Video Technology

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

The first use of video should be to examine every goal before the ref restarts the game. If nowt is up, then he restarts. If somebody is offside that the lino has missed, then the free kick. Would have gained us at least a point. Unfortunately, it would be a similar scenario to the rugby 'try test' - Could you have a look at whether Player X was offside, and is there any other reason NOT to award a try?" - and consequently the goons at the FArce would continue the notion that football could not learn anything from other sports, and so we carry on the same way where results and points awarded do not reflect what actually happened on the pitch! A shocking and blatant dereliction of duty from the governing body(ies) of the game!

 

[mrtwiceaseason]

simple for me, 2 challenges each team, can be used for penalty appeals, mistaken identity, red card decisions, either if play has been stopped, or gone out of play, if the ball is in play and they want to challenge, the team appealing has to kick the ball out of play.

The 4th Official gets the review, he's given 60 seconds to look at the angles to decide, and if he can't decide within 60 seconds that the referee's decision can be clearly overturned, then the decision remains on-field.

So how does that work say contentious decision in the first 10 min ,reviewed rejected 2 good shouts for pens ,sendings off etc in same half .
Once you challenge has been used up you would be no better off.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

simple for me, 2 challenges each team, can be used for penalty appeals, mistaken identity, red card decisions, either if play has been stopped, or gone out of play, if the ball is in play and they want to challenge, the team appealing has to kick the ball out of play.

The 4th Official gets the review, he's given 60 seconds to look at the angles to decide, and if he can't decide within 60 seconds that the referee's decision can be clearly overturned, then the decision remains on-field.

So how does that work say contentious decision in the first 10 min ,reviewed rejected 2 good shouts for pens ,sendings off etc in same half .
Once you challenge has been used up you would be no better off.

Correct (as I highlighted with my own example earlier in the thread)

IMO there is absolutely no way on Earth that any system where managers are involved in the process will ever be implemented. It's not American football, the flow and in-game management/refereeing of our game is so far removed from theirs that comparisons between the two are IMO completely pointless. All this flag throwing nonsense has no place in proper football, it's just too arbitrary/random. We need a "set in stone" set of guidelines to follow for when the technology is used, every time a certain event occurs on the field of play.

As Mr. 'eader said, much like the goal line technology is now used, video technology needs to be introduced slowly, for specific decision making purposes (ie ALL GOALS - reviewed by a screen watching adjudicator who has the final say on whether or not any infringements have taken place)
When this usage has been proved to be workable the use of the technology can be increased to include all red cards, and again, after a certain period of successful usage, it can be used to help other decision making processes. Easy-Peasy! Or is it?

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

simple for me, 2 challenges each team, can be used for penalty appeals, mistaken identity, red card decisions, either if play has been stopped, or gone out of play, if the ball is in play and they want to challenge, the team appealing has to kick the ball out of play.

The 4th Official gets the review, he's given 60 seconds to look at the angles to decide, and if he can't decide within 60 seconds that the referee's decision can be clearly overturned, then the decision remains on-field.

So how does that work say contentious decision in the first 10 min ,reviewed rejected 2 good shouts for pens ,sendings off etc in same half .
Once you challenge has been used up you would be no better off.

challenges, like in cricket, should only be used to overturn certain, clear errors, not to debate contentious decisions.

So our handball appeal v Palace, clear error, penalty. Easy. Milner v Everton, not clear-cut, stays with the referee.

Players and managers shouldn't have free rein to challenge everything, the tech should be there to overturn a clear, obvious error only. You can't avoid error even with tech, so the emphasis has to be on eradicating clearly obvious mistakes. They have to be made to value their reviews, and only do so when they're absolutely certain of a clear mistake.

You can't leave it in the hands of the ref because unlike rugby, they may not see everything and without a natural break-in play it will be too much to ask them to decide on what to review, especially if they had to stop play.

 

[LWashington]

A few people have said technology for goals to check if any infringement has taken place.

My question is What type of infringement and how far back to take it? Are we only checking to see if it was offside/ handled into the goal? Or if the winger crossed it and the centre forward heads in are we checking if it went out of play?

Only asking because sometimes the ball might be in play 2-3 minutes and 50 odd passes or challenges before a goal is scored. If you say just check the final player for offside then I can maybe understand. If you take it back further to see if cross went out then you start opening a can of worms. We've all seen off-the-ball clashes a few seconds before a goal is scored where a defender ends up on the deck because he and the attacker were both running back and have collided. Do you check this? Or what happens if the ball from the back goes to the winger who seems clearly offside nothing given then 90 seconds and 50 passes later a goal is scored. Do you go back and check the offside?

I'm not against video technology but I just want to be clear what infringements we want looked at.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

simple for me, 2 challenges each team, can be used for penalty appeals, mistaken identity, red card decisions, either if play has been stopped, or gone out of play, if the ball is in play and they want to challenge, the team appealing has to kick the ball out of play.

The 4th Official gets the review, he's given 60 seconds to look at the angles to decide, and if he can't decide within 60 seconds that the referee's decision can be clearly overturned, then the decision remains on-field.

So how does that work say contentious decision in the first 10 min ,reviewed rejected 2 good shouts for pens ,sendings off etc in same half .
Once you challenge has been used up you would be no better off.

Correct (as I highlighted with my own example earlier in the thread)

IMO there is absolutely no way on Earth that any system where managers are involved in the process will ever be implemented. It's not American football, the flow and in-game management/refereeing of our game is so far removed from theirs that comparisons between the two are IMO completely pointless. All this flag throwing nonsense has no place in proper football, it's just too arbitrary/random. We need a "set in stone" set of guidelines to follow for when the technology is used, every time a certain event occurs on the field of play.

As Mr. 'eader said, much like the goal line technology is now used, video technology needs to be introduced slowly, for specific decision making purposes (ie ALL GOALS - reviewed by a screen watching adjudicator who has the final say on whether or not any infringements have taken place)
When this usage has been proved to be workable the use of the technology can be increased to include all red cards, and again, after a certain period of successful usage, it can be used to help other decision making processes. Easy-Peasy! Or is it?

'Tis common sense, 8. But I will have long breathed my last before we see a whiff of this phenomenon spreading through the corridors of football governance.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

'Tis common sense, 8. But I will have long breathed my last before we see a whiff of this phenomenon spreading through the corridors of football governance.

Unusually for me, I'm not so pessimistic about this. I think it could be on its way, maybe in as little as 5 seasons from now. If you, as I do, think that Lampard's "goal" against Germany in the World Cup was a catalyst for FIFA to implement the use of goal line technology, I believe that all it will take is another high profile mistake (World Cup or European Cup final) on which the result of the game hinges, which could easily have been sorted with the use of video technology. If one of the "big clubs" or nations is "cheated" out of a result they'll be clamouring for the use of video and FIFA will invariably fold.

I live in hope.

 

[route46]

all this it would slow the game down is a load of bollocks....... any debatable decision takes the game minutes to restart anyway .....if anything it would speed the game up

 

[Proelia]

Stop being pansies and leave the game as is

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

Stop being pansies and leave the game as is

Yeah, I much preferred it when they had a piece of rope instead of a crossbar, all these newfangled ideas are just GAY!