Video ref

[cecchini]

Personally, i wouldn't want to be a ref today.  They are only human and have a split second to make decisions. If A ref makes lots of bad call - yes they should be scrutinised and even 'demoted'. but i'm with the 'some you win, some you lose' crowd.

 

What i can't stand is diving or any form of deliberate cheating.  Some say its part of today's game, but in my view, if video evidence shows that  a player has cheated to win a penalty etc, the final result should be reversed, no matter what the score is.

 

i.e if a team wins 3-0 but one of the goals comes from a piece of cheating, the final result is a loss for the team and all goals rescinded.

 

that will put a stop to diving overnight.

[DB11]

Personally, i wouldn't want to be a ref today.  They are only human and have a split second to make decisions. If A ref makes lots of bad call - yes they should be scrutinised and even 'demoted'. but i'm with the 'some you win, some you lose' crowd.

 

What i can't stand is diving or any form of deliberate cheating.  Some say its part of today's game, but in my view, if video evidence shows that  a player has cheated to win a penalty etc, the final result should be reversed, no matter what the score is.

 

i.e if a team wins 3-0 but one of the goals comes from a piece of cheating, the final result is a loss for the team and all goals rescinded.

 

that will put a stop to diving overnight.

 

But what one person may say is a dive another may say was evasive action to avoid a clattering, in which case they should still be awarded a foul.

[ARM1968]

It was a crap decision. But if it had gone our way I doubt many would have complained.

[WesMorganGod]

I like it how it is, if we had video replays and all that nonsense then it would slow the match down so much, 90 minutes will end up being 110 minutes.. and it would take the fun out of everything. give us nothing to discuss, no rage. it would make it more boring. football is about fun at the end of the day. 

[Countryfox]

I like it how it is, if we had video replays and all that nonsense then it would slow the match down so much, 90 minutes will end up being 110 minutes.. and it would take the fun out of everything. give us nothing to discuss, no rage. it would make it more boring. football is about fun at the end of the day.

I don't see much fun in blatant cheating whether it's a ridiculous dive or the feigned injury after no contact to try and get a player sent off and ruin a good game. I don't get any pleasure either when the ref (not his fault cus he can't see it and his 'assistants' haven't got the bottle to make the call) makes a game (season) changing wrong decision. If that means the game goes on for a further 10 minutes so be it.

And just for the record I've never been an advocate of the use of technology but with so many f@@king cheating ba@@ards around my opinion has changed.

[TheMightySystem]

I like it how it is, if we had video replays and all that nonsense then it would slow the match down so much, 90 minutes will end up being 110 minutes.. and it would take the fun out of everything. give us nothing to discuss, no rage. it would make it more boring. football is about fun at the end of the day. 

So your saying its fun when the opposition gets a false penalty at the end of the game and gets a replay out of it? I get what you mean in that it creates more talking points and debates but it aint fun for the team on the wrong side of the decision. Personally I say only do video replays for big decisions in a game so straight reds, penalties and any off side goals which had a chance of being onside and vice versa. If you consider it takes a minute or two for the commentators to look at the replays and make a decision it wont be that long, especially if they only focus on the big decisions and even more so when you consider the complaining players do for big calls surrounding the ref, it wont be that much added on.

[what?]

I actually think that using video replays would could add more excitement rather than slowing things down. Just imagine the referee blowing his whistle for a penalty shout. The players now know that it's out of his hands so there's no point in arguing, the entire stadium is holding their breath in tense silence. Then he points to the spot or doesn't and the crowd erupts. As long as the wait time wasn't longer than a minute or two and it was just kept for penalties or disallowed goals then it could probably add some extra drama to proceedings. 

[Captain...]

Video replays will only work on clear mistakes. Giving a handball when it hits someone in the face. Or a foul happening outside the box. Or a dive with no contact.

The wording of the laws are so ambiguous that it is often down to the ref's interpretation, and A video replay can't question a ref's interpretation of excessive force.

Dyer's handball, it did hit his hand, if the ref decides it was deliberate or his hand was in an unnatural position the video can't contradict the ref's opinion because it is a subjective law.

Before we can use technology we need to tighten up the laws of the game so it can be used.

[Detroit Blues]

Video replays will only work on clear mistakes. Giving a handball when it hits someone in the face. Or a foul happening outside the box. Or a dive with no contact.

The wording of the laws are so ambiguous that it is often down to the ref's interpretation, and A video replay can't question a ref's interpretation of excessive force.

Dyer's handball, it did hit his hand, if the ref decides it was deliberate or his hand was in an unnatural position the video can't contradict the ref's opinion because it is a subjective law.

Before we can use technology we need to tighten up the laws of the game so it can be used.

 

I agree with your last statement Captain. I have a hard time believing most players are deliberately trying to contact a ball with their hand/arm in the box. I believe that too often they are just in the wrong place at the wrong time. 

 

I also feel like the punishment given for a handball in the box is often more extreme than the offense. Take for example Dyer's handball. Does anyone actually think Tottenham would have scored had he not contacted the ball with his arm? Probably not. Yet the penalty given almost assures a goal for Tottenham barring a miracle save,or a disastrous miss. 

 

Perhaps the referee should have more flexibility in the handling of the punishment If he deems the offender does not take away a goal scoring opportunity. I just hate to let a hard fought game be dictated by the refs and not the players.

[Captain...]

I agree with your last statement Captain. I have a hard time believing most players are deliberately trying to contact a ball with their hand/arm in the box. I believe that too often they are just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I also feel like the punishment given for a handball in the box is often more extreme than the offense. Take for example Dyer's handball. Does anyone actually think Tottenham would have scored had he not contacted the ball with his arm? Probably not. Yet the penalty given almost assures a goal for Tottenham barring a miracle save,or a disastrous miss.

Perhaps the referee should have more flexibility in the handling of the punishment If he deems the offender does not take away a goal scoring opportunity. I just hate to let a hard fought game be dictated by the refs and not the players.

Fully agree, personally I think a handball should be an indirect free kick unless it is clearly deliberate.

[DB11]

When I was first learning how to be a referee I remember one of the trainers saying "If you never give a penalty for handball, you'll be correct 99% of the time" and the reasoning was that a player is very unlikely to ever deliberately handle the ball inside his own penalty area when the punishment is a penalty and almost certain goal, as opposed to just letting the play take its natural course and a much lower chance of a goal resulting

[Countryfox]

When I was first learning how to be a referee I remember one of the trainers saying "If you never give a penalty for handball, you'll be correct 99% of the time" and the reasoning was that a player is very unlikely to ever deliberately handle the ball inside his own penalty area when the punishment is a penalty and almost certain goal, as opposed to just letting the play take its natural course and a much lower chance of a goal resulting

Wise words .... Wish that tw@t last Sunday had gone to your training school.

[WesMorganGod]

Actually guys I'll change my opinion if its only for "big decisions", if so then yeah I guess I am fine with it. but if its for every decision like throw-ins and corners and free kicks and goalkeeper pass-backs and all that then I just feel like it will kill the games and go on forever. 

 

IF its for penalties and red cards only, then I'll be ok with it.  but I think a lot of things in football is subjective. 

[Countryfox]

Actually guys I'll change my opinion if its only for "big decisions", if so then yeah I guess I am fine with it. but if its for every decision like throw-ins and corners and free kicks and goalkeeper pass-backs and all that then I just feel like it will kill the games and go on forever. 

 

IF its for penalties and red cards only, then I'll be ok with it.  but I think a lot of things in football is subjective.

Good call Wes !

[Countryfox]

Couldn't help but notice that in the Sun today there was a call for tv replays due to something the ref got completely wrong in the Swansea Sunderland match, and in the Mail it said that 'Costa spent most of the game trying to get someone sent off' .... Bring it on I say !