Video Replay For Officiating

[maqroll]

Tonight's Ireland game would have been the perfect time to use video replay technology to get a disputed call right. With so much riding on that "goal", I believe it is only fair to employ every tool at the referee's disposal to call the match correctly.

My idea is simple: Allow each manager to make one challenge per half, and then, if extra time like tonight, an additional 2 challenges.

You could only challenge goals, penalties and bookings that require dismissal.

I think it is time to at least experiment with it, maybe at Euro 2012?

What say you?

[Vojskovoda]

FIFA say it's never going to happen because it would ruin the 'spirit' of the sport but yet video technology would cut out all the cheating that goes on in today's game so FIFA are just contridicting themselves.

[MrDuck]

FIFA say it's never going to happen because it ruins the 'spirit' of the sport but yet video technology would cut out all the cheating that goes on in today's game so FIFA are just contridicting themselves.

If they used video replays then France would not be at the world cup, which wouldn't suit FIFA at all.

There is no spirit of the sport anymore, money talks and money is FIFA's main interest.

[Vojskovoda]

Yeah that's what really annoys me about FIFA. They claim how they want diving and cheating kicked out the game... there's a simple solution for it but yet they don't want to take that option. They can't have it both ways.

[MrDuck]

They claim how they want diving and cheating kicked out the game....

Empty talk, just saying what they know they have to say. Actions speak louder than words... and FIFA's actions make it very clear where their interests lie - and it ain't in fair play!

[leviramsey]

I actually think that what makes more sense is to allow any matter of fact (including whether a player was in an offside position) to be challenged provided such a challenge is made to the referee at the first stoppage of play within a minute of the event in question. Such a challenge must be made by the captain, who would be booked for dissent (as telling the ref that the call was blown is dissent, even if you're right) regardless of whether the ruling stands after review.

IMO, making a challenge cost a booking is a high enough cost to limit challenges only to those disputes that would have an effect on the outcome of the game and have a high probability of changing the call.

[chrissmith921]

No - and nothing to do with tonights result.

Human error is part of the game, be it when a keeper misreads a cross and is beaten to it by a striker, or a referee is positioned incorrectly to not see the foul in the build up.

Its what keeps football on the back pages and talked about over and over again. The contreversy fuels footballs fire - video evidence would take out the human error element which is a big factor in football, particularly in goals.

Most goals are contreversial in some way if you look far enough back through the play - how long could the replay go back to? What if a team scored off a corner that should have been a goal kick? So on.... Leave it where it is.

[CastleBromVilla]

Yea, because it's perfectly acceptable for a player to keep a ball in play using his hand.

I'm sure you'd see it differently if it was Villa/Wales involved.

[chrissmith921]

if the referee doesnt spot it - hard luck.

thats the same for maradona when he did it and got away with it, the same with that jock who did it against wales in the world cup playoffs in the 70s and got away with it - you roll the dice, gamble, sometimes you win.

i have absolutely no problem with it at all - ive seen villa and wales cheated out of enough to know yeah at the time i'm pissed off but i dont believe the whole shape of the game should change just because of a decision that went against my team.

there are enough bad calls out there - everyone just remembers the ones that go against their own.

[The_Rev]

My one concern is that the game will go the way of Rugby Union and the referee will be afraid to give anything without going to the video to confirm it.

"Its a throw in to France, no, wait a minute, the referee is going to the video before he awards it.."

[maqroll]

I actually think that what makes more sense is to allow any matter of fact (including whether a player was in an offside position) to be challenged provided such a challenge is made to the referee at the first stoppage of play within a minute of the event in question. Such a challenge must be made by the captain, who would be booked for dissent (as telling the ref that the call was blown is dissent, even if you're right) regardless of whether the ruling stands after review.

IMO, making a challenge cost a booking is a high enough cost to limit challenges only to those disputes that would have an effect on the outcome of the game and have a high probability of changing the call.

Yeah, that's why you limit the challenges to one each half. That way, you have more continuity of play, and the managers must be more prudent in their challenges. Booking the captain for dissent is clunky, kind of pointless and unneccesary. You put it in the hands of the managers (as it should be, I'd think), and if the video proves the ref got the call right, then the play stands, simple as that, and possession is rewarded to the team on the right side of the call.

[maqroll]

My one concern is that the game will go the way of Rugby Union and the referee will be afraid to give anything without going to the video to confirm it.

"Its a throw in to France, no, wait a minute, the referee is going to the video before he awards it.."

Nah, you limit the amount of challenges to 1 each half, and you prohibit willy nilly usage of them, by limiting them to disputed goals, penalties, and dismissals.

[HJ]

1. Team A's player blocks a goal on the goalline with his hand, referee doesn't see it

2. Play goes on for 3 more minutes without stoppage

3. Team A scores a fantastic goal

4. Team B challenges the incident that happened 3 minutes ago

What then? Team A's goal doesn't count and team B gets a penalty? What happens to the 3 minutes that was played but doesn't count?

It'd be rubbish IMO.

[tonyh29]

i thought Video technology had already been used in our match against Hull last season :winkold:

that took about 15 seconds after the event so hardly stopped the flow

all it needed was a fourth official to have given the word yesterday ..nobody even needed to know ..just like at Hull

Edit :

and wasn't Zidanes headbutt missed by the ref and done via the fourth official ??

[Stevo985]

IN some capacity, yes I think it's needed. But it could only work in 2 ways, imo

1. A challenge system, much like the NFL. THis would stop the game being stopped at every decision.

2. Retrospective punishment.

[Wainy316]

I think the only thing they should brin gin should be goal line technology to determine whether the ball has crossed the line or not.

[Gringo]

Interesting proposal on the radio this morning, adopt the cricket approach and ask the player.

So France score, Ireland complain. Ref asks the hand of frog if he used his hand, HoF says no. After the game, video is reviewed and shows that he did indeed. Player is then hit with two bans, one for the original offence and one for deceiving the ref. The second ban should be of the 'football wide' variety - ie banned from all football, club country, league cup, chumps league etc and be punitive. So in last night's case, if HoF was offered the chance to own up and refused it, and the resultant error was of such magnitude, 8 month ban from all football - he stops one team going to the WC - he gets banned from the tournament as well.

Might add a touch of honesty to the game without having to stop for video.

[LondonLax]

I actually think that what makes more sense is to allow any matter of fact (including whether a player was in an offside position) to be challenged provided such a challenge is made to the referee at the first stoppage of play within a minute of the event in question. Such a challenge must be made by the captain, who would be booked for dissent (as telling the ref that the call was blown is dissent, even if you're right) regardless of whether the ruling stands after review.

IMO, making a challenge cost a booking is a high enough cost to limit challenges only to those disputes that would have an effect on the outcome of the game and have a high probability of changing the call.

I recon the armband would get handed round quite a few times in a game if that rule was brought in!

[BG_Villa_Fan]

I don't think Video replay during games would be a good idea, however, I'm all for using it for retrospective punishment. Bans for obvious dives or deliberate handballs, etc. should be harsh.

As for the gametime, I really like the idea of having 2 aditions refs behind the penalty areas, like they're experimenting in this year's UEFA cup. From what I've seen it works great and makes a lot of sense, but then I guess these are reasons why UEFA will actually decide not to use it.

[tinker]

Its all very well taking the opinion that a refs mistake is part of the game, perhaps its not a mistake, perhaps decisions are given to suit the situation. Maybe some refs are crooked? Its would not be the first time it had happened. We need accountability from these refs and officials, if replays can be used, then they should be. The option of ignoring the problem will lead to more 'mistakes' and more shame brought on our game.

What happened last night to Ireland was a massive injustice, not just to the Irish but to Football. How can anyone watching that incident not feel nothing but despair for a game that has sunk so low.

It will be very interesting to hear what Mr Platini thinks about his countries disgraceful victory. If I was in the Sports Media field I would be camped outside his house for a comment, IMO he has nowhere to go with this and his head should be hanging in disgrace.