5 Officials for new UEFA Cup Competition

GuanYin

It looks like they're putting an extra official beside each goal line instead of goal mouth technology.

I guess an assistant ref is cheaper than goalmouth technology..although they will have a headset, which by FIFA standards makes them half cyborg.


The reasoning is that they want "the human element" to remain in decision making, which to me sounds suspiciously like a way of leaving yourself open to accusations of match rigging (ala Italy Vs South Korea)....

Article

RATM

I don't really think they mean for the 4/5th official to be there instead of goal mouth technology only- from that article it says that they can also advise refs on infringements in the box, penalty calls etc.

It might work and it might not, but theres no point in saying it won't until its been tried at the highest level and this experiment in the Europa League gives them the opportunity to do just that so I reckon its a good idea tbh.

The article makes a good point about having the extra officials making it less likely that there will be messing in the box, I guess its kinda like crime & punishment- if a player thinks he will get away with something then he'll try it on, if he doesn't then he won't and by having an extra official it makes the latter scenario more likely. It could also prevent diving a bit too as there will now be three sets of eyes on any incidents in the goal area.

Mr.Nice Guy

It sounds like a good idea and it could work well for cutting down diving but I'm not sure I'd fancy being stood on either side of the goal in the modern era, particularly when the likes of Gerrard and Rooney are taking shots on goal. Sounds like a good way to get your face destroyed.

GuanYin

RATM wrote: »

I don't really think they mean for the 4/5th official to be there instead of goal mouth technology only- from that article it says that they can also advise refs on infringements in the box, penalty calls etc.

I was being a little tongue in cheek

I welcome any improvements, but video reply >>> human line judge.

gimmick

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'm not sure I'd fancy being stood on either side of the goal in the modern era, particularly when the likes of Gerrard and Rooney are taking shots on goal. Sounds like a good way to get your face destroyed.

Meh, hurling umpires are in more danger really.

Good idea if it comes to pass.

Guy:Incognito

The problem with extra people looking at divign instead of video evidence is it still leaves it open to human error, maybe even more so than with less officials.

What happens if the guy behind the goal reckons he's 100% certain its a dive but the ref or linesman looking from a difficult angle reckon they are sure it isnt?

Video evidence can take out any doubt, more humans add doubt.

PHB

Well like the standard rule is that if you see a foul of any sort, you flow up for it. For me, the linesmen and the box refs will be of lower quality than the actual refs.

Just like when theres a foul on the touchline, but since the linesman doesn't give it, the ref doesn't give it, I suspect a similar system will happen here.

I'm very interested to see where they stand though.

GLaDOS

They're adding a 5th official, and putting an offical on each goal.

I understand this to mean the 4th official will no longer be by the duggouts so?

ArmaniJeanss

Stekelly wrote: »

Video evidence can take out any doubt, more humans add doubt.

FIFA are totally opposed to video evidence, and for better or worse in the short term thats not going to change.

By the way its wrong to say that video evidence can take out any doubt, there have still been hugely controversial decisions in sports that do use video evidence (Off the top of my head I'm thinking of the French try that denied Ireland a grandslam in rugby a few years ago, various photo-finish controversies in horseracing, the debacle of the referral system in cricket, the fact that tennis players like Federer want Hawkeye to be abandoned etc).

So video evidence won't remove all controversy from football.

ScienceNerd wrote: »

I understand this to mean the 4th official will no longer be by the duggouts so?

There'll still be an official by the dugout - there always was long before he was given the (probably unofficial) title of 'fourth official'.

5starpool

So now we will have mangers ranting at the 6th official?

leninbenjamin

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

By the way its wrong to say that video evidence can take out any doubt, there have still been hugely controversial decisions in sports that do use video evidence (Off the top of my head I'm thinking of the French try that denied Ireland a grandslam in rugby a few years ago, various photo-finish controversies in horseracing, the debacle of the referral system in cricket, the fact that tennis players like Federer want Hawkeye to be abandoned etc).

but how often do we see controversial decisions in those sports? certainly it seems a hell of a lot less than in Soccer. And the presence of the video refs give the referee's something to fall back on, which seems to protect him somewhat from the players.

hawkeye is completely different though. it's not video analysis, it is video image processing to create a 3D image, using triangulation. that's an entirely different ball game, computer vision is still pretty novel and needs a lot of work.

eirebhoy

Stekelly wrote: »

What happens if the guy behind the goal reckons he's 100% certain its a dive but the ref or linesman looking from a difficult angle reckon they are sure it isnt?

The same way it happens now, they have a discussion about it and the ref who noticed some contact will win out.