Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Video Technology in Football

Goal like technology has finally been put into place. Now surely it would be easy to just do what they do in rugby where with big decisions there is a panel who quickly watch footage of a big decision and decide the outcome. I can't believe in 2014 we just accept huge mistakes like a penalty which wasn't a penalty which will effect the whole season when rugby has proven it works.

It won't slow the match down as it will be only for big decisions. But if people think it will get used too much then maybe each team should have 5 challenges per match like in tennis with hawk eye.
«1

Comments

  • Would surely ruin football.
  • Rugby, cricket and tennis decisions are all referred to tv replays or to technology solutions when the ball is out of play. The decision is given one way or another. In football, often the most critical decisions are based on whether there was a foul committed or not. In this case the referee has to decide EITHER to stop the play OR to wave play on.

    You can't make use of a technology which can result in the decision "there was no foul, carry on playing". You can't have the red stopping the game, only to be told there was no foul, so play on.

    Technology should only be used in football where it aids line decisions: did the ball cross the goal-line, etc.
  • Bloody hell, does everything have to be pixellated. What's so wrong with the real world that everything has to be reduced to what can be seen on screens?
  • I like it when mistakes by refs are made. Obviously not when its my own team but I like the way it is at the moment. We already have goal line technology and hopefully we can leave it at that.

    Otherwise we need to be checking screens for offsides, fouls etc.
  • Chizz said:

    Rugby, cricket and tennis decisions are all referred to tv replays or to technology solutions when the ball is out of play. The decision is given one way or another. In football, often the most critical decisions are based on whether there was a foul committed or not. In this case the referee has to decide EITHER to stop the play OR to wave play on.

    You can't make use of a technology which can result in the decision "there was no foul, carry on playing". You can't have the red stopping the game, only to be told there was no foul, so play on.

    Technology should only be used in football where it aids line decisions: did the ball cross the goal-line, etc.

    Or you can just wait till the ball goes out of play and then challenge a decision to not give a foul, offside etc. In the time between the incident happening and the ball going out of play any additional refs would have had time to review it so it would be a very quick decision.

    I personally hate how near enough every match is often ruled by bad decisions and I think bad refs are ruining football. Video technology would certainly improve it.
  • edited January 2014
    Ever since football was invented, virtually every aspect of the game has changed, the ball, the boots, even the players. Resulting in a much faster game, the only thing that has never changed is the ref, he may as well be standing there in a top hat and tails ffs. If the technology is there, then I think it's stupid not to use it imo.
  • I think Video Technology is a great tool that can be used yet it should only be used for if the ball has crossed the Goal-line or not...

    For those though that are saying having a panel would slow the game down, I give you the Newcastle "Goal" from yesterday - Between the goal being scored and the Referee deciding it shouldnt stand it probably would have been quicker had the Referee gone to the panel as it surely would have been quicker than him running over to the Linesman and having a discussion about it.

    Still as I say Goal-Line Technology is more than enough... I'd much rather see Sin Bins and the ability to hear the conversations between official and player (for respect reasons rather than me being a nosey git) if we were to bring any other Technology into the game
  • A foul and even some offsides are a matter of opinion. Ball going over goal line is a matter of fact. Glad we are utilizing that technology, no need to use it for other matters.
  • If a ref had a continuous dialogue with another ref via an earpiece and mic, and that guy was in a room with Sky+ And a remote control, football would have fewer mistakes and wouldn't be much different in terms of pace.
  • JiMMy 85 said:

    If a ref had a continuous dialogue with another ref via an earpiece and mic, and that guy was in a room with Sky+ And a remote control, football would have fewer mistakes and wouldn't be much different in terms of pace.

    lol! Its laughable because thats all you'd need!!
  • Sponsored links:


  • What about a team having 2 or 3 chances to challenge a decision for review each half, bit like in tennis? Doesn't then get out of hand like rugby. Only captain to the ref or manager to the assistant can make the challenge.
  • I really think controversial decisions make football more enjoyable. What's next? how about leave it to the crowd to decide? Text 1 if you think it was a pen or 2 if you don't.....................
  • You wouldn't need more than one challenge each as you rarely get more than one big decision in a match. Like the idea though but limit challenges to one per match each side.
  • I really think controversial decisions make football more enjoyable. What's next? how about leave it to the crowd to decide? Text 1 if you think it was a pen or 2 if you don't.....................

    Exactly
  • I really think controversial decisions make football more enjoyable. What's next? how about leave it to the crowd to decide? Text 1 if you think it was a pen or 2 if you don't.....................

    Football is a sport first, entertainment 2nd. It should be about the deserving team winning not about controversial decisions for entertainment value. If you want drama and controversy then watch a soap or a reality TV show with your bird.
  • Nug said:

    What about a team having 2 or 3 chances to challenge a decision for review each half, bit like in tennis? Doesn't then get out of hand like rugby. Only captain to the ref or manager to the assistant can make the challenge.

    I think this is a sensible suggestion. The real point is that what's needed is some trial and error. It wouldn't be hard to organise that in pre-season tournaments or in competitions like the JPT, for example. Let's find out what might work and what doesn't. I suspect that most objections could be easily dealt with.

    Its completely absurd that when technology is used widely in other sports football continues to languish in the dark ages.

    The use of goal line technology is a complete cop out by FIFA. Its rarely needed and has the benefit of being "precise". It was a non decision designed to help preserve the status quo. Why? Because that's what little people with no vision, courage or conviction do.

    Football will get there eventually, but its going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.
  • edited January 2014
    For those who think it would be used for every little fouls or decision, it wouldn't. It would be for red cards, offside goals and penalty decisions. We wouldn't want Gary Goals scoring non legit penos.
  • Tonight's penalty decision backs up my call for this sort of technology on incidences like that. It was outside the box. So if Barca go onto win the cup it could all come down to a wrong decision. It's wrong.
  • It's not wrong, it's football, it's sport and it's life. Some things go your way, some don't.

    Take all video technology out of sport.
  • dizzee said:

    For those who think it would be used for every little fouls or decision, it wouldn't. It would be for red cards, offside goals and penalty decisions. We wouldn't want Gary Goals scoring non legit penos.

    How would we decide if a decision was a "red card" decision? Would we have a video ref panel that views all incidents during the match and alerts the "red card video ref" when they see a decision they want to refer to him?

    And would this panel be the same as the panel that would be required to decide whether any tackles in, near or around the penalty area should be referred to the "penalty video ref"?

  • Sponsored links:


  • One of the most irritating side effects of not using technology is that it encourages the cheats to dive to win free kicks, penalties and get opponents sent off. With replays, if there is no contact and a player dives he could be sent off. To my mind, that's far more serious than the offence committed by Arsenal's keeper last night who was just doing his job.
  • Watching Wolfsburg v Everton. We've got to have video technology at some point. Because we are watching a match which is 0-0, which is just ridiculous as the actual score should be 1-0. It feels stupid watching this when two minutes of watching a quick replay would tell the ref it was a goal. It's just ridiculous.
  • Dizzee, stop trying to ruin football
  • Riviera said:

    It's not wrong, it's football, it's sport and it's life. Some things go your way, some don't.

    Take all video technology out of sport.

    ....unless it's a photo proving your horse nicked it on the line in the Cheltenham gold cup. Or would you be happy with a race stewards naked eye saying the other horse won?
    After all, some things go your way. Some don't.
  • Riviera said:

    It's not wrong, it's football, it's sport and it's life. Some things go your way, some don't.

    Take all video technology out of sport.

    ..and all modern medicine too.
  • Liverpool v Bournemouth

    Great example of why this needs to implemented into the game.
  • Riviera said:

    It's not wrong, it's football, it's sport and it's life. Some things go your way, some don't.

    Take all video technology out of sport.

    ....unless it's a photo proving your horse nicked it on the line in the Cheltenham gold cup. Or would you be happy with a race stewards naked eye saying the other horse won?
    After all, some things go your way. Some don't.
    Would suit me fine. I think if you are actually on the line in a race, be it human or animal, you call it correct 998/1002.
  • dizzee said:

    Goal like technology has finally been put into place. Now surely it would be easy to just do what they do in rugby where with big decisions there is a panel who quickly watch footage of a big decision and decide the outcome. I can't believe in 2014 we just accept huge mistakes like a penalty which wasn't a penalty which will effect the whole season when rugby has proven it works.

    It won't slow the match down as it will be only for big decisions. But if people think it will get used too much then maybe each team should have 5 challenges per match like in tennis with hawk eye.

    as some above comments indicate, the Liverpool/B'Mouth game is a supreme example of a team being robbed twice by bad, VERY bad officiating .. not to say that Bournemouth would have won the game, but for a new, relatively unsung club, with lots of money and careers at stake, they deserve better .. home team advantage should only stretch so far ..
  • Riviera said:

    Riviera said:

    It's not wrong, it's football, it's sport and it's life. Some things go your way, some don't.

    Take all video technology out of sport.

    ....unless it's a photo proving your horse nicked it on the line in the Cheltenham gold cup. Or would you be happy with a race stewards naked eye saying the other horse won?
    After all, some things go your way. Some don't.
    Would suit me fine. I think if you are actually on the line in a race, be it human or animal, you call it correct 998/1002.
    10 months to reply. Perhaps Riviera would prefer doing this by letters
  • Two calls each side and a red card for divers/play-acting, once proven, will clean up the game and gets my vote without any reservation!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!