Football to trial TV referral system, Sepp Blatter reveals

[Chicog]

The senile old f****r can't keep his grubby mitts off it, can he?

And he's said he's going to continue to rob football blind stand for election again.

A TV replay system allowing coaches to challenge a referee's decision is being proposed by Sepp Blatter.

The Fifa president, speaking at Manchester's Soccerex, also confirmed his intention to stand for re-election.

The 78-year-old wants coaches to be allowed at least one challenge against a decision per half.

"They have the right in the half, twice or once, to challenge a refereeing decision but only when the game is stopped," he said.

"Then, there must be a television monitor but by the television company and not by another referee.

"And then the referee and the coach, they will go then to look, and then the referee may change his mind, as it is the case in tennis, for instance."

The trial could happen as early as next year."And then the referee and the coach, they will go then to look, and then the referee may change his mind, as it is the case in tennis, for instance."

"It can only be done where there is television coverage of all the matches," added Blatter.

"Or in one Fifa competition, we can try in a youth competition, an Under-20, like next year when we are in New Zealand."

[SantiSuk]

Sepp's Cayman Federation head who was also on the 8 man ethics and audit committee of FIFA, the panel that was supposed to give oversight to cleaning up FIFA, was indicted in Grand Cayman at the weekend on several counts of corporate fraud and deception unrelated to football.

A rolling ball of ... gathers more ... around it!

[mrbojangles]

I'm all for it. Well, not re-electing Blatter but at least having a trial and using technology. It took decades to convince the old gits to al least use goal line technology and that has been a success IMO.

[jellydog]

Arghhhhhhh !!!!!!

[Chicog]

I'm all for it. Well, not re-electing Blatter but at least having a trial and using technology. It took decades to convince the old gits to al least use goal line technology and that has been a success IMO.

Rubbish ennit. Sky get to choose what replay to show them.

They should not have any influence on the ref at all.

[NiwPix]

I can't believe he is going for another term!!! Before getting new technology into place, fifa should set an age limit and minimum IQ requirement for becoming president. AFTER that we shall talk about new rules / technology.

I like the idea of TV Review, but not the way it is proposed.

It should be only allowed in a questionable goal / penalty situation.

Let's say a player scores, but was most likely offside and the ref did not notice. The coach should be allowed ONE Review per game.

I don't want to see a coach allowed a review for a tackle that should have been yellow/red carded or corner kick vs goalie kick etc.

[mrbojangles]

I don't want to see a coach allowed a review for a tackle that should have been yellow/red carded or corner kick vs goalie kick etc.

I agree but I can't see a coach wasting his one review questioning that type of incident.

[Chicog]

If it makes the difference between a player staying on the pitch or not?

[mrbojangles]

Apologies. I meant the corner kick or goal kick element. A red card incident would probably be worth reviewing if you thought he was innocent/harshly treated.

[rijit]

I don't want to see a coach allowed a review for a tackle that should have been yellow/red carded or corner kick vs goalie kick etc.

I agree but I can't see a coach wasting his one review questioning that type of incident.

Really!!! five mins to go, he's one nil up, his teams under pressure,,, wont be long b4 it's being used tactically

BIG no from me, I'm against anything that slows the game down and this will.

[mrbojangles]

I don't want to see a coach allowed a review for a tackle that should have been yellow/red carded or corner kick vs goalie kick etc.

I agree but I can't see a coach wasting his one review questioning that type of incident.

Really!!! five mins to go, he's one nil up, his teams under pressure,,, wont be long b4 it's being used tactically

BIG no from me, I'm against anything that slows the game down and this will.

A lot of people said that the use of technology would slow the game down but goal line technology hasn't. In really controversial circumstances players surround the ref and hold up play anyway. This would (maybe) stop that and any extra time taken would be added on.

I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be introduced, I just think it's worthy of at least a trial.

[rijit]

I don't want to see a coach allowed a review for a tackle that should have been yellow/red carded or corner kick vs goalie kick etc.

I agree but I can't see a coach wasting his one review questioning that type of incident.

Really!!! five mins to go, he's one nil up, his teams under pressure,,, wont be long b4 it's being used tactically

BIG no from me, I'm against anything that slows the game down and this will.

A lot of people said that the use of technology would slow the game down but goal line technology hasn't. In really controversial circumstances players surround the ref and hold up play anyway. This would (maybe) stop that and any extra time taken would be added on.

I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be introduced, I just think it's worthy of at least a trial.

technology slowing the game down, coarse ti aint, it hasnt been given the opp,if this is brought in it'll start, it'll be just a another 'tool' for the coach's to manage and the aesthetics of the game, imo , will start to diminish

[P45Mustang]

It works in tennis.

[NiwPix]

I haven't followed / watched tennis enough to have seen that situation, but Tennis: the Pitch is smaller, there are only 2 players. their coaches and 1? ref. The game flow is also interrupted every few seconds.

In football you have 22 players, 4 refs and 2 coaches....plus anywhere from 50-100k fans whistling their opinion .

What I am tying to say is, that it probably is quite a bit harder to implement it in football in comparison to Tennis.

I still believe the TV replay should only be used Goal / Penalty situation. Those are two really important and most of the time deciding game changers. The refs overall do a decent job handing out yellow/red cards and most red cards are given later in the game, which won't have that big of an impact as a goal / penalty error.

[jellydog]

I haven't followed / watched tennis enough to have seen that situation, but Tennis: the Pitch is smaller, there are only 2 players. their coaches and 1? ref. The game flow is also interrupted every few seconds.

In football you have 22 players, 4 refs and 2 coaches....plus anywhere from 50-100k fans whistling their opinion .

What I am tying to say is, that it probably is quite a bit harder to implement it in football in comparison to Tennis.

I still believe the TV replay should only be used Goal / Penalty situation. Those are two really important and most of the time deciding game changers. The refs overall do a decent job handing out yellow/red cards and most red cards are given later in the game, which won't have that big of an impact as a goal / penalty error.

I'm against anything other than goal line technology. Anything more will:

1. It will interrupt the flow of the game which is one of its great assets.

2. Slippery slope-you start going down this path it will not stop. Prepare yourself for further TV/replay encroachments in the future. As a Yank I am painfully aware of how this can happen.

3. Subjectivity ! Many of the ref decisions in multiple situations are too <deleted> subjective for even the best replays to overrule or confirm. We know this from watching the game. Even something supposedly as clear cut as an offside call is at times "too close to call" even with replay. So, you are going to stop the game for that ?

4. Other reasons. Too <deleted> many to go into without more coffee.

I'm telling you, it will be a <deleted> disaster that only TV suits and others of the same ilk will approve of. IMHO it will lead to more disagreement and rancor than already exists. Watch what you wish for !!!!!!

[StevieH]

referees get 95% of decisions correct on average. leave it the <deleted> alone.

[mrbojangles]

referees get 95% of decisions correct on average. leave it the <deleted> alone.

Have you got a link to that stat Stevie?

Worth a read. Research indicates officials unwittingly favour home teams and are particularly swayed by large crowds

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/apr/28/referees-home-team-sean-ingle

I'm not getting on referee's backs here but they are only human and will miss things. 22 players running at high speeds, they can't see everything, so I'm in favour of giving them assistance. But first, I'm in favour of trialling an idea and if it doesn't work i.e. slows the game down, then can it and think of something else.

I love football for all the debate we have after a match but there is nothing worse than being robbed of a win for a wrong decision.

[StevieH]

sorry, it's 92% of major decisions right, 99.3% of assistant referee calls right.

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news/features/q-and-a-with-referees-chief-mike-riley.html

think the point of it is that they are human boj, as are the players, and they are fallible. and for me there's already too much technology in the game anyway. leave it alone. stop over-complicating it and stop undermining the referee, without whom there is no match. i'll agree with replacing the referee with technology because he makes the occasional error when players stop making any mistakes whatsoever.

[Chicog]

If you let this in it will go like cricket.

Every umpire now is afraid to make an LBW decision in case they are wrong.

And they are more likely to send it upstairs than make decisions themselves in other cases as well.

Which makes for shi'ite umpires.

[smokie36]

referees get 95% of decisions correct on average. leave it the alone.

Even the majority of Spurs fans agree with this.

[mrbojangles]

sorry, it's 92% of major decisions right,

So 8% of major decisions are wrong.

I know they are only human and can make mistakes but I wonder if referees want the help of technology?

[jellydog]

If you let this in it will go like cricket.

Every umpire now is afraid to make an LBW decision in case they are wrong.

And they are more likely to send it upstairs than make decisions themselves in other cases as well.

Which makes for shi'ite umpires.

This has happened in spades in the NFL and college football in the states due solely to the increasing intrusion of replay.

Give it 10-15 years and they'll have super cameras mounted on drones hovering over the playing field. No joke. I'd be shocked if it didn't happen.

Edited September 9, 2014 by jellydog

[StevieH]

sorry, it's 92% of major decisions right,

So 8% of major decisions are wrong.

I know they are only human and can make mistakes but I wonder if referees want the help of technology?

i reckon they'd prefer the help of the FA and the premier league.

[alfieconn]

sorry, it's 92% of major decisions right,

So 8% of major decisions are wrong.

I know they are only human and can make mistakes but I wonder if referees want the help of technology?

i reckon they'd prefer the help of the FA and the premier league.

To do what ?

[StevieH]

sorry, it's 92% of major decisions right,

So 8% of major decisions are wrong.

I know they are only human and can make mistakes but I wonder if referees want the help of technology?

i reckon they'd prefer the help of the FA and the premier league.

To do what ?

stop them being undermined. stop them being abused by players on the pitch and by managers in post-match interviews. stop puce sh*theads like rooney screaming sweary bile into their faces. make the role of the referee a more respected one. they get a much higher percentage of their decisions and choices right than the players do.

[Chicog]

I'm with Stevie.

Under the referee's guidelines, foul and abusive language is supposed to be treated as violent conduct - straight red card.

Only ever seen it once, and that was Graham Poll and Emmanuel "Porn Star" Petit, who had just unloaded on a linesman.

If the refs started dishing out cards regularly, it would stop.

There was one ref in Europe who gave Wazza a second yellow for swearing about the first one, which was nice.

The only reason he is marginally better than he used to be is because the press had a go at him and several of his sponsors that were aimed at children dropped him like a hot potato.

[alfieconn]

So 8% of major decisions are wrong.

I know they are only human and can make mistakes but I wonder if referees want the help of technology?

i reckon they'd prefer the help of the FA and the premier league.

To do what ?

stop them being undermined. stop them being abused by players on the pitch and by managers in post-match interviews. stop puce sh*theads like rooney screaming sweary bile into their faces. make the role of the referee a more respected one. they get a much higher percentage of their decisions and choices right than the players do.

Your going off topic, none of them have anything to do with a referral system.

Footnote : How you can pick out Rooney when everyone does it including your own teams players is beyond me.

Edited September 9, 2014 by alfieconn

[BangrakBob]

We should a have a referral system on here. A nominated panel could be formed where members could refer the likes of Pishflaps, eejit and somtam for talking mince. Penalties could range from 1 day to a month gagging order depending on the severity of their sh-ite talking.

[P45Mustang]

referees get 95% of decisions correct on average. leave it the <deleted> alone.

The percentage they get wrong are quite often critical in the result of the game though.

eg. CL Sem-Final between Barca and Chelsea in 2010.

[P45Mustang]

I'm with Bojangles on this.

Here is a top referree's view.

"Everyone who watches a game on the television knows within seconds when a clear error has been made and the one guy that doesn't is the referee and that isn't fair."

Graham Poll. BBC Sport.