TV Referral System to be trialed in 2015

[supercrystal7]

Some interesting points of view here. Would FIFA be better off making the rules that cause controversy (i.e. that Newcastle goal) more concrete?

The Newcastle goal was as concrete as you get according to the rules. It's an obvious goal and was an obvious mistake. The rule was changed exactly for goals like that.

Not a fan of the rule change. I don't think it has made much difference in Rugby and sometimes they go too far back. As someone said it's human nature to rely on the safety net instead of risking the mistake and soon everything will be referred. It already happens far too much in rugby and that's actually a sport with natural stops and starts.

 

[andrewmswift]

can only see penalties and harsh fouls being judged. offsides wouldn't work.

and challenges as a replay system is fucking dumb as hell. baseball has it right in the late innings of a game (earlier in the game it is challenges-based, which again is dumb as hell), where there are no challenges but every close play is automatically reviewed by crews in new york who watch every game live. therefore when anything controversial happens they're already judging it by the time play is even stopped and a review is decided. makes the process very rapid.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Umpires in cricket can't be arsed giving decisions anymore knowing they can refer if anything happens

don't think that's true, they just can't be arsed making correct ones once they know they can't have them overturned.

When did you last see a low catch or a run out appeal NOT referred to the third umpire? It's human nature to not want to make a mistake and use the safety net instead.

Bowden did it a month or two ago, but to be fair they only review it when it's close enough for the batsmen to decide not to walk straight away.

 

[MaineRoadmcfc]

can only see penalties and harsh fouls being judged. offsides wouldn't work.

and challenges as a replay system is fucking dumb as hell. baseball has it right in the late innings of a game (earlier in the game it is challenges-based, which again is dumb as hell), where there are no challenges but every close play is automatically reviewed by crews in new york who watch every game live. therefore when anything controversial happens they're already judging it by the time play is even stopped and a review is decided. makes the process very rapid.

It still would be impossible to make the game fair.

What happens if a controversial penalty is given to team A but team B should have has a throw in the build up to the decision. Football for me us a unique sport, the game is played exactly the same from grassroots all the way premier league and should be left alone.

 

[Bill]

if it aint broke.....

 

[mancyman]

i think it is a great idea. and we could go further. let the players wear helmets so they don't get hurt by an elbow when challenging for a high ball. and why not let outfield players handle the ball as well. then we could mark the pitch out with say a grid system. what a game that would be. we would call it english football or even gridiron i suppose.

 

[stonerblue]

Fuckin shit idea that would ruin the game. It would be the final nail in the coffin for me

 

[Bigga]

I really wish I could post up the original thread that really kick started this discussion, but it was pre 2009.

I do have this snippet as a reminder to those that may remember the thought provoking origin...

Hello, i have coursework to be handed in tomorrow for English, and for it i have to make a speech about something important to me, obviously i could only think of city so i thought why not use video technology? i have 6 points to talk about...

1st. how it would improve the game
2nd. how it works
3rd. how its used in rugby
4th. maradona vs england, world cup incedent
5th. sheff utd match other week & list ofother incedents such as totenham vs utd, (roy carrol)
6th. counter arguments

i would also like to throw somehting about city it, can anybody help me with these points and basically give me some tips and usefull things to say?

Sorry I've only just come in from 5-a-side and seen this.

If it helps I wrote a passionate argument on this that was 'stolen'(let's say) by a particular journo that now works for MCFC!

Anyhoo...

My point was rather than simply using the Rugby method(where the game can stop repeatedly) use it in a tennis type method, where 2 'challenges' per team was allowed. Either Captain or manager could use it and if they were wrong, they would lose a 'challenge'. My thinking was that so many incidents happen they would have to be careful what they chose to use a 'challenge' for. If both teams ran out, then the ref ran the game to his discretion.

In reality, incidents like Adebayor's clash with van Persie would be inconclusive(also note the game had to be stopped, therefore allowing opportunity for the incident to be looked at) BUT would force the ref and 4th Official to make a decision there and then, avoiding the cop out with Clattenburg did with the FA. We would have had the decision in front of everyone, instead of the subsequent trial by media and no 'retrospective' video decisions by the FA.

As Sgoater says you could highlight certain incidents using this method and the ref can make the correct call, instead of fans feeling injustice at games all the time. It won't take away the feeling at time, but it would be much less than it is without video replay. I also wrote as Sgoater does about the clubs' future that hinges on silly unfathomable decisions that can ultimately send a club down. It's careers, income and history that can be affected.

It's not to the say the system wouldn't have initial teething problems, but that's why they are tried and tested in other 'less' important games of football, i.e., U-19/ Women's football etc.

Anyway, Sgoater beats me to my own thesis, but I was just relaying what I wrote about 18 months back.

The original thesis contained how and when a 'challenge' would have been issued. I also remember a poster called 'CBlue' that ridiculed my notion that any kind of review system would come in to play and I told him football had to move with the times and this was the fairest way of levelling the game at the highest plateau.

I also said, when challenged on other divisions having access, that like tennis/ cricket/ rugby, not all levels would have an automatic right for video replay. As an afterthought, the only way more profitable division get access would be 'trickle down' money for televisual/ refereeing purposes.

I said it in 2008 and I'll say it now; it's gonna happen, like it or not...

By the way, many of you are suggesting multiple incidents as a scenario and what does the ref do? He does what he does now, call on the first incident as everything afterwards is irrelevant.

When he waves 'play on' and no advantage is gained, he will call it back. In this multiple case, he will call on the first incident, if proved to be correct.

 

[RandomJ]

Some right drama queens on here "death of the sport" etc. In case it has escaped your attention the refs, certainly in the Prem, are getting worse and the game has become too fast for the refs and linesman and they make shocking cock ups all the time. Cock ups which could mean a club getting relegated or a team winning the league or not. I have zero problem when a dodgy goal has been scored during the natural break in the game the manager challenges it and the ref has another look and then makes a decision. Having worked on a football broadcasts they have the replays up and ready within 3 seconds so we won't all be sitting there for ages waiting for it to happen. Obviously things like normal offsides the system wouldn't work but for bad tackles the ref has missed, wrongly disallowed goals etc.

Football has for too long been stuck in it's "tradition" with fans of a certain age up in arms at even the slightest hint of change. It's time the game got with the times and utilised the readily available technology to make the game fairer and more importantly protect teams from shockingly inept refs.

 

[greasedupdeafguy]

Some right drama queens on here "death of the sport" etc. In case it has escaped your attention the refs, certainly in the Prem, are getting worse and the game has become too fast for the refs and linesman and they make shocking cock ups all the time. Cock ups which could mean a club getting relegated or a team winning the league or not. I have zero problem when a dodgy goal has been scored during the natural break in the game the manager challenges it and the ref has another look and then makes a decision. Having worked on a football broadcasts they have the replays up and ready within 3 seconds so we won't all be sitting there for ages waiting for it to happen. Obviously things like normal offsides the system wouldn't work but for bad tackles the ref has missed, wrongly disallowed goals etc.

Football has for too long been stuck in it's "tradition" with fans of a certain age up in arms at even the slightest hint of change. It's time the game got with the times and utilised the readily available technology to make the game fairer and more importantly protect teams from shockingly inept refs.

It would certainly damage the sport. I'm sure Americans will love it and people who just watch games on the telly but it would soon get annoying for fans in the stadium with refs watching replay after replay halting the game up like you see in the NFL and Rugby. Would especially hurt the game in the closing stages when matches begin to get more open and its end to end.