Let's have replays to give football refs a kick

[Lite Beer]

EDITORIAL
Let's have replays to give football refs a kick
The Nation

Controversy over close or errant calls isn't "part of the sport's charm", as Fifa maintains

For the thousandth time, football fans around the world are pressing for TV replays, and for the thousandth time the sport's governing body will shrug off their pleas. It's become a tiring routine, an issue raised after every significant refereeing blunder - and then muffled once more.

The vast majority of fans believe it would be highly practical and appropriate to use this mundane technology to make the world's most popular sport fairer. But those who make the decisions cannot be convinced - or are too stubborn, to be frank.

Last week there was another controversy to stir the pot. During an English Premier League match, a confused referee sent off the wrong player. It should have been the team captain chucked out for a foul, and indeed the skipper was in the process of removing his captaincy armband ready to leave the pitch when the referee instead showed a teammate the red card instead, ignoring protests all around.

Three days ago in the same top-ranking league, rival players were spitting at each other during a match.

Evidently the referee saw nothing and no one was punished. The ugly incident surely didn't affect the outcome of the game, but we wonder whether the players might have restrained themselves if they'd known the referee might see a replay tape and then assign penalties.

The obstinate refusal of Fifa, football's governing body, to allow TV replays as a refereeing aid would be laughable if it weren't so maddeningly wrong.

None of Fifa's excuses has withstood examination. It has said reviewing replays takes time and disrupts the flow of "the beautiful game". That's not true, since play can continue while officials elsewhere review the tape, only contacting the referee on the pitch if there is indeed a stoppage required. And the term "beautiful" is a red herring when it comes to incompetent refereeing, since a pall of ugly anger descends on the stadium - and on TV viewers - when there's a truly egregious error.

Fifa has also balked at the cost of replays and the manner in which they're captured from the sidelines, but why not simply make use of the video already being shot for commercial broadcast?

The only expense to Fifa would be for a TV set, a recorder with replay capability, and a pair of walkie-talkies.

Fifa has noted that TV footage doesn't necessarily tell the whole story.

This is true at times, but it's an exception to the rule, and greater accuracy in refereeing is worth the occasional risk of false perceptions.

In support of replays, they're not required for every untoward incident on the pitch. They'd primarily be useful when a player is sent off, when an offside-goal call is in question, and when the referee has to decide whether to award a penalty spot kick.

Fifa continues to draw fire because it lets an easily solved problem persist while other sports utilise the technology to everyone's satisfaction.

Controversy over close calls isn't "part of football's charm", as Fifa maintains. Those controversies on the field often spark brutality among players and fans.

With yet another refereeing mix-up, pressure on Fifa has been renewed. It does seem like the use of TV replays is just a matter of time. When Fifa finally bows to the inevitable, it needn't expect heartfelt thanks.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Lets-have-replays-to-give-football-refs-a-kick-30255462.html

-- The Nation 2015-03-07

[wgdanson]

We get almost instant replays 4, 5, 6 times of any incident, so yes, why can't the Fourth Offical, who does f..k all really, tell the ref. And why can't the ref review any dodgy decision at half time and reverse it before the 2nd half start and ADMIT HE GOT IT WRONG.

[DoctorG]

Perhaps they could try it the same as the cricket. Each team is allowed one referral per game. If the referral is successful, the team can use another one later.

This would ensure minimal disruption to the game and everyone would be happier.

[shaurene]

It is the stuck up noses in FIFA, I'm the boss and I say no. They know there are some really bad calls and it could be found true or false with a video check like in Rugby it is checked and a No Try of A Try is given, it is a very fair outcome.

[mrbojangles]

While Blatter is in charge I can't see technology being used. I'd be surprised if he has even got a remote control for his TV yet as he prefers to use one of his aides to turn over the channels and the only reason he thinks replays take so long is because his aide is still has to rewind the tape on his betamax

[alfieconn]

Video technology: Dutch FA trials delayed for 12 months

Video technology trials during competitive matches have been put back at least 12 months at a meeting of the game's lawmakers in Belfast.

The Dutch FA (KNVB) had wanted to extend its trial of having a video official in the stadium watching replays and advising the referee on key decisions via a headset.

FA chairman Greg Dyke had been keen to push forward the trials but other International Football Association Board (IFAB) delegates referred the idea back for further discussions

[trainman34014]

Blatter is a Dinosaur and until he is replaced by a younger man with fresh (and fair) idea's nothing much will change. The sooner he goes the better.

[Chicog]

"None of Fifa's excuses has withstood examination. It has said reviewing replays takes time and disrupts the flow of "the beautiful game". That's not true, since play can continue while officials elsewhere review the tape, only contacting the referee on the pitch if there is indeed a stoppage required."

What an utterly stupid idea.

Leave this to the cricket and egg chasing nobs.

[Chicog]

It is the stuck up noses in FIFA, I'm the boss and I say no. They know there are some really bad calls and it could be found true or false with a video check like in Rugby it is checked and a No Try of A Try is given, it is a very fair outcome.

Yes, but that is when there is a logical break in play.

As posted above, these nitwits are suggesting play could go on while the review takes place.

In that time you could have all sorts of things happen on the pitch, all of which could be invalidated by any subsequent decision.

It would make the game an utter farce.

If these people want video replays so bad, they should all piss off and play FIFA and leave the game to us.

[mrbojangles]

Yes, but that is when there is a logical break in play.

As posted above, these nitwits are suggesting play could go on while the review takes place.

Goal line technology lets the game carry on, until the ref gets a red/green light on his watch. That works fine to me.

As for other instances, in the event of a penalty being given, the ref has already blown up and the game stopped. Whilst all the opposition players are surrounding the ref, that's when the review could be done. I'm not for the use technology in all instances but it sure could be used more than it currently is.

[Chicog]

Goal line technology takes the decision out of the referees hands. What you are saying is that penalty decisions will only be reviewed if the ref gives it.

[khunken]

I agree with Chicog. The argument for video reviews has gone too far and, with lost time & reviews we could see an hour long half. The case of Wes Brown being sent off instead of John O'Shea should have been corrected at half-time or even when it happened if O'Shea had made it clear to the ref that it was him. Not a good reason for a video review.

[BB24]

Slightly off-topic I know, but the issue of FIFA changing things to make more refereeing decisions correct is not the core problem.

Whilst there is a valid argument to check that the ball crossed the goal line within a short period - whether the referee rules goal or not - the rest is invalid.

The core problem is that quality of the referees, and the core issue behand that is why there are not as many quality referees as there used to be (meaning as in my day).

IMO the reason is that Refs are no longer allowed to 'enforce' the laws of the game - and so many young referees struggle to accept being treated as shiete by the players they give it away.

Some years ago when the game became VERY profitable, REFs started to come under more and more pressure to let the game flow and stop enforcing every Law.

The Players and Coaches reacted to that by adopting tactics that became more are more outright cheating - now they are experts.

Refs who 'dared' ever award a free kick (let alone a penalty) were abused and ridiculed - the Players, Coaches and Media more and more started to run the game, not the Refs.

So nowadays you watch any game and the Laws of the game are clearly not being enforced and the Ref abused from every corner - who would want to be a Referee?

I tell you who - less than the best people - they can succeed at many things and so they go elsewhere (most are part-timers to begin with and there aint big money in it either).

Now add all the media scrutiny and criticism on top of that, and people wonder why there are not many good referees these days.

As I came to the end of my career, I saw less and less quality young refs coming through the system - most with potential would say 'screw this shiete - I have better things to do'.

At the end all the players and coaches knew me ('Old School') and I didn't have anywhere near the problems as the younger Refs - but now us 'old dogs' are long gone.

I said it back then, and I am still saying it now - if you allow the Players Coaches and Media to abuse the Refs so much - you wont get many good young ones willing to put up with it all.

If anyone wants to see how it is done 'properly' check put NFL and NBL and US Baseball etc etc - the Players Coaches and Media all respect the Refs - knowing they will make mistakes (even blowing up sometimes) - and they have overall very good Refs and they get most decisions right - and the game is better for it because the best cheats (divers) dont win.

Watching EPL/SeriA etc is (for me) watching blatant cheats playing and inneffective apologistioc Refs trying hard not to 'spoil' the game (entertainment).

The World Cup is much better though - the Players tend to 'behave' and that is because for some time FIFA has made it VERY clear to them that the world is watching and this aint their local competition where they can cheat without ramifications - unfortunately the FIFA Refs are still the same and their 'inadequacies' are more and more obvious every World Cup.

[Chicog]

Even in peanut hugging players wouldn't dare abuse refs.

[mrbojangles]

Goal line technology takes the decision out of the referees hands. What you are saying is that penalty decisions will only be reviewed if the ref gives it.

I'm not saying the rules have to be as rigid as that Chicog. Common sense can also take place. I.E. the Newcastle game last week when there was a stonewall pen and the ref didn't see it. Seconds later video replays where showing that there was deffo contact. 4th official could have instructed the ref to give it. To be honest, most major incidents are followed by a break in play and players remonstrating to the ref anyway.

Another instance could be if a goal is scored and the ref is unsure if someone was off side, he can simply request the 4th official reviews and he tells him if it was off-side or not. The ref could either just ask for the 4th official to review a specific incident or if he thinks there might be a couple of iffy things i.e. there was maybe a foul in the build up as well as off-side, he could request the 4th official to review.

I think what I'm trying to say is there are way too many bad decisions made when the use of technology could assist the ref in making the right decisions. I wouldn't like technology to take over but merely used as an additional tool for the ref, should it be required. I honestly think it works great in Rugby and it could be simply an adaptation of that.

[champers]

I'm torn. I don't want artificial excitement created by video replays like in inferior sports; rugby in particular, which needs to generate excitement because the rest of the sport is about hiding the ball and deliberately kicking it out of play. Also, I want correct decision making at the time and not after the event. The John O'Shea incident is an intersting case in point. Why hasn't he received the red card that Brown has had rescinded? After two days we still had a barmpot decision. Either way, the genie is out of the bottle now because of goal line technology and the foreign owners, TV companies and advertisers & sponsors will insist on it, so in due course it will happen.

[jellydog]

Thanks but no thanks.

[smokie36]

The new rules should be retrospective and Man Yoo stripped of a couple of titles.

[Chicog]

Goal line technology takes the decision out of the referees hands. What you are saying is that penalty decisions will only be reviewed if the ref gives it.

I'm not saying the rules have to be as rigid as that Chicog. Common sense can also take place. I.E. the Newcastle game last week when there was a stonewall pen and the ref didn't see it. Seconds later video replays where showing that there was deffo contact. 4th official could have instructed the ref to give it. To be honest, most major incidents are followed by a break in play and players remonstrating to the ref anyway.

Another instance could be if a goal is scored and the ref is unsure if someone was off side, he can simply request the 4th official reviews and he tells him if it was off-side or not. The ref could either just ask for the 4th official to review a specific incident or if he thinks there might be a couple of iffy things i.e. there was maybe a foul in the build up as well as off-side, he could request the 4th official to review.

I think what I'm trying to say is there are way too many bad decisions made when the use of technology could assist the ref in making the right decisions. I wouldn't like technology to take over but merely used as an additional tool for the ref, should it be required. I honestly think it works great in Rugby and it could be simply an adaptation of that.

It only works when there is a logical break in play.

Do it in football and it will be more stop-start than when you have a shit ref that blows for everything.

No thanks.

[SantiSuk]

I agree with Chicog. The argument for video reviews has gone too far and, with lost time & reviews we could see an hour long half. The case of Wes Brown being sent off instead of John O'Shea should have been corrected at half-time or even when it happened if O'Shea had made it clear to the ref that it was him. Not a good reason for a video review.

Khunken - I refer you to an incident earlier in the season when gunner Ox went up to the ref and said (quite clearly to lip readers) "it was me ref" and not Gibbs. The ref totally ignored Ox and sent off Gibbs. Bit of a result actually - as I recall it (maybe incorrectly?) Ox had the red card rescinded and Gibbs was not punished.

On the broader argument the ref should be able to call up a TV review for goals, penalties, red cards and other incidents at his discretion, only where he believes none of the officials had a good view - they discuss who could see what on the RTs anyway. I agree that we do not want the match stopped for interminable reviews (the goal/penalty reviews could take place while the players set up for the restart kick or penalty) and we do not want to replace referee judgement with TV second guessing for all routine stuff.

[Chicog]

Talking refs, Oliver had a great game last night

[champers]

Looks like Tom Daley has been taking training sessions at Man U.