Video Replay For Officiating

[Dom_Wren]

From the angles provided on the replay it looks as if none of the officials could have saw it. However, like you say, the reaction was so genuine from the Irish players that if I was ref, I would actually have asked Henry and given him a chance to be honest. With a call of that magnitude, all it would have taken was a cool head and a minute to call him over( actually talk to both captains) and see if they could be professional about it. Failing that, video replay. Don't give a shit that they can't be used officially. I would have gone to the monitor in the dug-outs and saw for myself, called it back and got on with it. I may have lost my job after the game for doing that from all those FIFA cronies resisting technology in the game but I tell you, I bet if one day, one ref does that, he'd be applauded all over the world for being brave enough to do the common sense thing.

This was from a mate of mine after i said that surely one of the officals mussed have sussed something from the reaction of the Irish players. Love what he was saying about what he would have done.

[villa4europe]

why do you spend all day at work talking about football? its not because trappatoni made a great challenge on the play last night

its not fair but human error has always been a part of the game, and like yank football and rugby, you can introduce a video ref who still has to make a decision based on interpretation and opinion rather than fact so its a waste of time, im all for goaline technology because that is a fact, but i dont see why we should change football forever just to have some idiot in a box make the wrong decision rather than some idiot on the pitch (rugby WC final vs SA)

that said refs should be fitter, the pace of the game has changed dramatically, but good ones shouldnt be forced to retire (?!) and like players, top refs should travel across different leagues building experience

[kidlewis]

solution is simple;

each team gets 2 referals a match (similar to tennis) where they feel there has been an offence commited by the opposing team. This would NOT include the wrong issuing of red or yellow cards as these can be overturned after the match.

However where incidences need to be rectified during the match then something like below would follow

penalty appeal is turned down by the referee;

Captain of the team runs to the ref (like they do now anyway) and says they want a video referal (ONLY the captain can call for it via the referee)

If the captain is the goalkeeper then it would be down to the other person able to call for video replay which would be the Manager via the 4th official.

the ref would blow the whistle or the 4th official would tell the referee via the headsets they wear now to stop the match.

the video evidence would be viewed and if the outcome is in favour of the team defending the position, then it would be there free kick from where the incident took place.

However if the prosecuting team is in the right, then the apropriate decision is taken (whether it be free kick, penalty etc).

Issues that would arrise would be;

1. Defending position were on the counter attack and it's unfair to have them taking a free kick all the way back in their own area.

1a. Perhaps the defending team get a free kick from where their last player was in posession of the ball (again video replay can sort that out a bit like snookers being re setup after a foul)

2. If the defending person did commit a foul in the area and it is a penalty do they get booked or sent off? or do they stay on the pitch and that gets sorted out after the match?

2a. I think it should be decided there and then.

3. what happens if a team has no referals left and the opponents commit an offence which would normally be referable?

3a. tough titty

4. The video evidence isn't 100% conclusive either way

4a. then you must side with the defending team (a bit like lbw decisions in cricket, if in doubt, NOT OUT).

5. If the prosecuting team fails in there appeal on a replay and they were in posession

5a. then the defending team gets a free kick from where they had the ball

any other issues that you can think of? I am sure there are more.

[villa4europe]

like i said though kidlewis what do you then do if the video ref has to make a judgement based on opinion and say its against villa, we all think its wrong, we'd kill the game and have the same problem

like i highlighted england vs SA in the final, you'll never convince me they made the right call

i think platini is on to something with the extra officials but IMO not behind the goals, but absolutely everything they do and how much they spend its all pointless if no one is willing to retrospectively punish players that are caught cheating, all that will happen is players will develop new cons and tricks, thats simple human nature

[kidlewis]

like i said though kidlewis what do you then do if the video ref has to make a judgement based on opinion and say its against villa, we all think its wrong, we'd kill the game and have the same problem

like i highlighted england vs SA in the final, you'll never convince me they made the right call

i think platini is on to something with the extra officials but IMO not behind the goals, but absolutely everything they do and how much they spend its all pointless if no one is willing to retrospectively punish players that are caught cheating, all that will happen is players will develop new cons and tricks, thats simple human nature

well you could have retrospecive punishment for players and actually put something like that in place.

IMO Henry should get banned for the next 3 international matches.

will they do it?

ofcourse not.

[RunRickyRun]

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.."

Spot on from the Rev.

I'd also add that many crucial decisions are not clear cut. Video decisions will only add to the controversy not take away from it (especially when they look like they favour 'bigger' teams)

This coming from a gutted Irishman

[TheSufferingVilla]

Anyone know why the France v Ireland thread was locked???

[chrissmith921]

solution is simple;

each team gets 2 referals a match (similar to tennis) where they feel there has been an offence commited by the opposing team. This would NOT include the wrong issuing of red or yellow cards as these can be overturned after the match.

However where incidences need to be rectified during the match then something like below would follow

penalty appeal is turned down by the referee;

Captain of the team runs to the ref (like they do now anyway) and says they want a video referal (ONLY the captain can call for it via the referee)

If the captain is the goalkeeper then it would be down to the other person able to call for video replay which would be the Manager via the 4th official.

the ref would blow the whistle or the 4th official would tell the referee via the headsets they wear now to stop the match.

the video evidence would be viewed and if the outcome is in favour of the team defending the position, then it would be there free kick from where the incident took place.

However if the prosecuting team is in the right, then the apropriate decision is taken (whether it be free kick, penalty etc).

Issues that would arrise would be;

1. Defending position were on the counter attack and it's unfair to have them taking a free kick all the way back in their own area.

1a. Perhaps the defending team get a free kick from where their last player was in posession of the ball (again video replay can sort that out a bit like snookers being re setup after a foul)

2. If the defending person did commit a foul in the area and it is a penalty do they get booked or sent off? or do they stay on the pitch and that gets sorted out after the match?

2a. I think it should be decided there and then.

3. what happens if a team has no referals left and the opponents commit an offence which would normally be referable?

3a. tough titty

4. The video evidence isn't 100% conclusive either way

4a. then you must side with the defending team (a bit like lbw decisions in cricket, if in doubt, NOT OUT).

5. If the prosecuting team fails in there appeal on a replay and they were in posession

5a. then the defending team gets a free kick from where they had the ball

any other issues that you can think of? I am sure there are more.

thought you said it was simple?!

whats to stop it being used as a way to stop teams counter attacking? like the current 'injured' thing that players do to get their opposition to kick it out of play?

[P3te]

whats to stop it being used as a way to stop teams counter attacking? like the current 'injured' thing that players do to get their opposition to kick it out of play?

you limit it to one a game

if your appeal is successful, youve still got one. if you waste it and 2 minutes later youre turned down a blatant penalty, tough shit

[LatestConfirmedIn]

whats to stop it being used as a way to stop teams counter attacking? like the current 'injured' thing that players do to get their opposition to kick it out of play?

you limit it to one a game

if your appeal is successful, youve still got one. if you waste it and 2 minutes later youre turned down a blatant penalty, tough shit

Spot on...or maybe like tennis when they get two a set, teams could get 1 or 2 per half

[leviramsey]

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.

In my scheme, the software running the replay system would only have a 60 second buffer. Additionally if the stoppage in play that allows the challenge to occur is itself a goal, then nothing that occurred prior to the buildup to the second goal could be challenged.

Of course this sets up the possibility that after Team A blocks a goal with a handball and is going for the goal that Team B does a crazy-rash challenge in the box to prevent the goal from going in and use the penalty stoppage to make a replay appeal. I would probably settle that by awarding B a penalty and then A a penalty.

[leviramsey]

And I'd further refine my proposal to be that the captain's challenge must be a specific allegation: e.g. the player who scored the goal was offside when he scored the goal or the ball was blocked with a hand. If the allegation is found not to be true, then no further challenge on that stretch of time would be allowed (the console to be checked would have a switch that would clear the buffer).

As for there not being anything to discuss the next day, since my proposal imposes a cost on the appellant regardless of whether they win or not, would there not be discussions the next day about whether it was a good idea to challenge that or on the tactical angles brought up by this (e.g. Gerrard challenges and is booked accordingly: if you're Rafa do you sub Gerrard knowing that you're now making a second challenge result in him being sent off if you leave him in?).

[chrissmith921]

Rafa would already have taken him off for some full back with 25 minutes remaining

[Ponky]

whats to stop it being used as a way to stop teams counter attacking? like the current 'injured' thing that players do to get their opposition to kick it out of play?

you limit it to one a game

if your appeal is successful, youve still got one. if you waste it and 2 minutes later youre turned down a blatant penalty, tough shit

Spot on...or maybe like tennis when they get two a set, teams could get 1 or 2 per half

You could make it so the manager is the only one who can make the challenge - directly to the 4th official - so no-one on the field has any input.

[AndyClarke]

thought you said it was simple?!

whats to stop it being used as a way to stop teams counter attacking? like the current 'injured' thing that players do to get their opposition to kick it out of play?

Yep, exactly what would happen. Would always save a referral for just before the oppo score to stop the game. What if the ref didn't hear the call for a referral and in the meantime the oppo score or call for a referral of their own?

All this video official talk is garbage, the game existed for long enough without it so why the need to change? If it is because players are cheating then lets deal with the real issue and start dishing out some retrospective punishment.

The other issue to deal with is these refs who demand respect but do very little to earn it. As funny as it was, the cock up in the Sunderland v Liverpool game was unforgiveable, the guy has potentially cost Liverpool millions of pounds among lots of other more basic issues because he didn't know the rules, his punishment is a week off the panel! I understand the theory behind him not coming out and apologising because there is a good chance that admitting a mistake would weaken his position but if he'd had 30 seconds on MOTD holding his hands up and saying he got it wrong he would have earnt a lot more respect. After all, we know he got it wrong, it was not a marginal call or an honest mistake.

[Si.]

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

Totally disagree.

Even if the goal was disallowed there is no guarantee Ireland would of gone through.

[tinker]

We should only use video replays for contested goals/Penalties and for contesting a sending off. This way the game would not be stopped and started every couple of minutes.

England seem to have suffered more than most with controversial decisions and I have no doubt that we will suffer again, probably in next years world cup.

[P3te]

whats to stop it being used as a way to stop teams counter attacking? like the current 'injured' thing that players do to get their opposition to kick it out of play?

you limit it to one a game

if your appeal is successful, youve still got one. if you waste it and 2 minutes later youre turned down a blatant penalty, tough shit

Spot on...or maybe like tennis when they get two a set, teams could get 1 or 2 per half

nah, multiples opens it up to potential abuse. 1 per game unless youre right

[HJ]

No matter how you set up the replay scheme it would inevitably lead to situations that are as damaging to football as these hands of god or dives for penalties. Also, plenty of situations would be debatable enough that one side or the other would feel cheated no matter what the video judge decided.

And its the final whistle, Villa win the FA cup! No wait, stop the celebrations, Spurs are challenging something that happened before the whistle. Hold on a few minutes..

Any replay/challenge system that happens during the play would inevitably lead to a metagame around it which shouldn't have any place on football pitch either. Teams trying to foul / kick ball out of play to get a to get a replay while other team tries to keep the ball in play or a team using a challenge to stop a 2v1 counter attack and rubbish like that.

The best way to help the officials would be to enable retroactive punishment for cheaters. It's already difficult enough to ref a game and then the modern players act like words removed cheating and trying to get opponents sent off etc. If they knew they'd get in trouble afterward I think it would cut down cheating, and less cheating = easier to ref the game. As it is now, cheating carries too big rewards for little risk.

[maqroll]

And I'd further refine my proposal to be that the captain's challenge must be a specific allegation: e.g. the player who scored the goal was offside when he scored the goal or the ball was blocked with a hand. If the allegation is found not to be true, then no further challenge on that stretch of time would be allowed (the console to be checked would have a switch that would clear the buffer).

As for there not being anything to discuss the next day, since my proposal imposes a cost on the appellant regardless of whether they win or not, would there not be discussions the next day about whether it was a good idea to challenge that or on the tactical angles brought up by this (e.g. Gerrard challenges and is booked accordingly: if you're Rafa do you sub Gerrard knowing that you're now making a second challenge result in him being sent off if you leave him in?).

That is why allowing a captain to make the challenge and not the manager is a bad idea. Booking the player for not being successful in his challenge is an even worse idea.