Video Technology (Again)

[Webby]

I've had quite a chat about this on Twitter today. Others have have asked what would happen if the flag went up on a move 35 yards out and the video showed that he was onside? Defenders would have stopped on seeing the flag, whistle or no whistle. I know they should play to the whistle!

 

But, the more I think about it, I feel that the video evidence would only be called into play on an 'instant' game affecting action such as a cross finished off in the box; goal. The lino might flag, but his flagging wouldn't affect the play; the ball would already be in the net. Then the ref would call on the VT to check the decision. As happened in last night's game.

 

In the event of the through ball 35 yards out and the flag going up. Is he offside? Is he onside? Well, the linesman flags, the ref blows and that's it. No review. Anything else would just complicate it. You can't say play on and see what happens and then we'll look at the VT.

[Avenue_Saint]

All for it. Bring it in

[Avenue_Saint]

Don't know if anyone else watched the France vs Spain game, but the video referee stopped a goal being incorrectly awarded to France and reinstated one incorrectly ruled out for Spain.

 

As I had imagined, it broke the flow of the game for about 30 seconds during each incident, but the correct result was obtained and it built up a sense of anticipation over ref's final decision.

 

Overall, I think this would be really good for football.

 

Great example of what could be

[Window Cleaner]

Don't know if anyone else watched the France vs Spain game, but the video referee stopped a goal being incorrectly awarded to France and reinstated one incorrectly ruled out for Spain.

 

As I had imagined, it broke the flow of the game for about 30 seconds during each incident, but the correct result was obtained and it built up a sense of anticipation over ref's final decision.

 

Overall, I think this would be really good for football.

 

Obviously a good thing because it corrected 2 bad calls. First one should have been spotted by the linesman though, second one was just a boot in front so wasn't so evident.

[richardc]

I've had quite a chat about this on Twitter today. Others have have asked what would happen if the flag went up on a move 35 yards out and the video showed that he was onside? Defenders would have stopped on seeing the flag, whistle or no whistle. I know they should play to the whistle!

 

But, the more I think about it, I feel that the video evidence would only be called into play on an 'instant' game affecting action such as a cross finished off in the box; goal. The lino might flag, but his flagging wouldn't affect the play; the ball would already be in the net. Then the ref would call on the VT to check the decision. As happened in last night's game.

 

In the event of the through ball 35 yards out and the flag going up. Is he offside? Is he onside? Well, the linesman flags, the ref blows and that's it. No review. Anything else would just complicate it. You can't say play on and see what happens and then we'll look at the VT.

 

There is a whole host of things in between thou that will cause contention - if a player was on the edge of the box and carried on for a few seconds - at the moment they would get booked if they carried on an shot - however this change will ensure that they carry on just in case - Im all for it but think there should be two challenges per team like in cricket

[mrfahaji]

I've had quite a chat about this on Twitter today. Others have have asked what would happen if the flag went up on a move 35 yards out and the video showed that he was onside? Defenders would have stopped on seeing the flag, whistle or no whistle. I know they should play to the whistle!

 

But, the more I think about it, I feel that the video evidence would only be called into play on an 'instant' game affecting action such as a cross finished off in the box; goal. The lino might flag, but his flagging wouldn't affect the play; the ball would already be in the net. Then the ref would call on the VT to check the decision. As happened in last night's game.

 

In the event of the through ball 35 yards out and the flag going up. Is he offside? Is he onside? Well, the linesman flags, the ref blows and that's it. No review. Anything else would just complicate it. You can't say play on and see what happens and then we'll look at the VT.

 

While I tend to agree with what you say/suggest, if you're a linesman and you know that a) if you flag for offside the move is dead even if he was on, and b) if you don't flag and the players scores, it will be reviewed by TV, why would you ever flag?

 

What if, the goalscoring team argue that the goalscorer was onside, and in the course of review it's found that there was another offside or a foul in the build up?

 

The reason goal-line technology worked so well is that they were able to find a scientific method that gave instant results. All the time we are relying on subjective views there's still a big risk. It will start with offsides, then it will be about fouls, then there'll be something else. I'm not saying I'm against it, just wary that it's easy to view a couple of incidents and be convinced it's the right thing.

[SKD]

I've had quite a chat about this on Twitter today. Others have have asked what would happen if the flag went up on a move 35 yards out and the video showed that he was onside? Defenders would have stopped on seeing the flag, whistle or no whistle. I know they should play to the whistle!

 

But, the more I think about it, I feel that the video evidence would only be called into play on an 'instant' game affecting action such as a cross finished off in the box; goal. The lino might flag, but his flagging wouldn't affect the play; the ball would already be in the net. Then the ref would call on the VT to check the decision. As happened in last night's game.

 

In the event of the through ball 35 yards out and the flag going up. Is he offside? Is he onside? Well, the linesman flags, the ref blows and that's it. No review. Anything else would just complicate it. You can't say play on and see what happens and then we'll look at the VT.

 

Disagree.

 

Play on until that phase of play is over. Either the attacking team score (decision reviewed and stands / ruled out) or the attacking team miss in which case it will not matter anyhow.

 

Personally I cannot see this / TV replays being a bad thing for the game and it will certainly level the playing field. however maybe that's because i'm still bitter about the awful decisions from the linesman in against United (clear goal disallowed) and Tottenham (A hack at Tadic not given as a pen).

 

Let's be honest, the don't get many wrong, so surely it is better to eradicate the few wrong calls.

[the saint in winchester]

I am older and I would welcome this with open arms! Been supporting it for years!

[Dark Munster]

Now that Blather has gone FIFA may finally drag themselves into the 20th century. About bloody time.

[Lighthouse]

I've had quite a chat about this on Twitter today. Others have have asked what would happen if the flag went up on a move 35 yards out and the video showed that he was onside? Defenders would have stopped on seeing the flag, whistle or no whistle. I know they should play to the whistle!

 

But, the more I think about it, I feel that the video evidence would only be called into play on an 'instant' game affecting action such as a cross finished off in the box; goal. The lino might flag, but his flagging wouldn't affect the play; the ball would already be in the net. Then the ref would call on the VT to check the decision. As happened in last night's game.

 

In the event of the through ball 35 yards out and the flag going up. Is he offside? Is he onside? Well, the linesman flags, the ref blows and that's it. No review. Anything else would just complicate it. You can't say play on and see what happens and then we'll look at the VT.

 

If the Lino suspects offside, he flags. The game plays on, unless the attacking player is reasonably certain he is offside and gives up. Even if he plays on and scores, the whole ground is well aware off the offside flag and wouldn't be overly excited, pending a review and a likely disallowed goal.

 

Likewise, if the ball goes out of play to the advantage of the attacking team (e.g. Corner, pen. Throw in) the replay is reviewed before it is taken.

 

If the ball goes out of play to the defending team, play the free kick from the offside position as per normal, no need for any reply.

 

Each team gets 2 challenges per half.

[mrfahaji]

I think they should also have a similar rule to what the NFL have in that the decision only changes if there is significant/compelling evidence that the ref got it wrong. It means that if after looking at the replays it's still debatable, you go with the ref. People will still argue no doubt, but don't feel video referees should be making a subjective call based on the balance, rather than overwhelming, evidence.

[Professor]

More than just the result of single game depends on decisions being as accurate as possible because these days there is far more money riding on trophies and league positions than once was the case. In the days when a second division side like Southampton could beat a first division side like Man U in the FA Cup Final the gulf between the top and second tier was closer, including the financial standing of clubs at both levels and the rewards for the players. You only have to look at the internationals in our cup winning side to see that.

Being denied the EFL Cup due at least in part to the official's error over the disallowed opening goal has denied Saints a place in European competition next year and therefore a lot of money. Even being one place down in the final league table has a cost. Human error can't be eliminated but surely if the technology is available, it should be used to get more correct outcomes.

[Webby]

Disagree.

 

Play on until that phase of play is over. Either the attacking team score (decision reviewed and stands / ruled out) or the attacking team miss in which case it will not matter anyhow.

 

 

But that's the thing. It will be difficult to implement that, to get players to play on when their instinct is to stop when a flag is raised.

 

If the Lino suspects offside, he flags. The game plays on, unless the attacking player is reasonably certain he is offside and gives up. Even if he plays on and scores, the whole ground is well aware off the offside flag and wouldn't be overly excited, pending a review and a likely disallowed goal.

 

Likewise, if the ball goes out of play to the advantage of the attacking team (e.g. Corner, pen. Throw in) the replay is reviewed before it is taken.

 

If the ball goes out of play to the defending team, play the free kick from the offside position as per normal, no need for any reply.

 

Each team gets 2 challenges per half.

 

Again, there are lots of scenarios to consider. The issue is with the flagging, even without a whistle, def's and gk's tend to relax waiting for the whistle. So, that's going to take quite a shift in behaviour.

[Lighthouse]

But that's the thing. It will be difficult to implement that, to get players to play on when their instinct is to stop when a flag is raised.

 

Again, there are lots of scenarios to consider. The issue is with the flagging, even without a whistle, def's and gk's tend to relax waiting for the whistle. So, that's going to take quite a shift in behaviour.

 

If the flag goes up you play to the whistle, nothing remotely complicated about it. Most of the time players play to the whistle anyway.

[simo]

I'd have rather played 5 minutes more extra time in the final at 3-3 than lose it 3-2 !

[Sour Mash]

If the Lino suspects offside, he flags. The game plays on, unless the attacking player is reasonably certain he is offside and gives up. Even if he plays on and scores, the whole ground is well aware off the offside flag and wouldn't be overly excited, pending a review and a likely disallowed goal.

 

Likewise, if the ball goes out of play to the advantage of the attacking team (e.g. Corner, pen. Throw in) the replay is reviewed before it is taken.

 

If the ball goes out of play to the defending team, play the free kick from the offside position as per normal, no need for any reply.

 

Each team gets 2 challenges per half.

 

What an absolute farce that would become.

[Pancake]

Reading the above posts, maybe it's time to ditch the visual flag by the Lino and move to an alert sent to the watch of the ref like for goal lines technology. If a Lino thinks it's offside, he presses a button which alerts the ref. The red then decides to whistle or allow play to go on and review. Refs call.

[RedFear]

Reading the above posts, maybe it's time to ditch the visual flag by the Lino and move to an alert sent to the watch of the ref like for goal lines technology. If a Lino thinks it's offside, he presses a button which alerts the ref. The red then decides to whistle or allow play to go on and review. Refs call.

 

why not have robot players too? then everything about the game would be perfect with no possible chance of human mistakes. There would be no goals as no defenders would ever make mistakes and robot keepers would always make perfect saves. It would be dull but at least it wouldn't have any errors on anyones part

 

Im against it, I can see all the reason for it and understand them, but errors/mistakes on everyones part is and should be a part of the game

 

although, I will admit, I was against goal line tech to, and that has been very good. so Im certainly not claiming to be right here, just my opinion

[mrfahaji]

why not have robot players too? then everything about the game would be perfect with no possible chance of human mistakes. There would be no goals as no defenders would ever make mistakes and robot keepers would always make perfect saves. It would be dull but at least it wouldn't have any errors on anyones part

 

Im against it, I can see all the reason for it and understand them, but errors/mistakes on everyones part is and should be a part of the game

 

although, I will admit, I was against goal line tech to, and that has been very good. so Im certainly not claiming to be right here, just my opinion

 

Goal line technology underwent a key development when the suggestion went from having "video replays" to having scientific technology that immediately detects when the ball has crossed. I was sceptical until that development.

[Sour Mash]

Goal line technology underwent a key development when the suggestion went from having "video replays" to having scientific technology that immediately detects when the ball has crossed. I was sceptical until that development.

The key to goaline technology is it doesn't halt, delay or bring back play in anyway.

[Micky]

Reading the above posts, maybe it's time to ditch the visual flag by the Lino and move to an alert sent to the watch of the ref like for goal lines technology. If a Lino thinks it's offside, he presses a button which alerts the ref. The red then decides to whistle or allow play to go on and review. Refs call.

 

The flag is visual for a reason - it's not only to alert the referee, but also the players as well - I think?

[mrfahaji]

The key to goaline technology is it doesn't halt, delay or bring back play in anyway.

 

And that it is objective.

[Dark Munster]

I think we should scrap throw ins, free kicks, penalties, offsides, goal kicks, and goals, and leave injured players lying on the pitch, because they all halt, delay or bring back play.

[Lighthouse]

What an absolute farce that would become.

 

It quite clearly isn't, it's very simple.

 

If an offside flag is raised you play on until the ball goes out of play, by which time the video ref has decided whether or not it was on/off.

 

How is it a farce?

[Whitey Grandad]

It quite clearly isn't, it's very simple.

 

If an offside flag is raised you play on until the ball goes out of play, by which time the video ref has decided whether or not it was on/off.

 

How is it a farce?

 

That might be 45 minutes later.

[Sour Mash]

It quite clearly isn't, it's very simple.

 

If an offside flag is raised you play on until the ball goes out of play, by which time the video ref has decided whether or not it was on/off.

 

How is it a farce?

Its not complicated. The game could run for a couple of minutes, with the originally defending team breaking down the other end and scoring, all the while everyone in the ground with half an eye on the linesman with his flag up, then everyone stands around for a couple of minutes while the offiside is reviewed and the game is brought back a couple of minutes. Complete farce.

[Sour Mash]

And that it is objective.

Agreed.

[redder freak]

I'd have rather played 5 minutes more extra time in the final at 3-3 than lose it 3-2 !

 

Agreed. I think video technology will favour the less popular and fashionable clubs like Saints because the majority fans, famous managers and the media won't be able to influence decisions like they can now.

[Lighthouse]

Its not complicated. The game could run for a couple of minutes, with the originally defending team breaking down the other end and scoring, all the while everyone in the ground with half an eye on the linesman with his flag up, then everyone stands around for a couple of minutes while the offiside is reviewed and the game is brought back a couple of minutes. Complete farce.

 

Then the goal would stand as they would basically be playing an advantage.

 

Not a farce.

 

Simple.

[mrfahaji]

Agreed. I think video technology will favour the less popular and fashionable clubs like Saints because the majority fans, famous managers and the media won't be able to influence decisions like they can now.

 

Yet somehow you just know that those 'inconclusive' video replays will somehow still go the way of the bigger clubs.

 

Hard to tell if it was offside = allow it for Man United, chalk it off for Burnley.

[Sour Mash]

Even if he plays on and scores, the whole ground is well aware off the offside flag and wouldn't be overly excited, pending a review and a likely disallowed goal.

 

Just read that back to yourself a couple of time. Any attack involving a move that might have an offside at some point and results in a goal fans, in your opinion, shouldn't "be overly excited". Its a game of football, not a scientific process to be full of checks and balances regardless of its impact on the game.

[Sour Mash]

 

Each team gets 2 challenges per half.

How does that work?

[Sour Mash]

Then the goal would stand as they would basically be playing an advantage.

 

Not a farce.

 

Simple.

And if the originally attacking team instead successfully defend the break, counter-attack themselves and score, the game will get called back from an incident minutes before and everyone would stand around waiting to find out if the previous move had been offside or not. Farce.

[Lets B Avenue]

Talkshyte actually came out with a good idea. Let former refs be the Video Officials.

 

I've missed hurling abuse at Poll and Winter.

[Wurzel]

And if the originally attacking team instead successfully defend the break, counter-attack themselves and score, the game will get called back from an incident minutes before and everyone would stand around waiting to find out if the previous move had been offside or not. Farce.

 

You're really not getting this are you? To be fair I wasn't for a while till it suddenly clicked. When the flag went up in the ORIGINAL attack either that attacking team score or they don't score. If they score, ball is dead, review the decision. If they DON'T score then there's no need to review it at any point as the possession, and subsequent advantage has then already passed to the defending team and lino can simply put his flag down again. Anything after that is a totally different phase in play. In the majority of cases i.e. any flagged attack that DOESN'T end up as a goal it would actually speed up play as there would be no need to blow up for the offside at all.

[RedFear]

why have a linesman at all in that case? if he is just going to be ignored from now on anyway

[Whitey Grandad]

why have a linesman at all in that case? if he is just going to be ignored from now on anyway

 

Ball in or out of play. That's all we did on Sunday mornings

[Sour Mash]

You're really not getting this are you? To be fair I wasn't for a while till it suddenly clicked. When the flag went up in the ORIGINAL attack either that attacking team score or they don't score. If they score, ball is dead, review the decision. If they DON'T score then there's no need to review it at any point as the possession, and subsequent advantage has then already passed to the defending team and lino can simply put his flag down again. Anything after that is a totally different phase in play. In the majority of cases i.e. any flagged attack that DOESN'T end up as a goal it would actually speed up play as there would be no need to blow up for the offside at all.

I think you'll find you're not actually following it. So a simple scenario for you. What if possession doesn't pass back to the defending team and is retained for several minutes by those attacking? And in that period there requires another offside decision from the linesman. What does he do then, hold up two flags?

 

And what if possession passes back to the defending team in a position much less favourable to them then where the offside decision would have been given? So they win back possession boxed in by the corner flag, rather than an offside just past the half way line?

[Dark Munster]

I think you'll find you're not actually following it. So a simple scenario for you. What if possession doesn't pass back to the defending team and is retained for several minutes by those attacking? And in that period there requires another offside decision from the linesman. What does he do then, hold up two flags?

 

And what if possession passes back to the defending team in a position much less favourable to them then where the offside decision would have been given? So they win back possession boxed in by the corner flag, rather than an offside just past the half way line?

It would only take a few seconds for the video ref to relay to the ref that the play was offside, and he'll whistle there and then.

[Mr Biscuits]

If the ball is dead, there is plenty of time for a replay.

 

Most crosses and through balls result in some sort of shot on or off target and the ball going out of play. Therefore if a goal is scored and the linos flag is up it would take less time to review and decide than it would for the goalie to bring the ball back into play. And, in fact, by the time the review is done, everyone is nearly ready for the game to start again anyway.

Look at the instant replays the commentators get right now - they take seconds to set up and seconds to review all in the time it takes for the game to get going again anyway.

 

It ESPECIALLY should be used to determine a penalty. I hate diving with a passion.

[Whitey Grandad]

If the ball is dead, there is plenty of time for a replay.

 

Most crosses and through balls result in some sort of shot on or off target and the ball going out of play. Therefore if a goal is scored and the linos flag is up it would take less time to review and decide than it would for the goalie to bring the ball back into play. And, in fact, by the time the review is done, everyone is nearly ready for the game to start again anyway.

Look at the instant replays the commentators get right now - they take seconds to set up and seconds to review all in the time it takes for the game to get going again anyway.

 

It ESPECIALLY should be used to determine a penalty. I hate diving with a passion.

 

Penalties are extremely difficult to judge on TV. Diving even more so.

[Sour Mash]

It would only take a few seconds for the video ref to relay to the ref that the play was offside, and he'll whistle there and then.

Says who? Plenty of incidents take several reviews from different angles to find anything conclusive. What if another incident happens in the period the first decision is being reviewed?

[Useful Idiot]

To be honest, I think it works better the way they had it working in the France vs Spain game, referrals only after the ball is in the back of the net and on the ref's call, no reviews by managers. I assume he would also call for penalty reviews if he were not 100% sure of the decision.

 

If there is no break in play then no replay reviews are used.

[Dark Munster]

Says who? Plenty of incidents take several reviews from different angles to find anything conclusive. What if another incident happens in the period the first decision is being reviewed?

Several angles can be done quickly. And if it's not conclusive the benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker. It's not that complicated, it'll be just like replacing the linesman on that side of the pitch with two linesmen (the extra one being much more competent ). Also it'll be the ref's call if another incident occurs shortly after.

[Dark Munster]

Penalties are extremely difficult to judge on TV. Diving even more so.

Penalties are extremely difficult to judge by a ref on the pitch. Diving even more so.

[Whitey Grandad]

Penalties are extremely difficult to judge by a ref on the pitch. Diving even more so.

 

Yes, but far better than watching on TV.

[Mr Biscuits]

Penalties are extremely difficult to judge on TV. Diving even more so.

 

I would say SOME penalties, not all. And definitely most dives I see on a replay are easy to spot.

 

You won't get every one but cutting out the majority would be absolutely fine by me.

[whelk]

We'll be laughing at the Luddites soon. Bet they thought having more than one sub would ruin the game too. And what a goalkeeper can't pick up a backpass? Don't mess with our sacred game!

[Wurzel]

I think you'll find you're not actually following it. So a simple scenario for you. What if possession doesn't pass back to the defending team and is retained for several minutes by those attacking? And in that period there requires another offside decision from the linesman. What does he do then, hold up two flags?

 

And what if possession passes back to the defending team in a position much less favourable to them then where the offside decision would have been given? So they win back possession boxed in by the corner flag, rather than an offside just past the half way line?

 

First paragraph - if a team has kept possession for several minutes they've gone backwards and sideways several times, so the second one would be a totally different attacking phase whether defenders have touched ball or not.

 

Second paragraph. Unfortunate for them, but then no more unfortunate than with the defending team winning the ball in mid-half and hitting the (previously) attacking team (who may now have several players going forward and out of position) on the break whereas if offside had been given (correctly or not) they'd have had chance to regroup defensively whilst the free kick was taken. Swings and roundabouts, things balance out, **** happens sometimes.

 

Unless a lino has made a really glaring error a replay would only be needed for those marginal decisions anyway. As a fan I'd sooner see play continuing as uninterruped as possible without being broken up because an attackers knee may or may not have been 6 inches forward of a defender who may even be on the other side of the pitch from him. Do such margins "really" give the attacker any advantage?

[Whitey Grandad]

I would say SOME penalties, not all. And definitely most dives I see on a replay are easy to spot.

 

You won't get every one but cutting out the majority would be absolutely fine by me.

 

The referee always has a better view than the TV.

 

Judging whether it's a dive involves getting into the mind of the alleged diver. What if the player is just trying to avoid what he thinks is coming? And remember that a lot of the laws are just 'in the opinion of the referee', not 'in the opinion of all those watching on the tele'.