IFAB approves trials for video referees.

The International Football Association Board (IFAB) has approved trials to see if the use of video replays can assist referees in their decision making. Trials to start no later than the 2017-18 season. Infringements in the buildup to a goal, penalty decisions, wrong player sent off, red cards to be looked at.

Needed I say. Too many goals for example are being given even though theres an offside in the buildup, as well as too many goals wrongly chalked off for an offside that wasn't.

http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2016/0305/772798-trialling-of-live-video-replays-gets-green-light/

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/35736241

ArmaniJeanss

Some other interesting changes include.

a fourth substitution in extra time (trial from next season).
denying goalscoring opportunity not necessarily a red card offence (from next season).
fouled&injured player doesn't have to leave pitch after treatment (starts this summer at the Euros).

Guy:Incognito

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

fouled&injured player doesn't have to leave pitch after treatment (starts this summer at the Euros).

Can see this encouraging timewasting more.

CSF

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Can see this encouraging timewasting more.

Yeah, I don't know if I'm in the Stone Age but I don't see any of these positives possibly with the exception of the 4th substitute in extra time.

When I've had to watch the rugby, there have been some reasonably long breaks for the video ref. It also seems as though there are more contentious decisions in football also so this would be need to be used more often.

As a match going fan both here and abroad, I don't want to be dealing with this. It's all well and good when you're in the pub or at home with a few cans or out in the pub, but on a cold winters night this would bug the sh*t out of you. I don't find that the human aspect of refereeing has particularly affected my enjoyment of the game.

ArmaniJeanss

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Can see this encouraging timewasting more.

I agree but its a toughie - it was always a bit farcical when say Crouch or Koller is fouled, wins a free and has to go off whilst the free is taken meaning his team don't have their preferred target to aim at. So this goes a way to rectifying it.

Personally I always think the way around timewasting is for referees to add on realistic time at the end - I'm always surprised by the amount of 'continental' referees who signal '2 minutes' at the end of stop/start second halfs. In England 4 and 5 is more the norm but even then there are times it seems on the low side to me.

Guy:Incognito

One use I'd like to see for the video ref is if theres a close offside, the ref or linesman notes it with a word to the video ref but lets plays go for a phase or 2 to see if it leads directly to a goal. The video ref can already be checking the offside while the play is continuing. If a goal is scored then the ref has a quick word to ask if it should stand.

Guy:Incognito

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

One use I'd like to see for the video ref is if theres a close offside, the ref or linesman notes it with a word to the video ref but lets plays go for a phase or 2 to see if it leads directly to a goal. The video ref can already be checking the offside while the play is continuing. If a goal is scored then the ref has a quick word to ask if it should stand.

Good point. Infringements in the buildup to a goal are meant to be covered by these trials, so whether a goal was offside or not would i guess be relevant here.