Comments on: Why are people so afraid of instant video replays in football?

By: Roy

Roy — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 18:29:11 +0000

You people need to watch AMERICAN football. Thye have instant replays there. THe way it works is the team captain or coach calls for a review of the play. IF the review shows that the origional descision was bullcrap then the descision is overturned. However, if the descision was found to be correct, the protesting team loses a time-out. Soccer should use video technology as times are evolving, and fair play should be upheld, if thats by video technology then so be it. But i just think that the “staying true to the sport” argument is just plain stupid.

By: John

John — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 05:39:47 +0000

Well, this kind of technology blunts the edge of the game. Every fan needs a high and low, they need something to talk about over the competitive season like…”That shit decision against Middlesbrough…”.

But I’ve seen the video referee be used in Rugby League in Australia to great effect, and it can delay the game for a few moments.

I think that any technology that can aid, but not hinder the pace of the game, whilst providing a favorable and fair outcome for teams involved is a great thing.

By: Adam

Adam — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:50:02 +0000

Harry, Jose Mourinho said it best “there is no advantage law in the box.” Styles blew the whistle almost immediately anyway, so whether there was a video replay or not wouldn’t change the flow in that respect.

Now, there’s only one problem I see with this sort of thing. If we assume that Styles had access to replay technology, and he blows the whistle, checks up, and realizes it’s not a foul. What is the correct reaction? Free-kick to Liverpool? Drop kick? I’ll be buggered if I know. No matter what scousers say (Liverpool_fan notwithstanding), Malouda clearly didn’t dive, so it’s not a foul/card against him. It’s a tough situation to call, and if this sort of thing ever happens, it will take some thorough thought by FIFA.

By: Grognard

Grognard — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 01:55:07 +0000

Strikarz

Unfortunately football is not just a sport. It’s a multi billion dollar business where individual teams have an awful lot at stake. The money and not the play on the pitch rules in todays professional sports arenas. It’s a shame but it is a reality. In the world of big business a “mistake” not only costs a corporation a great deal of money and position in the marketplace, it also gets those who made the mistake sacked. Even community run sports team feel the heat to perform at a high level just in order to survive financially. So pleas don’t tell me it’s only a sport. It is capitalist free enterprise and heads roll when money is lost. FOR EXAMPLE, what if Carlos Tevez’ goal against United on the last day of the season was ruled offside, can you imagine the financial ramifications of that decision on the entire club’s infrastructure as well as the future ticket sales potential for a team being relegated. If Liverpool end up finishing only 1 or 2 points behind Chelsea at the end of the season, because of Sunday great gaff, will Liverpool FC and it’s fans be able to live with the decision? It would cost the club millions. Modernizing and progressing forward does not mean we are playing Pro Evolution on our XBOX. And anyway, I kind of like the fact that no goals I have ever scored on Pro Evolution have ever been ruled no goal through a wrong decision. Proof positive of how well technology can protect the supporter and business interests of the game.

By: Harry

Harry — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:28:53 +0000

To all those jumping over the band wagon for video technology, assume that Styles had access to instant reply between SF & Malouda incident. For him
“Styles” to see the reply, he had to stop the game and watch the incident for a decision. Now turn the clock back to when SF & Malouda collided, the ball was at the feet of Drogba to score. Had the referee blown his whistle for video verdict, the clear advantage for Drogba to score would have been diminished. After watching instant video the referee knows that the incident would not have warranted for a penalty, what the referee is supposed to do next?! Instant video is not the answer for such incidents when advantage rules are critical to the outcome. However, goal mouth video reply in black and white situations such as Fulham versus M’boro’s game is justified.

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:53:20 +0000

“top-level football should be essentially the same as it is at the bottom”

I disagree wholeheartedly with this. I think it is the responsibility of the top leagues to pioneer the changes and new technologies in the game. They are the ones that can afford to experiment with expensive new equipment (50,000 pounds is a pittance for top-flight clubs, but definitely a sizable investment for League Two clubs, for example). Once the technology is established, the companies are guaranteed a return on their R&D investment, and can improve the product and make it cheaper, thus allowing it to filter down to the lower leagues, and everyone benefits.

“Football is meant to be a sport, I know it can be frustrating at times, but that part and parcel of it. Mistakes happen, the idea is that you learn from them and try to not make them again – isn’t that what sport is all about? ”

Again, I disagree, but this is much more subjective. If there was a robot referee that could spot every single foul, and goal and whatever else perfectly, it should absolutely be used in every game. The refs are there to prevent a mass-brawl from happening and to adjudicate 50-50 decisions. If we can improve their accuracy, why not grab that opportunity with both hands?

By: Liverpool_Fan

Liverpool_Fan — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:52:03 +0000

oh yes and malouda didnt even dive he fell into Finnan witch makes it more the Refs fault than any of the Chelsea players. None of them claimed a penalty it was bad Reffing so get your facts right first ok

By: Liverpool_Fan

Liverpool_Fan — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:50:21 +0000

Actual incase you didnt do your homework liverpool fans always boo kewell when he goes to ground they either dont like him or something i dont know

By: Strikarz

Strikarz — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:22:53 +0000

but where does it stop? we’ll be replacing real football with Pro Evolution eventually if you think like that – after all, the graphics just keep getting better and better.

Football is meant to be a sport, I know it can be frustrating at times, but that part and parcel of it. Mistakes happen, the idea is that you learn from them and try to not make them again – isn’t that what sport is all about? Maybe if the FA/Premier League actually put some time in to improving the standards of refereeing throughout the country then these mistakes would be reduced.

I just wonder if it had happen to Bristol Rovers and not Liverpool, would we still be having this discussion…?

By: Grognard

Grognard — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:56:19 +0000

We are living in a new technological age yet some segments of our society continue to operate as if they are living in the Dark Ages. Will the footballing powers that be wake up and smell the java. If you have a tool that can end unfairness and controversy, then why not. I couldn’t care less about losing the human element. There is nothing worse than being a supporter of a club an have to endure the rubbish call Liverpool fans had to stomach over the weekend. It’s total bollocks and we should all wake up and realize the world has changed. Get rid of the internet, computers, cell phones, wide screen tv’s and hell automobiles for that matter. Lets go back to pre Victorian England where we tolerated human error because there was no instant replay.
Stop thinking like dinosaurs and accept instant replay as the first of many salvations to the modern game.