Video Replay

[paxiotis7]

As of now, i am agasnt it. But i can see it fifa one day. It would slow down the game wayyy too much. Soccer is not like american football, where the play stops every minute. IF their was video replay in soccer, it would ruin the flow completly. I think eventually if more problems come about like we will eventually use video replay, but only when needed. Like american football, each manager of teh teams playing, should be allowed to use 1 challenge per game. You can only challenge the referees call once a game. If the ball goes pass the goal line, doesnt go it, if its a fool in the box. Thats just my take, what do you guys think? Do you like the idea of a challenge?

[BlueStriker]

I do like the idea of a challenge, as long as it is only used in game changing situations such as if the ball crossed the goal line and fouls inside the penalty box. I agree that soccer is a game that flows unlike American football, and this should be preserved. I can't think of an exact number, but I'm guessing wrong calls on the ball crossing the goal line and pk's awarded to diving, probably averages less than once per game. I rarely see a goal being awarded when the ball doesn't actually cross the goal line, or when a goal is not awarded when it actually does. The diving in the penalty box though, happens frequently enough that it needs to be replayed in my opinion. It happens probably no more than every few games or so.

My idea is that the ref gets 2 min. maximum to review such a play and since these types of plays happen every couple of games, you will only be adding an extra 2 min. delay to a game every so often. In my opinion, an extra 2 minutes delay is much better than an entire 90 min. of a game being thrown down the drain because a ref makes a bad call. I can't express how frustrated I have become watching an entire game, and then because a player gives a great acting performance in the box, and at the end of the game, his team is awarded the penalty, as well as the entire game. It just isn't fair, it really ruins the entire game for me. I don't think an extra 2 min. every couple of games would really hurt the game as much as a bad call ruins an entire game.

The important thing is that the flow of the game does not become interrupted. That's why I say that replay can only be used minimally. Only in game changing moments such as if the ball crossed the goal line and questionable penalty kicks. Now if replay was used for any type of bad call, forget about it, the games would be an extra 30 min. and it would ruin the game.

Btw, I'm guessing the Azzurri vehemently oppose any form of replay, unless of course it's being used to point out their opponent is head butting one of their players in the chest. :whistle:

[loup]

US football is all about the breaks -- bet some more, get a beer, take a leak and especially watch a commercial or 3, they don't want replays to be quick, otherwise somebody in the booth would review it.

Soccer should look at rugby for an example of a quick effective replay system that is used only for goals and takes seconds to review, if they do that it would be a great idea.

there were many near catastrophes in US football that lead to adoption of the replay system, I hope they don't wait until a team is awarded the world cup because of an error. I guess they have waited 42 years since that happened so what is the rush.

[DUDE]

It should only be used to see if the ball crossed the goal line or not. Many decisions are open to interpretation. I, for example, don't think Liverpool's equalising goal in the CL final against Milan was a penalty, but my friend does. So what happens in situation when the decision isn't clear? So it should be introduced just to see if the ball crossed the line.

[drakos13]

thats because it wasnt a penalty DUDE, it was a dive. If its not clear or so indisisive, than benefit of the doubt has to be given to the defending team depending on what advantage the attacker had.

I think at times no dont make replay and others, when refereeing can become that horrible and that important. Some instances a video replay is just needed, to show what a moron the ref was.

I see no reason why there cant be an official with a video/television too, to help on certain calls. Penalties for example, can be very harsh and plain incorrect sometimes, and the most costly call that can be made other than cancelling a goal.....If a referee calls a penalty kick, the play should be briefly stopped, and confirmed with a video replay first. Its just fair - and no, it wouldnt delay the game because it wouldnt happen any more often than the ref calls PK's now. Fans, players can wait the extra minute with the clock stopped if its to step up the officiating.

The NFL (American Football) is a good example of the video replay. They have it, and the officiating stays pretty good. Teams have a set amount of "challenges" (like one or 2) where they can challenge the referee's decision and have the call overturned. Many times, it works, and many times, the refs do see they were mistaken.

But football goes 90 mins without stopping......I think there needs to handle the time issue - why isnt it ok to stop the clock once in a while? If it would be for a challenge, all you do is put the timer on hold, so it doesnt need to be "evauluated" on injury time often coming out minutes short of what was fair..

[Genome]

Well... no video replay, but two extra assistant referees might be introduced into the game:

Positive greeting to referee experiment

Initial reactions are extremely positive to the experiment with two additional assistant referees that is taking place at a UEFA European Under-19 Championship qualifying mini-tournament in Slovenia.

Platini present

The Group 5 mini-tournament features the hosts, Norway, Slovakia and Armenia. The tournament began yesterday and continues until Wednesday, and UEFA President Michel Platini has been on hand to watch the experiment in person. In addition to the match referee and two assistant referees on the touchline, two extra assistants are situated behind the goalline to focus on incidents that happen in the penalty area, such as fouls or misconduct.

Referees' experiences

Mr Platini has been able to hear the first reactions to the experiment, which follows approval of the test by football's lawmakers, the International Football Association Board (IFAB), last spring. Referees Nicola Rizzoli (Italy), who took charge of the Norway-Slovenia game, and Mark Courtney (Northern Ireland), who refereed the Slovakia-Armenia encounter, were given the opportunity to tell the UEFA President about their experiences.

Source + full article.

[NYPAO13]

it can only be used for weather the ball crossed the line. Anything else will interrupt the flow of the game..

[BlueStriker]

It appears that FIFA is for using video replay... after the game is finished. Here is the article on Eduardo being suspended for 2 CL matches after they determined he deceived the ref on to get a PK: Eduardo suspension

So this got me thinking, what if the goal from this PK was the deciding goal in the qualification of the CL? Would they tell the entire Arsenal team "hey sorry, we decided you are not going to the CL afterall". Or would they tell Celtic "hey sorry, we know you guys should be going to the CL and receiving an extra 20 million dollars of CL money, but eh, shite happens". Imo, if it was the deciding goal, FIFA would not do anything, cause these are the types of questions that would arise and point out FIFA's incompetence at making the game more fair with simple solutions.

It's a controversial penalty, they waste a good 2 min. arguing and setting up for the penalty kick. What can you do within those 2 min.? Uh... review a video replay maybe?

[drakos13]

The game of football is full of stupid interruptions anyways, whats an extra minute to review HUGE decisions?

What is with this "sacriledge" idea that the football clock can NEVER be stopped? Its quite stupid when you think about it.

Penalties, Goals, offsides etc, teams should be up for review in some possibility - obviously not every single one of them.

Obviously, that comes at a cost of fluidity of the game.

Thats why I suggest having a limited number of challenges, meant to protect teams from downright ROBBERY, such as what we saw last night in France vs Ireland.

The replay has GOT to happen, FIFA is a USELESS ORGANIZATION for really not even making considerations to protect teams from robbery and scandal. It happens every tournament in some form.

Even having a limit of 2 challenges a matches could make a giant difference, and honestly, the game would not suffer time wise -- in the least bit..........

For F*** sake, its not like an extra 5 mins in a football game makes a difference, we already have injury time which is stupid enough, and teams manipulating the running clock to waste time out of bounds etc.

The only thing I disagree with on replays, is fouls from outside the area..This type of thing is just wasting time. And in the 1/30 chance that the resulting free kick will go in, so be it, it happens. A team would have to use there challenge before the play, not after it has resulted in a goal.

[Clover22]

I can only conclude that FIFA are being run by a bunch of backward monkeys; how can you NOT use a video monitor for the games? Obviously you use it only up to a certain point; it WON'T screw up the fluidity of the game, thats BULLS HIT! Use it for offside goals, diving and Thierry the-jack-ass Henry. It isn't fair to the teams who don't advance, its that simple. And its happened to everyone - Greece included (Croatia '98)!

[Euro2004]

I can only conclude that FIFA are being run by a bunch of backward monkeys; how can you NOT use a video monitor for the games?

They don't want to introduce it because it will make it harder to match-fix. ;)

[Clover22]

Euro then do you think FIFA are behind some of the match fixing?

[Clover22]

So Thierry Henry has admitted it was wrong and is for a re-match. At least he has some integrity...Blatter and FIFA won't budge apparently though.

[Genome]

Nope, Ireland appealed, FIFA denied. Lame.

[Euro2004]

Euro then do you think FIFA are behind some of the match fixing?

Of course they are. They want the big teams in the big tournaments

[Euro2004]

Of course they are. They want the big teams in the big tournaments

to elaborate. Remember the 2002 world cup? Asia is a HUGE market financially speaking. Football wasn't as big there as it is now. They wanted the host countries to do well in order to generate interest there and revenue and "unbelievably" it South Korea and Japan did well thanks to some very contentious decisions.

S.Korea vs Portugal = Portugal went down to 9 men, one red card came after a blatant dive by a Korean player. S.Korea went through and Portugal went out.

S.Korea vs Italy = Italy had a perfectly good golden goal ruled out. Totti was also sent off for tripping over (not diving!). On top of that S.Korea were awarded a very soft penalty. S.Korea went through.

S.Korea vs Spain = Spain scored 2 perfectly good goals, they were disallowed and Korea went through on penalties. One of Spain's disallowed goals was particularly laughable. It came from a cross and the linesman deemed the ball to have gone out of play, i'm not exaggerating when i say the ball was at least half a yard in play. The linesman has agreat view and the rule is "the whole of the ball has to cross the whole of the line" did he really make such a big mistake?

They wanted them to get far and they did.

It's not just them. Look at the decisions that have gone against Greece recently? Why do you think that is? Greece is a defensive team that want loads of viewers to make great revenue. Greece's team is unpopular globally so they want us out. They did the same to Argentina in 1990. On top of that, the Swiss benefited from our "bad luck". Uefa is based in Switzerland and the President of FIFA is Swiss. They also helped them against turkey a few years ago. Or how about last years Champions League semi-final between chelsea and barca. How many penalty appeals did chelsea have? 5 or 6? At least 2 were definite penalties. But the world wanted to see a Man Utd vs Barca final. And now the mighty France, Platini's France, made it through at the expense of lowly Ireland thanks to an obvious handball. These things are way too frequent on the biggest stage to be a coincidence.

Football is a business nowadays. There's absolutely no logical argument to keeping camera technology out of the game. They do it so they can match fix.

[BlueStriker]

Match fixing, without a doubt, is the reason for no replays.

Btw, I'm glad Henry was able to admit his use of the handball. Apparently, even confessions and video evidence don't count for shite when it comes to FIFA.

[Genome]

Loved Eric Cantona's remark. He said something in the lines of "If I were Irish I would have punched him in the face. The thing that was most outrageous was after the game he went close to an Irish player (and in front of a camera) who was close to crying, to comfort him. You don't do this to someone you've just screwed over. I would have kicked his (Henry's) ass."

I have a newfound respect for Cantona! :tup:

[Clover22]

Loved Eric Cantona's remark. He said something in the lines of "If I were Irish I would have punched him in the face. The thing that was most outrageous was after the game he went close to an Irish player (and in front of a camera) who was close to crying, to comfort him. You don't do this to someone you've just screwed over. I would have kicked his (Henry's) ass."

I have a newfound respect for Cantona! :tup:

Funny! Not surprising coming from Cantona though!

[Clover22]

to elaborate. Remember the 2002 world cup? Asia is a HUGE market financially speaking. Football wasn't as big there as it is now. They wanted the host countries to do well in order to generate interest there and revenue and "unbelievably" it South Korea and Japan did well thanks to some very contentious decisions.

S.Korea vs Portugal = Portugal went down to 9 men, one red card came after a blatant dive by a Korean player. S.Korea went through and Portugal went out.

S.Korea vs Italy = Italy had a perfectly good golden goal ruled out. Totti was also sent off for tripping over (not diving!). On top of that S.Korea were awarded a very soft penalty. S.Korea went through.

S.Korea vs Spain = Spain scored 2 perfectly good goals, they were disallowed and Korea went through on penalties. One of Spain's disallowed goals was particularly laughable. It came from a cross and the linesman deemed the ball to have gone out of play, i'm not exaggerating when i say the ball was at least half a yard in play. The linesman has agreat view and the rule is "the whole of the ball has to cross the whole of the line" did he really make such a big mistake?

They wanted them to get far and they did.

It's not just them. Look at the decisions that have gone against Greece recently? Why do you think that is? Greece is a defensive team that want loads of viewers to make great revenue. Greece's team is unpopular globally so they want us out. They did the same to Argentina in 1990. On top of that, the Swiss benefited from our "bad luck". Uefa is based in Switzerland and the President of FIFA is Swiss. They also helped them against turkey a few years ago. Or how about last years Champions League semi-final between chelsea and barca. How many penalty appeals did chelsea have? 5 or 6? At least 2 were definite penalties. But the world wanted to see a Man Utd vs Barca final. And now the mighty France, Platini's France, made it through at the expense of lowly Ireland thanks to an obvious handball. These things are way too frequent on the biggest stage to be a coincidence.

Football is a business nowadays. There's absolutely no logical argument to keeping camera technology out of the game. They do it so they can match fix.

Euro, yup, you're right. I remember those games in S. Korea...unbelievable. Another recent game was Standard Liege vs. Arsenal in September...Arsenal won 3-2; total nonsense in favor of Arsenal. I've been saying in the other threads about the CL...a shame. Bringing this stuff to the surface is a necessity. Good post.