This has probably been done to death but, in light of Terry Butchers recent remarks, I thought I would add my tuppence worth. Hibs could end up being relegated on what, by all accounts, was a fairly poor decision from a linesman. I know the "swings and roundabouts" argument comes into play but why should we not assist our officials to get it right?
My proposals are these;
1) Each side gets two appeals for a review per game.
2) A successful appeal does not reduce the number of appeals remaining.
3) Appeals can only be for sending offs, offside goals against the appealing team, simulation, handballs/other offenses in the penalty area, disallowed goals where the ball may have crossed the line (goal line technology) and serious off the ball infringements.
4) The offended team would have a minimal period to question the officials decision (to eliminate their own video reviews).
5) In instances where it is not 100% clear what happened, the original decision stands.
Having observed this type of technology in various sports (mainly cricket and rugby league) I have come to the conclusion that;
a) It often adds to the excitement of the game, and
b) It is more often right than wrong thereby producing fairer results and reducing official bias/incompetence.
I have deliberately excluded awarding a goal to a player considered offside when they were actually onside. Some players would see the officials flag up and switch off thereby allowing the attacking player opportunities they may have not otherwise had.
I am sure there are many more instances where technology could be used and would appreciate being enlightened in this regard.
Long post on technology in football
posted on 31/3/14
Mick, most of the time they would be overturning the decision of the linesman, but take your point.
posted on 31/3/14
I trust the refs to consult the video ref when they are not sure.
If they dont, and think they are 100% correct, and turn out to be completely wrong, I think that would give the authorites and the managers/players a lot more clout in bringing refs to task
It would still mean there are controversial decisions, but in instances when the ref is entirely wrong, yet insisted he made the correct decison and didnt consult the video ref, he would be painted as being nothing more than a stubborn bastirt rather than a guy at the will of the elements, under pressure to make a split second decision or whatever.
posted on 31/3/14
posted on 31/3/14
I just dont think anyone but the referee should be allowed to disturb the flow of the game.
As someone said above, in the NFL, coaches make challenges, but the review isnt until the play stops.
With football, I just dont think a manager should be allowed to stop a team counter attacking for the sake of a review, that should be the referee's call, not a players/managers
posted on 31/3/14
posted on 31/3/14
"He would throw a flag, but the review wouldn't take place until the play is dead."
Hence why I think the ref shoud have the power also, becasue it could be another 10 minutes before the play is dead, unless a team kicks it out intentionally....whereas the ref could stop the game then and there and do a bounce up if need be
Think about it, if a team kicks it out intentionally in order to review a decision that didnt go theri way, but it turns out that the decisions was correct in the first place, would the opposing team be expected to just kick the ball back in some sort of gesture of fairness??
Fck that, if the opposition kicked the ball out to try and get a penalty agaisnt my team when they were not due one, never were, and were just chancing their arm, the last thing I would be doing is giving them the ball back out of sportsmanship, coz where's the sportsmanship in their original decision to undemine the ref??
posted on 31/3/14
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 31/3/14
posted on 31/3/14
It's unlikely that play would stay live for 10 minutes. But I get your point.
---------------
Also, lets say they looked back at the decision 10 mins ago and decide they were wrong. Do they wind the clock back?
If not then 10 mins of the game have basically been lost.
Regardless of what we think, the powers that be are all old guys who dont like change or the suggestion that things could be done better.
Its taken years for them to even test out goal line technology, never mind anything else.
posted on 31/3/14
I understand your point about trusting refs but under any scenario, its still a ref that is going to make a call, the video ref is still a ref, so if we are going down the impartial or non trust issue then the same thing has to apply to the video ref aswell, and that can go on and on and never end.
At some point, someone, somewhere has to make a fair call.
I dont see why that responsibility shouldn't lie with the ref on the field, and its just a case that video technology is there to aid him make the correct decisions and its him that should take the flak if he doesnt use it, he's not doing his job properly or good enough if he's not using it at all, not using it enough or using it too much