Video referees anyone?

[bricktop]

I'm about the cases where players go down like they have been shot and it is shown and proven to be absolutely no contact on all angle on TV

 

[happyhippy]

I'm about the cases where players go down like they have been shot and it is shown and proven to be absolutely no contact on all angle on TV

Retrospective evidence is used though, but I think you could be right about the level of the punishment handed down. I don't think that enough is done to reduce the levels of clear cheating and diving. I also fear that 'names' still would get away with it.

Would Gerrard have got a six match ban a couple of years ago, even if such a system were in place? I doubt it!

 

[bricktop]

If it is proven then the ban would have to be mandatory.

That is unless you can sweeten Richard Scudamore with a decent backhander

 

[happyhippy]

If it is proven then the ban would have to be mandatory.

That is unless you can sweeten Richard Scudamore with a decent backhander

<fx: just clears throat>

Indeed, possibly.

 

[bricktop]

Prehaps i better take that off before they do me for libel!

 

[MAQ]

It is very interesting to see how this whole thread is developing.

Unfortunately the whole argument is flawed for one vital reason.

Im in favour of Goal Line Technology, however this is not without its own problems and repurcussions.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

It is very interesting to see how this whole thread is developing.

Unfortunately the whole argument is flawed for one vital reason.

Im in favour of Goal Line Technology, however this is not without its own problems and repurcussions.

As usual the ref arrives late at the incident!

I was wanting a refs perspective on this. Everybody is now talking as if technology is infallible, you sad bunch of poor deluded geeks!! How many times does hawkeye get switched off at Wimbledon because it's malfunctioning??

Also, stop buying into the Murdoch/Scudamore myth that football was invented in 1993 and consists of 18 teams in the English PL. What about FL divisions 1,2 & 3??? How do clubs accommodate the technology without super hig def murdochvision??? What about the conference and the rest of the pyramid? At what point is this introduced?? Will promotion be decided by geek-rating (can't go up haven't got the right technology) rather than on the pitch? What about referees who start at the bottom and work up. Is the technology thing an extra course added when they qualify for PL matches?? Technology in other sports has operated by a sort of cascade of intervention, where it was introduced for a single specific thing but quickly gets used for more and more, like cricket! Is football prepared for that??

 

[Bladesman]

It is very interesting to see how this whole thread is developing.

Unfortunately the whole argument is flawed for one vital reason.

Im in favour of Goal Line Technology, however this is not without its own problems and repurcussions.

What becuase it might mean the officials might actually get a decision right for once?

 

[RIP Niftos]

They might do, but the game will end up like American Football stopping and starting every 4 and a half secons. You'd go to a 3 o'clock kick off on a Saturday and not get hom til the following Wednesday.

 

[Linz]

The ref decides hes the man in charge if he thinks hes 100% right and hes wrong then so be it. But at least it would cut down on the amount of incorrect decisions he would make if he can go to a video ref.

See, that for me is the crux of the argument. Are you ever really going to get a referee who turns around and admits that he just isn't sure?

Rob Styles was convinced that "that" penalty given for Morgs against the Bindipper was a penalty.

That nob on Saturday was convinced that Kyle Naughton had dived, hence the booking.

In those circumstances, they aren't going to put it to a video referee because in their own minds, they are 100% certain. Their own linesmen are under used when it comes to decision making, as is the fourth official, I don't see how adding another person to this mix would prevent muddying already murky waters.

Retrospective decision making is alright, but how many matches are covered by a multitude of cameras? When United aren't on Sky, the only vantage point they use is on the press gantry... high and only covering one side of the pitch. There'd have to be a massive investment in tamper-proof equipment down the League system and I don't think it would ever happen.

 

[jose_d_blade]

its too hard to apply to lower leauge games due to cost however in the championship n prem theres no game iv ever seen without a tv crew filmng if not two or three. so the replay option is already there.

saying dont use it becous it will change the game is a poor argument should we go back to leather casey football's and no nets between the posts.

times are changing and football too.

the fact is theres too much money involved in the game today not to use it.


it should be used but limited say two replays per half, it cant slow the game any more than it is now how long dose it normally take the ref to run around the pitch persued by an angry mob of players before regaining controle and the game starts again? less than two minutes replay im sure.

if you want to see an end of big club protection get the replays in use simple

 

[MAQ]

As usual the ref arrives late at the incident!

I was expecting a comment such as this, so thanks for not disapointing

I was wanting a refs perspective on this. Everybody is now talking as if technology is infallible, you sad bunch of poor deluded geeks!! How many times does hawkeye get switched off at Wimbledon because it's malfunctioning??

A very valid point, what would happen in matches where this was the point, should they then be called off to be replyed when such technology is working correctly? Discuss

Also, stop buying into the Murdoch/Scudamore myth that football was invented in 1993 and consists of 18 teams in the English PL. What about FL divisions 1,2 & 3??? How do clubs accommodate the technology without super hig def murdochvision??? What about the conference and the rest of the pyramid? At what point is this introduced?? Will promotion be decided by geek-rating (can't go up haven't got the right technology) rather than on the pitch? What about referees who start at the bottom and work up. Is the technology thing an extra course added when they qualify for PL matches?? Technology in other sports has operated by a sort of cascade of intervention, where it was introduced for a single specific thing but quickly gets used for more and more, like cricket! Is football prepared for that??

This pretty much sums up my feelings on it. A video ref could prove to be invaluble in alot of cases, however where does this start and finish? As SEB as mentioned there are a certain amount of advances that would need to be made should this come into play. Certain grounds already have giant screens that could be used for this purpose, however what do teams further down the pyramid do? are they all to spend thousands installing screens and the required relevant works for this and for teams such as rotherham who are well known to have financial difficulties who pays? does everyone form an orderly que at the FA's finances department and take a number? people complain about the cost of attending footbal matches, especially further down the leagues so surely this would be an increased cost that the fans would incur should the clubs have to pay. It simply isnt feasable to only apply this to the premier league, yeah they can afford it, but you have a situation whereby the rules would need to be changed for one league in the country.

Anyone who has actually read the Laws of Association Football, will quickly be form their own interpretation of the rules contained therein. People often say "why does one ref give it and another doesnt". This is a very simple answer. When i took the FA course there were 25 "Students" and the course was conducted by no less than 5 FA approved Referees from a variety of different levels. All of this made the course very confusing for most as everyone drew their own interpretations of the rules. Granted, some of the rules are quite straight forward, however as all the rules take into account different situations it isnt difficult to draw your own views from these. For this very reason one referee looking at a video replay would undoubtedly come to a different view to the man in the middle of the pitch.

This brings me to my next point, someone mentioned earlier about the linesman and how the referee over rules them in certain situations. This will always happen. Firstly they arent linesman any more. They are "Assisstant Referees", with the clue there being "Assisstant". They have there own jobs to do, namely ball in and out of play, offsides and to be an extra pair of eyes and ears to the referee. Granted the performances of many at the lane in recent weeks has not done anything for their popularity. But they are "assisstants" and the referee takes any precident over them in any match. The referee is in charge and can take their advice on a situation but he doesnt have to agree with them.

One perfect example of this is a referee (who some may have heard of) called Mr. Graham Poll. It is common knowledge within the members of the RA how Mr. Poll advised all assisstants prior to the match (quite sternly) that he was "The Man" and in charge of proceedings. Like with the interpretations of rules this is something that all referees approach differently. Some have a good bond with their assisstants, and respect there views, others dont and enter into a power trip once walking over the white line.

For these reasons and others technology will never work in the world of football.

What becuase it might mean the officials might actually get a decision right for once?

Contrary to popular belief alot of the officials do actually get the decisions right. However its thanks to shit punditry by messrs Lawro, Hanson et al that they are seen to be wrong. I cant say that they have or havent read the LOAF, however if they havent then thats why they do and say what they do, but if they have then this will simply be a case of their own interpretations of the rules.

They might do, but the game will end up like American Football stopping and starting every 4 and a half secons. You'd go to a 3 o'clock kick off on a Saturday and not get hom til the following Wednesday.

Nice

 

[Oughti-blade]

ok lets discuss the cost of it all.
Top four clubs are moaning all the time,football is a business like it or lump it. The fa should charge a'windfall tax' and get them to pay for the installations of the 92 leauge clubs simple! In terms of turnover it would be an insignificant cost. Football is continuing to evolve and always will get the replay ref in now. He can be in contact with the ref all the time and buzz him if he makes an error of judgement. Are there anymore objections to the video ref??? it makes sense and the technology is there so use it!!!!

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

Here's where football starts to unravel itself. It is essentially a very simple game, the rules as they are make the game played around the world, for all, by all. We can travel anywhere and start a game and those that like the game can join in because of the commonality of the rules. Even taking it to the next level and making those games competitive still means the same rules apply whether you are RaggyArse Rovers playing in the Bolsover & District League Division 9 or Brazil in the World Cup Final. The introduction of technology into the interpretation of those rules inevitably introduces a two-tier game as regards the rules of the game. I've heard the ball mentioned as an example of technology moving on. MAQ can clarify this for me, but I'm sure for all the changes of the type of ball, the rules and regulations haven't changed for a long time with regard to the size of the ball?

This would be the first introduction of new technology to the game that has been directly connected to LOAF, as far as I can recall. Evolution with regard to equipment, physiology, grass, tactics have long happened. The laws have been tweaked for off-side, keepers and steps and a few others but none of these were regarding new technology.

 

[MAQ]

MAQ can clarify this for me, but I'm sure for all the changes of the type of ball, the rules and regulations haven't changed for a long time with regard to the size of the ball?

For Clarity

LAW 2 - The Ball

The ball is:

• spherical made of leather or other suitable material
  
• of a circumference of not more than 70cm(28ins) and not less than 68cm (27ins)
• not more than 450g (16oz) in weight andnot less than 410g(14oz) at the start of the match
• of a pressure equal to 0.6 - 1.1 atmosphere(600 - 1100g/cm2) above atmosphericpressure at sea level (8.5lbs./sq.in to15.6lbs/sq.in)

 

[beightonblade]

An owd trick............confuse em with information.

 

[shorehamview]

Have you ever watched a live game of American "Football" (featuring such great teams as the Tennessee Todger Touchers and the Boston Fudge Nudgers)?

They have lots of officials, the clock is stopped every few seconds, and the bloody game takes around twelvety-nine hours. You've got more chance of watching great sporting action letting two tramps fight over a bottle of meths.
Football flows because there are few interruptions. Cast your mind back to the last time you watched a match and it was stopped for a long time for a player to be treated for a bad injury. Took ages, didn't it.
Having video officials is like owning a tiger. Seems like a great idea, but when you get one you realise it was so much better without it.

 

[jose_d_blade]

We will never know if it works or not if it’s never tried ....wonder if there would be a way to try it?

There has to be a strict code of practice to stop it becoming a farce i'm a keen supporter of the idea but even I concede that it could become detrimental.

However I think it would free a lot of the F.A’s time with appeals against red cards i.e. once the decision has been made and replay shown no appeals all's decided made on the day.

It would be hard for a ref to show the replay and not agree with the general Census with out drawing his own ability into the limelight.

The best thing it could bring to the game is more referee accountability the worst a game that’s stopped for every off side booking corner ECT surly some use could be made of it.

Seems rash to not implement some limited use of it even if only under strict conditions.

 

[Username]

1 appeal per half, if you appeal and the referee is correct, then side loses a substitution

thats fucking stupid

 

[bricktop]

Have you ever watched a live game of American "Football" (featuring such great teams as the Tennessee Todger Touchers and the Boston Fudge Nudgers)?

They have lots of officials, the clock is stopped every few seconds, and the bloody game takes around twelvety-nine hours. You've got more chance of watching great sporting action letting two tramps fight over a bottle of meths.
Football flows because there are few interruptions. Cast your mind back to the last time you watched a match and it was stopped for a long time for a player to be treated for a bad injury. Took ages, didn't it.
Having video officials is like owning a tiger. Seems like a great idea, but when you get one you realise it was so much better without it.

And that is bang on the money

 

[Linz]

However I think it would free a lot of the F.A’s time with appeals against red cards i.e. once the decision has been made and replay shown no appeals all's decided made on the day.

The thing is, what else do the FA do?

thats fucking stupid

Hardly a respectful and constructive input into the debate. Please refrain... we find it keeps things more sensible around here.