posted Aug 20, 2007

It is a must. They use television replays in cricket, tennis, rugby union, rugby league, basketball, american football and so on. Why is football the only sport terrified to introduce technology, when clearly the officials are not up to the task to clarify these things. The Fulham disallowed goal and the Southampton disallowed goal were shocking decisions. And I hope it doesn't cost either team relegation or promotion..

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 20, 2007

JayRAWR,

You obviously get paid too much. If I spent £30 on a football match, well £28 for a category A match at the Lane, I want to see a great football match with lots of talking points about goals & footballing skills.

It's a game of football not a game of Test the Referee. I want to talk about football not the refereeing decisions.

When you watch MOTD, do they put up a league table of referees with the best decision percentages at the top.

No, they put up the Premier League table because that is what is important.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 20, 2007

I think they should consider it, if only for goal-line decisions.

That Healy goal was without question over the line, and if they had some kind of system (like the Hawk-Eye) then the blindness of the officials would not be a barrier to fair play.

I've seen it used in Tennis in various tournaments, and think a system with a set number of allowed challenges could work in football. Something has to give, because these extremely poor calls are bad for the game.

On a related topic, what about post-match review of blatant dives? West Ham was gifted a penalty on Saturday courtesy of Bellamy's theatrics, and that won them the match.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2007

OF course we should use it - the only reason we don't is because the FA are a decade behind the rest of the world of sport.

How hard would it have been on Saturday, the game had stopped anyway, for the penalty, for the ref to ask the 4th official to give a ruling from the video.

Ditto at Mbro

All penalty box incidents that lead to, or stop a goal, should be challengeable

No impact on the game at all - except a right result. Everyones a winner.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2007

No, no, no.

If we stopped the game for a tea break and a watch of the video on the big screen it would destroy the Premiership in a season.

The beauty of football is the nature of the game. The emotions and passions induced by the results, performances and incidents on the pitch give so much. To introduce video would complicate the controversy and in the long term dilute the sport into bland facade.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2007

Colonelbean,

The games does not need to stop. The video could be watched by another official linked to the referee who can talk to him as and when necessary.

As for stoppages. We have stoppages every time one of these controversial decisions are made because incensed players continually surround the referee.

During this time the official watching tv can be watching video playbacks & reaching a decision. Often the decisions are so blatant you don't even need to play it back.

The point is, if the official needs to stop the game in order to make a decision, then it is too late & the decision remains firmly with the referee. The fourth official would need to be 100% certain of the error before he intervenes.

It won't solve every decision but it would reduce the really obvious errors to a minimum.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 21, 2007

I agree.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 22, 2007

Formula 1 uses television technology to judge on rule infingements.... and that is "somewhat" faster than premier league football; They make judgements whilst the race is still going.

You dont have to "negate" the football after the incident; you correct the error. You thought you were 1-0 up ? Well tough, there was an illegal push on the keeper. Penalty ? After its been placed on the spot - oops no, striker carded for diving. Even after its been taken (for those who dont want a nanoseconds pause) - cancel the goal. Who cares if its 5 minutes later ?? Regardless of the alleged "irrelevant football" in the interim, I'd say the team conned into conceding a goal deserve as much of a fair crack as they can get.

IMO, what **** fans off is the wrong decision and subsequent result.

If you get awarded a penalty, and then its taken off you after 4th official judgement, then you've got to be pretty stubborn to complain.

And the constant dives with minimal contact..... hmm, wonder how long that would continue when the players know they are more likely to be punished in game.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 22, 2007

I am not too sure that it would work unless we started having the referees announcing their decisions through the announcers at football ground.

It could cause problems with the fans in the ground not knowing what is going on.

However, I am all for it after the game. If a player is judged to have cheated his way to a penalty, it should be a mandatory red card with the relevant suspensions.

If a player is going to miss 3 games, he may be less inclined to commit the crime.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Aug 22, 2007

^^^

Deffo. They really need to bring in post-match review of questionable and phantom fouls and hand out suspensions in order to act as a deterrent.

add comment | complain about this comment