Referees, Video Tech, The FA

[Naushad78]

I was infuriated after last nights game for many reasons.

Henry did nothing wrong by taunting Kirkland. Henry deserves flak for his play, but praise for his lil jibe at the Wigan keeper. We need a certain element of character and personality in the game and I saw nothing wrong with that. Soon the game will turn sterile with every action clamped down upon and I don't want that!

Rossicky gets a yellow for that celebration because it was 'out of the field of play?!' Who makes up these stupid rules?! Referee's feel free to use common sense and their discretion for some decisions but go strictly by-the-book for others. Pathetic!

Lehmann gets a yellow for one act of time-wasting(not as subtle as his counterparts') but Kirkland doesn't for repeatedly doing just the same?!?!?!

Adebayor gets a goal incorrectly ruled offside and we then get a goal incorrectly ruled on-side.

The ref's issuing cards like he's some candy man.

The three penalty calls in the Spurs-ManUtd match were all a joke!!!

More than one crucial decision in EVERY MATCH is decided either by refereeing incompetence. On top of that, I'm almost certain that some referees are biased and have their favourite teams and try to turn decisions in the way that suits them. I've been watching Mike Riley for a while now and we have a serious case against the guy.

Which leads me to the fact that I am glad Paul Jewell spoke out so strongly against the establishment. If another manager had indeed told him that Phil Dowd was the worst referee in the league then why have they kept mum so far. Why do manager, who can be so influential, in such matters keep out of them especially when their teams suffer again and again and again. Wenger has been crying out for video technology but it seems to fall on deaf ears. I hope Paul Jewell is pulled up to task only so that he can show the FA their glaring incompetencies and laziness to act.

Video technology would be perfect and would NOT slow down the game. Give a manager a challenge each per half. That's a maximum of two challenges per half. For offside calls, linesman don't need to raise their flags anymore, let play carry on and appeal the decision after and if a goal is scored on the play.
Same for penalties. Also, review the cards after the game, however hard or soft, and retract of impose them on reviewing the evidence.

What is so difficult in that?!

rant over

[akofman12345]

But football has fared fine without this technology for over 100 hundred years, no need to start now, unless there is a major crisis. In English football right now, its bad, but not that bad.

[NightHawk]

Naushad I completely agree with you. Tennis has video technology by having players contest decisions having a certain number of correct challenges per set. There is no reason why football shouldn't follow suit. However, I think it should be the captain not the manager who makes the decision whether to challenge a decision or not as he would be in the best position and can discuss with fellow players more easily than a manager in the dugout.

A lot of pundits say if you put video technology in place, it would have to be across the board and that includes lower leagues but I don't think lower leagues have as much at stake as the top clubs where one decision can mean playing football in the Championship, playing Champions League football or winning the Premiership.

Akofman, you answered the whole thing. Football is different compared to how it was 100 years ago, faster, more competitive and harder to referee. We might have won the Champions League last year if video technology was in place as E'too was offside for his goal.

FIFA get your head out of your arses and put video technology in place!

[Gooner_for_Life]

Im not quite sold on the video thing yet but i would like to see the electronic chips put in balls for goals and out of bounds and stuff like that. This to me seems like a minimal change and would do its part to help the ref make some clean decisions. I think it would also help the ref because i can see from their point that so much is going on and at such a fast pace. Granted they are on the field but half the time i miss stuff when watching at normal speed, i need the replay to see everything clearly.

I think another idea is to introduce another referee onto the field for a total of 4. 2 main ones and 2 sidelines/assistants/whatever.

I also agree with a couple of Naushad78's other points. Footy is a beautiful game and it seems like they are trying to take the beautiful part out of it. One thing that really bothers me is the rulings on celebrations now. I think they should discard these rules and let players celebrate how they want to. Players should be able to celebrate with fans, jump the media boards, etc. Also i dont by that it takes time, that is what stoppage time is for. Just add it on to the end.

Finally i also agree with Naushad78 that they should review cards given out, yes even yellows. However, this is an entirely different topic and i guess it would undermine the referees decision making a lot.

Just tired of the refs mucking up the situation as usual. I dont watch much else besides the Prem but it seems bad enough for changes to be looked into and i dont think anyone needs to say anything about last summers World Cup.

I guess my rant is over too.

[GutBomb]

But football has fared fine without this technology for over 100 hundred years, no need to start now, unless there is a major crisis. In English football right now, its bad, but not that bad.
Humanity survived for thousands of years without antiseptics and antibiotics but that doesn't make either of those any less beneficial

[Rewinder]

They should only use video technology in retrospect, I don't want to see refs running off the field after every offside call to review the tape - and ultimately bad calls costing teams games has always been a part of the game.

Rosicky's yellow was bs, and I think that the FA should definately use video technology to stamp out diving, and because a dive may turn the result of a game, make punishments that are based on video evidence extra harsh.

3 game ban for 1st offense + 1 week wage fine.
6 game ban for 2nd offense + 2 week wage fine

If 3 or more diving punishments have been handed out to player(s) from the same team, then you fine the team as well.

[ASkergonan]

With all the camera angles involved in the modern telecast, it's only pointing out the human element of reffing that has always been there. Personally, I'm a purist, and against anything that would hinder Arsenal from playing at a break-neck speed. That said I never complain (too much;) ) about the ref's, because it all squares up in the end.

One quality exception is the chip-implant-goal line-thingy. That would not slow down the match at all, and it seems it would be fairly easy to implement. Another would be having 2 field officials, which I think is LONG overdue.

[foxflyer5]

i would like to see post-match video review of linesmen,
not just players.

i feel like most referees make a bad decision or two per match,
but it does seem to usually even itself out during the course of the game.

however,
linesmen seem to get 8 or 9 out of 10 offsides calls incorrect.
i think there needs to be some sort of re-training for these guys.
and if that doesn't help, then give them bans.
5 incorrect offsides call equals a three match refereeing ban.

fifa and uefa always want to research how to make the game more fast paced and offensive minded,
i think the answer is in correct officiating.

[NightHawk]

I don't want to see refs running off the field after every offside call to review the tape

I was thinking the fourth official having a screen beside him to review a challenged decision and tell the referee on the field of the correct decision through his mic.

Also get the decision on the big screens like cricket so the fans know and aren't confused.

This article sums it up well http://www.footballingworld.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1171223530&archive=&start_from=&ucat=86

[michaec]

Which leads me to the fact that I am glad Paul Jewell spoke out so strongly against the establishment. If another manager had indeed told him that Phil Dowd was the worst referee in the league then why have they kept mum so far. Why do manager, who can be so influential, in such matters keep out of them especially when their teams suffer again and again and again. Wenger has been crying out for video technology but it seems to fall on deaf ears. I hope Paul Jewell is pulled up to task only so that he can show the FA their glaring incompetencies and laziness to act.I agree with quite a lot of what you said, but I just want to make a point on your praise of Paul Jewell. The best thing he could do is tell Emile Heskey to stand up and stick the ball in the net instead of tumbling over at the merest touch from a bloke half his size. He should also tell Kirkland to stop wasting time, which he was doing from the very first goal-kick he took in the match, long before Wigan took the lead. Then he can come over all whiter-than-white.

I don't really want to pick on Jewell as all managers do the same and he obviously feels wronged, but if he criticises his own players for these acts of blatant gamesmanship then I'll take on board his gripes about referees. Dowd had a poor game in my opinion, but the players actions hardly helped him.

Moving on and some of my annoyances about player conduct have been covered above, but to stick my penny's worth in:

1. Foul and abusive language to a referee or any match official should be dealt with by the issuing of a straight red card. This is already part of the laws of the game and should be enforced. Whether the players and managers think the referee is performing well or not, they should have respect for his authority and make any protestations in an appropriate manner, not bawling out a string of obscenities. Anyone who has played rugby will know that you refer to the referee as "Sir" (up to and including international matches) and if you gave him the abuse that football referees get you'd be kicking your heels on the touchline for a long time to come.

2. I'm not in favour of video evidence during the game, but after the game I have no problem with it. And forget this rubbish about not reviewing incidents the referee has already dealt with, we all agree that officials are only human and make mistakes. If these mistakes can be sorted out at a later date then fine. I'm particulalry interested in using this for blatant dives, I think it would stop almost overnight if players thought they would be pulled up for it after the game. Punishments for diving should go yellow card, 1 match ban, 2 match ban and so on for subsequent offences. And the accumulation should not be wiped clean at the end of the season, that would effectively give players a one-time free pass the following season.

3. If technology can be inserted into the ball/goalposts/stadium to instantly tell whether the ball has crossed the line for a goal, then great. This is not the same as a video review.

4. The stupidity of making a player go to the touchline after receiving treatment should be stopped. This has not had the intended effect of reducing players feigning injury.

[thebigman]

only bring in video evidence in goal mouth technology, we dont want the game stopped every 10 seconds for fouls the ref misses

[Martin Daoust]

They should only use video technology in retrospect, I don't want to see refs running off the field after every offside call to review the tape - and ultimately bad calls costing teams games has always been a part of the game.

Rosicky's yellow was bs, and I think that the FA should definately use video technology to stamp out diving, and because a dive may turn the result of a game, make punishments that are based on video evidence extra harsh.

3 game ban for 1st offense + 1 week wage fine.
6 game ban for 2nd offense + 2 week wage fine

If 3 or more diving punishments have been handed out to player(s) from the same team, then you fine the team as well.

Take each week's wages during the ban. The money hurts the players more than the matches missed often I'm afraid. This is the ONLY way to stop diving and other simulation because it actually works too often and the refs won't punish it too often.

[Rewinder]

I was thinking the fourth official having a screen beside him to review a challenged decision and tell the referee on the field of the correct decision through his mic.

Also get the decision on the big screens like cricket so the fans know and aren't confused.

This article sums it up well http://www.footballingworld.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1171223530&archive=&start_from=&ucat=86

But how will you control the number of incidents that are challenged per game? I don't want to see technology interfere with the game during play, but after the game I would like them to use video technology to hand out additional punishments.

The only technology I wouldn't be against is the goal mouth technology, if they can get the sensors in the ball to work and alert the 4th official when the ball has crossed the line - that would not be too disruptive.

[Naushad78]

But how will you control the number of incidents that are challenged per game? I don't want to see technology interfere with the game during play, but after the game I would like them to use video technology to hand out additional punishments.

The only technology I wouldn't be against is the goal mouth technology, if they can get the sensors in the ball to work and alert the 4th official when the ball has crossed the line - that would not be too disruptive.

Allot one challenge per captain/manager per half of play. That's a total of two challenges per half and a maximum four over the entire game. It would hardly take a minute or two to get the 4th/5th official who is seated on a monitor to review the incident and give his verdict.
It is not difficult at all.

[Naushad78]

I agree with quite a lot of what you said, but I just want to make a point on your praise of Paul Jewell. The best thing he could do is tell Emile Heskey to stand up and stick the ball in the net instead of tumbling over at the merest touch from a bloke half his size. He should also tell Kirkland to stop wasting time, which he was doing from the very first goal-kick he took in the match, long before Wigan took the lead. Then he can come over all whiter-than-white.

I don't really want to pick on Jewell as all managers do the same and he obviously feels wronged, but if he criticises his own players for these acts of blatant gamesmanship then I'll take on board his gripes about referees. Dowd had a poor game in my opinion, but the players actions hardly helped him.

Moving on and some of my annoyances about player conduct have been covered above, but to stick my penny's worth in:

1. Foul and abusive language to a referee or any match official should be dealt with by the issuing of a straight red card. This is already part of the laws of the game and should be enforced. Whether the players and managers think the referee is performing well or not, they should have respect for his authority and make any protestations in an appropriate manner, not bawling out a string of obscenities. Anyone who has played rugby will know that you refer to the referee as "Sir" (up to and including international matches) and if you gave him the abuse that football referees get you'd be kicking your heels on the touchline for a long time to come.

2. I'm not in favour of video evidence during the game, but after the game I have no problem with it. And forget this rubbish about not reviewing incidents the referee has already dealt with, we all agree that officials are only human and make mistakes. If these mistakes can be sorted out at a later date then fine. I'm particulalry interested in using this for blatant dives, I think it would stop almost overnight if players thought they would be pulled up for it after the game. Punishments for diving should go yellow card, 1 match ban, 2 match ban and so on for subsequent offences. And the accumulation should not be wiped clean at the end of the season, that would effectively give players a one-time free pass the following season.

3. If technology can be inserted into the ball/goalposts/stadium to instantly tell whether the ball has crossed the line for a goal, then great. This is not the same as a video review.

4. The stupidity of making a player go to the touchline after receiving treatment should be stopped. This has not had the intended effect of reducing players feigning injury.

About Jewell - my praise was more directed to his statements about pointing out to the FA the inconsistencies of the refs. He said if they pull me up, I'm just going to have to show them the Senderos-Yakubu incident and roll it alongside the Flamini-Heskey one and demand an answer, or something to that effect.

It's time managers take the FA & establishment head-on especially when they have such strong cases. About freakin time!

[crazy150]

But how will you control the number of incidents that are challenged per game? I don't want to see technology interfere with the game during play, but after the game I would like them to use video technology to hand out additional punishments.

The only technology I wouldn't be against is the goal mouth technology, if they can get the sensors in the ball to work and alert the 4th official when the ball has crossed the line - that would not be too disruptive.

I don't think anyone wants to see more lengthy interruptions, but considering the quality of officiating and the increase in stakes, video replay will come eventually.

One thing that might work is to let each club have as many replays as they have substitutions. For example, currently each club has 3 subs...if a manager wanted to challenge a call he would lose a sub. This would insure that only pivotal calls were challenged.

Secondly, the types of challenges that could be made would be limited...goals (including those flagged for offsides), penalties, and "letter of the law" red cards come to mind.

Thirdly, a separate official should review the replay and call down to the ref on the field...this would save time and insure the ref isn't biased toward not rescinding his own decisions.

[RealMadGunner]

Offside rules, fouls etc have to be present, without video replays, or else the game can get very wierd .. I'll celebrate a goal, shout my guts out and then realise the next minute that it isn't, which would look bad in an crowded pub .. The game is more interesting and spontaneous the way it is now .. The refrees should get better ..

[NightHawk]

Offside rules, fouls etc have to be present, without video replays, or else the game can get very wierd .. I'll celebrate a goal, shout my guts out and then realise the next minute that it isn't, which would look bad in an crowded pub .. The game is more interesting and spontaneous the way it is now .. The refrees should get better ..

So you say in spite of a goal that shouldn't stand due to there being a foul or an offside, you would rather a goal stands to save the embarrassment of you celebrating then finding it isn't a goal? I don't find this logic to make sense and I'm sure you'd get p*ssed off if an opposing supporter was celebrating a goal against us, find out that it shouldn't have been given after replay then rubbing your face in it even more knowing it shouldn't have been given but still stands.

If only it was as simple as "referees should get better".

[NightHawk]

But how will you control the number of incidents that are challenged per game? I don't want to see technology interfere with the game during play, but after the game I would like them to use video technology to hand out additional punishments.

Errm... by having a certain number of correct challenges per half? Not very difficult is it. I don't understand why you would be for retrospective punishments after the game but if a team loses or wins due to an incorrect goal being given, it's ok and there's nothing that can be done about it.

Anyway, it's only a matter of time before FIFA buckle and finally allow some sort of video technology. Just hope it's sooner rather than later. Most sports have some sort of video technology these days but why the richest sport in the world is reluctant I'll never know.

[Rewinder]

Errm... by having a certain number of correct challenges per half?

And what happens to teams that fail a challenge? Also how much longer is this going to make the game?

You also have to take into account the possibility of abusing a rule like that. I can think of many managers who wouldnt mind losing a sub on a pointless challenge, if it allowed their team to regroup before a crucial play. What's next? Timeouts?

Bad calls have cost teams games, and championships in the past - it's part of the game. Diving is not part of the game, and since players won't voluntarily stop, punishing them in retrospect is the only way to get to them.