chance. Its called human error and has occurred in football since the game was invented but has not stopped it becoming the most popular sport in the world
Perfect example actually, that.
Carlos Tevez was MILES offside.
Goal give, Mexico players surround the ref and lino for about a minute and a half. Football made to look very stupid, backwards and amateurish.
Now, with technology:
Same thing happens, however when it's obvious (whether challenge or 4th official saying something in ref's ear, whatever) they watch the replay on a big screen (what on earth you on about "20 seconds"? 4 seconds max, refs have to think much quicker than that all the time).
Everything sorted within seconds. As your name suggests, "Easy"...
Now I know you'll come back with millions of ifs and buts and different scenarios, but do you at least agree that in the above case, CLEARLY the tech direction works MILES better? That's all I'm asking for.
Carlos Tevez was MILES offside.
Goal give, Mexico players surround the ref and lino for about a minute and a half. Football made to look very stupid, backwards and amateurish.
Now, with technology:
Same thing happens, however when it's obvious (whether challenge or 4th official saying something in ref's ear, whatever) they watch the replay on a big screen (what on earth you on about "20 seconds"? 4 seconds max, refs have to think much quicker than that all the time).
Everything sorted within seconds. As your name suggests, "Easy"...
Now I know you'll come back with millions of ifs and buts and different scenarios, but do you at least agree that in the above case, CLEARLY the tech direction works MILES better? That's all I'm asking for.
But footballers are fine to make mistakes, whereas obviously with officiating the game it's essential there are as few mistakes as possible. Refs are ONLY there to apply the laws of the game, in an ideal world there would be no ref.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Cock-ups like the one you refer to in that Argentina v Mexico game are actually pretty rare, and the whole thing was excaberrated by it being shown on a giant screen to the whole stadium.
Why not have video technology to review decisions ? Quite simply, its the thin end of the wedge. Once you begin using video technology to uphold / overthrow decisions, then inevitably there'll be calls to use it more and more. Tackles, offsides, free-kicks, throw-ins - EVERYTHING even slightly contencious that leads to a goal, or the ruling out of one, would be analysed to death and argued over DURING THE GAME.
Its noticable that advocates for video technology always cite the extreme examples to state their case. The Henry handball, the Argentina offside goal, the Lampard "goal" etc. These are, in effect, "obvious" calls that should have been made by the officials but wern't. And yes, video technology would have "resolved" those calls quite easily.
BUT
its the more difficult calls that would be the crippling issue. The ambiguous ones. The decisions where we can still be arguing WEEKS later about "did he dive ?" "Did he get any of the ball" or (god help us) "was he really interfering with play or was that the 2nd phase" ?
The obvious calls are one thing. Imagine sorting that other shit out in 4 seconds.
Thin end of the wedge, see ?
Depends how new rules were implemented. How about just ONE new rule introduced, giving the 4th official power to overrule the ref, so it ONLY happens when it's something glaringly obvious that can be put right? Rest of the time, he doesn't get involved, and as he's not a physical presence, players won't be on at him for anything. That way the "extreme" decisions that are a big issue will be solved.
Leave the rest.
Also, please answer my question as to how you would've explained the situation in the Mexico Argentina game to my friends. Remember, they're not very football-savvy, so - in simple terms - how would you explain why justice couldn't be done??
Leave the rest.
Also, please answer my question as to how you would've explained the situation in the Mexico Argentina game to my friends. Remember, they're not very football-savvy, so - in simple terms - how would you explain why justice couldn't be done??
And I don't agree it would necessarily be "the thin end of the wedge" as you keep spouting. Loads of small rules have changed in football over the year. We are now getting those new 4th and 5th touchlines officials, I don't see anyone pushing for a 6th and 7th etc?
Sometimes it's black and black (or white and white). For instance the recent example of Nani's goal v Tottenham. The ref acted in accordance with the laws of the game. He had all the information he needed, and all the information he would have garnered if he used a video replay. He was given a chance to change his decision when confurring with the linesman, and he didn't.
However, if he had changed his mind, disallowed the goal and given a free kick for handball, he would have also been acting in accordance with the laws of the game.
One decision favours Tottenham, one favours Man Utd. Both are right. So whichever way it happens, it is challengable, and a manager could lose their challenge over such a decision.
I can't understand why you're embarrassed on behalf of football, I think that's a little overly dramatic.
My explanation would be:
One of the basic rules of football is that for any given match the referee is the ultimate authority, it's why FIFA have such strict rules about overruling referee's decisions. (and why your fourth official having the power to over-rule the ref won't happen)
Introducing video technology, especially if relying on an anonymous person in a control box selecting camera angles for replays undermines the ref (he may make only one mistake in a game, but if it's aired for everyone to see, every single one of his decisions will be questioned by fans, players, managers, which could ramp up the atmosphere to unsafe levels) and leaves the system open to abuse. Perhaps the controller in the Mexico/Argentina game was neutral, but how do you ensure neutrality at old trafford, or white heart lane, or the amex? The big screen operator will be obviously biased, if not by supporting the team, by fact that their employment is by the club. The selection of which replay they show can have a huge effect with perspective and angles.
To counter these issues there would have to be such a complex system, the use of replays would have their own law book.
How do you get a 5th official to operate the jumbotron when they don't have training? Train them would be ovious, of course, but who pays? How much will that cost?
Every match having 5 officials means we need more referees, at a time when there's a decline in referees where are these extra bodies going to come from?
FIFA don't currently allow use of replays, if a mistake is made, players have to accept it and get on with the game, however obvious the mistake. Errors occur in every sport, even those with video replays. Football isn't alone with this.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
And how often do managers and players complain about "glaringly obvious" decisions not being made ? You're still asking for a definitive line to be drawn somewhere when its impossible to do so, because its still always going to be down to interpretation. "Leave the rest" ? Come on, once they know someone can overturn a decision by looking at a screen, "the rest" starts getting questioned more and more and more.
Easy. Because there is no video technology used in football, so referees are unable to alter their decision based on a TV replay. He can't suddenly and arbitrarily "pick and choose" when or when not to refer to a video to review a decision, because the current rules simply do not enable him to do that.
He makes an honest decision, and rightly or wrongly that decision stands.
theacademic
Member
- Jun 14, 2010
- 90
- Thread starter
- #39
thanks for your comment so far guys on this topic. Please complete my 2 minute survey at VIDEO TECHNOLOG ... DESIRABLE OR UNNECESSARY?
BensGrandad
New member
The question of manpower is not a problem as refs have to retire at a young age so it would be easy to have a retired official who is unable to run and ref the game but is quite capable of watching a tv monitor with radio connection to the ref. It will come it is just a matter of how and when it will be implemented..