Video Technology

pks00

Inactive User
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Messages
3,210
Reaction score
162
Location
Getting sunburnt in SoCal
Reading the latimes, it seems FIFA have decided to think about using video technology. But an apology to England and Mexico dont mean anything considering those decisions helped them get knocked out.

The paper also said that the refs are to be cut. Now I can understand that but if FIFA had trialled video technology here, then maybe they would not of been cut. If its a south american vs europe final, what country can they use to get hold of a top ref. Hmmm.
 

Raven24

Banned
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
1,186
Reaction score
22
Location
Lost In HD.
I don't think there's anybody who is against video technology being introduced into the game to aid referees and assistants....after all the technology is already there all they have to do is put the feed onto the big screen and watch.

But the thing is where does one draw the line ? Because in football every offside call in major finals will be attempted to be called to the screen and it could be abused....but then again that's down to the ref to make the call to be absolutely sure - if he's not 100% fact with it then consult the video feed or video ref, it works wonders for super league rugby. And it stops teams being screwed by human error. Goals a mile over the line that never were. Offside goals that should have stood or shouldn't have been allowed to stand etc.

Do it Fifa.
 

pks00

Inactive User
Joined
Jun 30, 2007
Messages
3,210
Reaction score
162
Location
Getting sunburnt in SoCal
I think it should be goal line incidents only. These mistakes can turn the game around and in games like this it is heart breakening. Dont want it everywhere else it would keep stopping like usa games. Take a game of basketball, each quarter is 12 minutes but after various stoppages you end up being well over 20 minutes!
 

stevie1ball

Inactive User
Joined
Jun 11, 2009
Messages
1,128
Reaction score
8
Location
Soaring above the clouds
Video technology has got to be introduced in football sooner rather than later.

As for implementing the rules on it's use during a game it would have to be limited to 2 or poss 3 appeals per game selected be the captain of the team only and time stopped until the decision is finalized not added to the length of the match extending extra time which is the old injury time.

I am sure fans would not be complaining about any extra length to the duration of the game if this meant that fair play and a true result was obtained in the end.

These sort of decisions can cost some clubs a lot of money if it means they get relegated or fail to become champions.
 

elniro

Inactive User
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
1,400
Reaction score
21
I think video tech should only be used for whether ball has crossed the goal-line and red card incidents, as these are the biggest events that can change a match.

As soon as a red card is dished out I think there should be the 4th official who immediately reviews replay footage and decides whether the referee was right or not. I guess they could make it more expansive and after the ref has issued the red card he can jus get over to the sidelines and they can review footage together and make a decision...this wouldnt take long.

The same can be done for goal line incident, the 4th official can decide whether ball has crossed the line or not via video replay and if it has he can tell the referee via the mouthpiece.
 

jaffa

Inactive User
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
9,889
Reaction score
391
Location
Made in Belfast
Dodgy penalty decisions (given or not given) should also be looked at because they can alter a game massively. It wouldnt take that long because if a penalty is really controversial, the team aggrieved almost always surround the ref, by the time he sorts this out and books players, 2 or 3 minutes have passed. 30 seconds with the video ref and its sorted, if players still protest over the decision, book them or send them off.

It's a farce that in this day and age with so much money dependant on results, we still have to rely on a human decision.

Just penalty box decisions would at least be a step forward.

At saying all that...it really shouldn't have been necessary against the Krauts, because it wasnt touch or go, it was way over the line, but if it gets Septic Blatter of his fat a$$ and makes Fifa review it again then maybe Eng will have done something worthwhile in World cup...:proud:
 

gasman

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
5,431
Reaction score
2,178
Location
depends
Never been a big fan of the technology at all as the shite decisions do create some of the hype that surrounds football. Id maybe go with goal line technology as it's easy to implement and can be cleared up in seconds. Maybe even offsides because again simple and easy to clear up. As for penalty decisions handballs/fouls etc the replays can make those look far worse in slow mo than real time and dont take into account the speed the player or ball is traveling thats gonna be a lot of watching replays and breaks in play. Even then human error gets it wrong, ask any rugby or cricket fan if hawkeye or the fourth official has ever let them down. Im both answer is yes on both counts.
 

dj999

Inactive User
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
817
Reaction score
28
Location
birmingham
The paper also said that the refs are to be cut. Now I can understand that but if FIFA had trialled video technology here, then maybe they would not of been cut. If its a south american vs europe final, what country can they use to get hold of a top ref. Hmmm.

they dont cut the refs. usually send the refs home whose countries are still there.
 

gasman

VIP Member
VIP Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
5,431
Reaction score
2,178
Location
depends
they dont cut the refs. usually send the refs home whose countries are still there.
Aye i see Howard Webbs still in the World Cup might well be an Englishman in the final after all :proud:
 
TEST
Top