Use of new technology in football

niallo27 · 26-09-2015 08:44PM #1

Watching the rugby there and the ref going to the TMO and then thinking of the Spurs game this morning, how simple would it be for the ref this morning to ask is there any reason why i cannot award the goal. It might slow the game a bit but at least you would have the right call every time.

I know its not going to be simple either as defenders might say they stopped playing if the linesman put up his flag, but then linesmen might let more things go if they knew the TMO would cover them. Would people be in favor of it or would it slow the game too much.

MightyMandarin · 26-09-2015 08:47PM

A slower game is better than one which is ruined by a bad decision imo. I'm all for a TMO and technology if it means less risk of a refereeing cock up happening.

Mushy · 26-09-2015 08:47PM

Very much in favour of it!

niallo27 · 26-09-2015 08:51PM

Rugby is gone so slow these days though, I think its nearly overused and refs are afraid to make a call themselves these days. Would be exciting waiting on a tight call.

MythicalMadMan · 26-09-2015 08:53PM

All the time it would save with players not whinging and moaning at the ref over every decision would nearly make up for time lost.
You see it with the goal line tech, the players start to complain and then realise **** goal line technology no point.

NomadicGray · 26-09-2015 09:25PM

MythicalMadMan wrote: »

All the time it would save with players not whinging and moaning at the ref over every decision would nearly make up for time lost.
You see it with the goal line tech, the players start to complain and then realise **** goal line technology no point.

I'd rather see them bring in a straight yellow for players who go complaining to the ref at any incident before bringing in video replays/video ref. Maybe make an exception to captains, but they'd really need to take no prisoners on it for a couple of seasons.

MythicalMadMan · 26-09-2015 09:28PM

NomadicGray wrote: »

I'd rather see them bring in a straight yellow for players who go complaining to the ref at any incident before bringing in video replays/video ref. Maybe make an exception to captains, but they'd really need to take no prisoners on it for a couple of seasons.

It would lead to absolute carnage at the start though but I'd also love to see it brought in and enforced properly

Sand · 26-09-2015 09:37PM

I'd back a TMO with the ability to draw the refs attention to incidents the ref has missed. Like the running battles Costa likes to wage with opposing defenders. It doesn't necessarily even have to cost much time as the ref can review an incident whilst the ball is otherwise out of play.

I think the technology can go further too - goal line technology can already determine when a goal is scored with little requirement for human judgement. Something similar could be done for the offside rule with the appropriate equipment modifications.

AgileMyth · 26-09-2015 09:37PM

Taking away the major talking points from games will not be a good thing. Every decision doesn't have to be correct.

Fr Tod Umptious · 26-09-2015 09:57PM

AgileMyth wrote: »

Taking away the major talking points from games will not be a good thing. Every decision doesn't have to be correct.

That's a BS argument.

Should we put quotas on good decisions by refs that are "too good at their job"

The game should be officiated correctly.

There will still be plenty of controversial issues to talk about regardless

raze_them_all_ · 26-09-2015 10:03PM

Do it like american football, give the managers a challenge flag where they can make a certain amount of challenges, if they get it wrong they give up a substitution, would mean no manager would throw it unless completely necessary

AgileMyth · 26-09-2015 10:04PM

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

That's a BS argument.

Should we put quotas on good decisions by refs that are "too good at their job"

The game should be officiated correctly.

There will still be plenty of controversial issues to talk about regardless

Its officiated as correctly as humanly possible. That's the game. We don't need to change that.

Its always armchair fans calling for video refs. It will take away hugely from the match day experience, which is what football is all about.

Sand · 26-09-2015 10:08PM

AgileMyth wrote: »

Its officiated as correctly as humanly possible.

Its humanly possible to officiate it better with a TMO. They're human too.

enfant terrible · 26-09-2015 10:11PM

raze_them_all_ wrote: »

Do it like american football, give the managers a challenge flag where they can make a certain amount of challenges, if they get it wrong they give up a substitution, would mean no manager would throw it unless completely necessary

Yes like how they do it in Tennis.

Even limit it to one challenge for each team per game.

Usually only one or two controversial decisions per game.

the incredible pudding · 26-09-2015 10:12PM

AgileMyth wrote: »

Its officiated as correctly as humanly possible. That's the game. We don't need to change that.

Its always armchair fans calling for video refs. It will take away hugely from the match day experience, which is what football is all about.

I don't think a single rugby fan will agree with your assessment there.

raze_them_all_ · 26-09-2015 10:14PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

Yes like how they do it in Tennis.

Even limit it to one challenge for each team per game.

Usually only one or two controversial decisions per game.

2 in the match, if you get all 2 right you get a third

TheTownie · 26-09-2015 10:20PM

Give the managers somewhere between 1 to 3 challenges per game. If the decision is in the refs hands he'll just go to the TMO too often IMO due to pressure from the players or because he just constantly doubts himself.

Also give TMO license to bring off the ball incidents to the refs at the next pause in play and ref can issue yellow or red as appropriate.

jacool · 26-09-2015 10:58PM

Just watching MOTD. Technology is required.

The only thing preventing it being brought in is the fact that these things average out over season.
When we find out how the Premier League manage that we can all relax more, and just enjoy the banter generated by the raft of terrible decisions every week.

AgileMyth · 26-09-2015 11:04PM

the incredible pudding wrote: »

I don't think a single rugby fan will agree with your assessment there.

I don't really care what rugby fans think. Its a completely different sport.

farna_boy · 26-09-2015 11:08PM

I'd be in favour of it in general but I think at least at first it should be restricted to red cards and dodgy goals.

If it were used it would also need to be used in conjunction with a stop clock.

Finally the tmo should be able to alert the referee for unseen or off the ball incidents at any time and the referee can deal with it at the next stoppage.

niallo27 · 26-09-2015 11:16PM

It does work better with rugby as it is already a slow stop start game. Football is pretty non stop.

farna_boy · 26-09-2015 11:27PM

niallo27 wrote: »

It does work better with rugby as it is already a slow stop start game. Football is pretty non stop.

Except after goals and after red card decisions

Paz-CCFC · 27-09-2015 04:43PM

farna_boy wrote: »

Except after goals and after red card decisions

What if it's borderline whether the ball crossed the line? Does the ref stop it there and then, preventing a possible goal from the rebound or a counter-attack? And how does play restart if he stops play to review with the television ref and it's ruled as not being a goal? A drop ball in the box? An indirect free kick? It's not as simple as saying "they do it in rugby", because they have an entirely different set of rules. The TV ref is called when the ball was dead anyway, which isn't always the case with calls for a goal in football. And you score a try if you ground the ball on the line or against the posts. In football, the ball has to fully cross the line and simply hitting the posts don't count. So, there's less margin for error for a football referee to call the TV ref in the first place. Sensors in the ball and woodwork are far better suited to the pace of football.

Again, with red cards, if the ref misses it, what happens? Do they wait 'til the ball goes dead, which could be 10/15 minutes later? If it turns out to be a red, do the previous 10/15 minutes get replayed from the point of the red card? What if the innocent team score in the meantime, does their goal get disallowed? What if the player who should've been sent off scores or clears one off the line? You could give a short window for the video ref to review things to help minimise this, but these things could still occur in that window and it might put undue pressure on the referee compared to rugby, where the ball is dead anyway and he can calmly review it.

These things could work more cleanly if they were only used to right wronged parties. Ie, if the ref incorrectly called a goal or incorrectly sent someone off, as the ball goes dead regardless. But, then would refs be more likely to make these calls, without really being convinced, knowing the video ref will back them up? So, again, you could have a ref calling a goal, that's then ruled out, where the attacking team may have buried from the rebound anyway or the defending team may have scored on the counter.

Re the example of challenges in tennis. A singles tennis court is 26 x 9 yards. The player is going to be about 10-15 yards away, so in a good position to spot marginal fouls. A football pitch is 100-130 x 50-100. In terms of area, it's between 20 and 50 times the size. The managers are about about 60 or 70 yards away from where the main action happens. They're very unlikely to be in a position to spot a ball that's a few inches over the line or a marginal offside and it's a lot harder for them to keep track of everything that's going on over such a large surface area. You can't just say because it works for one sport, it should be applied to another, without carefully considering the differences in both.

I don't agree with the idea that the wrong decisions make football great. I'm in favour of technology to assist referees, provided it's given very careful consideration, trialled extensively and has a minimum impact on the flow of the match. I'm completely opposed to blindly applying a rule just because, on the face of it, it works in another sport.

27-09-2015 04:56PM

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

Again, with red cards, if the ref misses it, what happens? Do they wait 'til the ball goes dead, which could be 10/15 minutes later? If it turns out to be a red, do the previous 10/15 minutes get replayed from the point of the red card?

I'd love to know what games you're watching when the ball stays in play and in an area where stopping the play would unfairly penalise a team in a promising position for 15 minutes straight.

NIMAN · 27-09-2015 05:05PM

The head honcho's in the game have resisted it for years, so hopefully they will all be in jail in the coming years so we might see it happen.

That Zebo non-try just shows how important it can be. Imagine that was in the last minute to win a big game.

Dozen Wicked Words · 27-09-2015 05:05PM

Don't agree with it, smacks of elitism. Universal rules for the universal game. Not something different for wealthy leagues and clubs which is exactly what it would be. Or are people suggesting we are going to get TV trucks at every League of Ireland game or lower leagues in England for example.

Paz-CCFC · 27-09-2015 05:13PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd love to know what games you're watching when the ball stays in play and in an area where stopping the play would unfairly penalise a team in a promising position for 15 minutes straight.

I didn't say that a team would be in a promising position for 15 minutes straight. I said that if you waited for the ball to go dead (and in some matches, the ball does indeed stay in play for extended periods of time) to review the decision, there could be quite a time lag between the incident and the review. Argue against the points that I actually made, instead of making up something to argue against.

27-09-2015 05:17PM

Dozen Wicked Words wrote: »

Don't agree with it, smacks of elitism. Universal rules for the universal game. Not something different for wealthy leagues and clubs which is exactly what it would be. Or are people suggesting we are going to get TV trucks at every League of Ireland game or lower leagues in England for example.

Universal. :rolleyes: There isn't even a single required pitch size ffs. Officials being able to communicate at some levels, different squad sizes in different competitions, different numbers of officials, different standards for lighting. It's not universal.

27-09-2015 05:20PM

Paz-CCFC wrote: »

I didn't say that a team would be in a promising position for 15 minutes straight. I said that if you waited for the ball to go dead (and in some matches, the ball does indeed stay in play for extended periods of time) to review the decision, there could be quite a time lag between the incident and the review. Argue against the points that I actually made, instead of making up something to argue against.

15 minutes? That's just not true.
Referees can stop play for injuries or scuffles off-the-ball. Usually they allow attacks to finish (as in injury time) before doing so, they could do the same for this. As it is play will often continue when something happens and then the referee acts on information from other officials during a break in play.

NIMAN · 27-09-2015 05:26PM

I genuinely think there is an elelment that the powers-that-be like the controversy that goes with iffy decisions, its keeps people talking about the games well after they are over, and fans quickly get over bad decisions.

Just think of your chats in work on Monday morning, they are often about bad decisions as much as good moves, goals or tactics. It also keeps the column inches filled, social media going etc.

No such thing as bad publicity?

Dozen Wicked Words · 27-09-2015 05:26PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Universal. :rolleyes: There isn't even a single required pitch size ffs. Officials being able to communicate at some levels, different squad sizes in different competitions, different numbers of officials, different standards for lighting. It's not universal.

Yeah you're right universal was a lazy word.

I've seen enough sport that have video officiating and they still make errors, so to me it's just yet another layer of officiating that can make mistakes or their interpretation differs from half the people watching.

Use of new technology in football

Comments