Video Referees for Football

ysabel

/ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5
#1
There are petitions about its use in football but so far they haven't been successful in convincing FIFA to deploy this technology.

Rugby, tennis and other mainstream sports already use video refs. I think football should also get into this to avoid games where crucial moments are decided by refereeing controversies.

I heard that one reason it hasn't been done was that FIFA hasn't found a system which can be implemented in events such as World Cups or European Championships. Is that really hard? Because when we watch the games from tv camera angles, sometimes their playback is enough to know what went wrong that the actual refs didn't catch on real time. That's why commentators are able to provide video analysis based on that and we get frustrated when we see there's no off side or fault when otherwise called because the ref thought he saw one. :lol:

Like the Russian Linesman syndrome....
------
Major thread resurrection. I'm surprised no one else has an opinion about this. Has none of you watched games with controversial calls that could have been settled better if the decision was based on what the videos have shown?
 
Last edited:

Bananas

Endangered Species
#3
FIFA should move with the times and have a video ref. There have been a couple of of occasions it could of come useful in the Premiership this season, where it has clearly been a goal and one has been rewarded and theres even been a ghost goal awarded(Reading v Watford).

The only down side of a video ref is that it can take the momentum out of a game. In Rugby by the time the video ref has seen all possible angles a good 2 minutes can of passed. Football would need less analysis, so would presumably take less time.
 

ysabel

/ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5
#4
FIFA should move with the times and have a video ref. There have been a couple of of occasions it could of come useful in the Premiership this season, where it has clearly been a goal and one has been rewarded and theres even been a ghost goal awarded(Reading v Watford).

The only down side of a video ref is that it can take the momentum out of a game. In Rugby by the time the video ref has seen all possible angles a good 2 minutes can of passed. Football would need less analysis, so would presumably take less time.

I'd rather wait several minutes for video ref results than watch players let the clock run with their fake injuries and other drama.
 

Bananas

Endangered Species
#5
I'd rather wait several minutes for video ref results than watch players let the clock run with their fake injuries and other drama.
Clock running....Other drama?

Hijacked:shifteyes:
I guess you did not see Wales v New Zealand on the weekend. The ref struggled to even get the clock started.

Skip to about 1:50 if you dont want to watch the entire Haka.

YouTube - Wales V The All Blacks - Haka 2008
 

ysabel

/ˈɪzəˌbɛl/ pink 5
#7
What do you mean skip the haka? It's the only reason I watch NZ. :lol: Best one was when they faced France in the last WC. I haven't seen a more exciting game after that. But yean, video refereeing is one thing I like about rugby too. You'd think football would follow it....
 

Major

4 legs good 2 legs bad
V.I.P.
#8
I would like to see it for the controversial calls. Goals are too important to make a wrong call.
 

RTWmaniac

Registered Member
#10
I'm all for it. Like most issues, people are just stubbornly tradtional and conservative with this.

But I think it's important how this is implemented, if and when FIFA ever decide to leap into modern times. I'm not in favor of having minute long breaks to make this work. I'd rather deal with human error than rid the sport of its free flowing, non-stop essence. But there's no way you need as much time as something like American Football or rugby (as someone else mentioned; I don't know anything about rugby) for video review. A panel of a couple of refs upstairs could review a close call, override it, and radio down to ref on the pitch in a matter of 20 seconds. This is, in my opinion, well worth the usage of time to eliminate the inevitable mistakes. Hell, they could at least implement it for offside only and make the decision in less than 10 seconds. I'm surprised this is getting unanimous approval on GF. Most people I talk to in the real world are stubborn and against it.

But what most blows my mind is why they aren't using GPS technology (or even something more precise) for boudary issues, both on the touch line and goal line, and of course most importantly including those within the goal itself. Other than tradition, there is absolutely no reason to keep this out of the beautiful game. I might slap the next person opposed to this.