Instant Replay , We have the Technology so why not ?

Discussion in 'World Cup 2014: Refereeing' started by puyol, Jun 24, 2014.

?

Should Instant replay using a fifth referee be used ?

  1. Yes

    30.0%
  2. No ( please explain your reasons of why not )

    70.0%
  1. unclesox

    unclesox BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 8, 2003
    209, California
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Again, totally irrelevant. The umpire isn't required to take the batter's thinking into consideration when making a ball/strike call. He only watches to see if the batter swings.
    And if the batter doesn't swing, we know with 100% certainty that he would not have hit the ball.
     
  2. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Youre missing what I'm saying. But I won't waste more time explaining it to you in this thread, as I don't wanna risk derailment. Pm me if you care to understand.
     
  3. guignol

    guignol Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 28, 2005
    mermoz-les-boss
    Club:
    Olympique Lyonnais
    Nat'l Team:
    France
    5 seconds? look at how it works in rugby or american football. it's more like a whole minute. the kind of televised replay you're saying everyone on the planet sees takes about a minute just to come on screen: by then there's a lot of water under the bridge. how many times have TV audiences missed big plays and even goals because they were being shown an "instant" replay?

    if it works (and it does) it wasn't wasted. and it took millions because they found that all the previous methods tried (including replay) proved unreliable.

    first of all are you sure that half the 90' are dead time? i think it's much less. and i'd say less than 10% of televised games have more than 6-8 cameras... and let's not forget that perhaps only 1% of the matches played in the world, pro and amateur combined, are televised at all.

    only using it for the most important matches, OK. but since you bring up tennis, it's important to point out that the case is absolutely different. 1) only situations very akin to goal-line tech are concerned and 2) the court is tiny compared to a football pitch. doing only what hawkeye does for football would take 20 times the means.

    you don't seem to have a very good idea how those two referees work. they don't call anything themselves, they're simply in headset contact with the head referee. and though i think that system needs to improve, it really is working better and better as refs get the hang of it.
     
  4. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    yeah, I find goal line technology a lot more reliable than replay. Why do people think they use line technology in tennis rather than replay? it's because line technology is far more accurate and reliable than replay.
     
    guignol repped this.
  5. unclesox

    unclesox BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 8, 2003
    209, California
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    There was one sequence during the Costa Rica-Greece match that had me thinking of this thread and what you've said here.
    When leading 1-0 Costa Rica sent in a long cross that appeared to sail just over a Greek defender and Costa Rican attacker who were inside the penalty area. This was at 53:16 (ESPN's clock)
    Play continued with the ball being sent to the Costa Rican goalkeeper and a play developed where Costa Rica were able to get off another shot at goal from close range but it was blocked.
    Ball stayed in play before it went out for a Costa Rican throw in at 54:25 and a replay five seconds later showed the cross from over a minute earlier had deflected clear off the Greek defender's arm.
     
  6. GreatGonzo

    GreatGonzo Member+

    Jul 1, 1999
    MA
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    No, not necessarily, and to be honest, none of this makes sense. If a player is fouled, then you have a penalty. If the penalty is given but it turns out to not be a foul, why would the defending team deserve to get the ball? What if the ball fell to a different offensive player? What if it went out for a corner kick? Why wouldn't you consider it to be an inadvertent whistle, which would restart with a drop ball?

    So you wouldn't review the one thing that actually is (mostly) an objective decision and is probably the biggest reason for calling back legitimate goals? I'm not saying you review incidents where offside is called, because you're right, you can't go back to it. But you can let play continue at the time, and if a goal is scored (or the result of the immediate play is a corner kick), you review it and see if the player was offside in the first place. Just like fumbles in the NFL, where they try not to blow the play dead and allow the play to continue, then review it afterward if there's a change in possession.

    If you can't understand that, I don't think it's worth my time trying to explain this any further.
     
    unclesox repped this.
  7. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Meh.

    Gonzo, you don't think I understand you, and I feel youre not understanding me..so youre right lets not waste time.

    Mark my words though, if replay ever makes it into soccer, offside won't be a part of it...just like other sports where similar position violations are not reviewable.

    I'll come back in a few years to this post just to quote it too. I made a similar declaration years ago when people said there would never be goal line technology review in a World Cup.
     
  8. AremRed

    AremRed Member+

    Sep 23, 2013
    Obviously replay for judgement calls is a contentious issue. How about replay for off-ball VC-yes/no decisions only? Would those parameters work?
     
  9. GKbenji

    GKbenji Member+

    Jan 24, 2003
    Fort Collins CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    jaycrewz, I am having trouble getting what you're saying as well. You keep talking about the possible outcome of the play. But that's not how officiating works... not in soccer, or basketball, or baseball or any other sport. Officials must call what they see at that moment, and judge if it violates the given rules or not. That is all. Officiating in its broadest sense would be impossible if the official had to consider a thousand "might have beens".
     
  10. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    My point is that rules for officiating and each field instances awards and infractions, are crafted around potential outcomes of those particular instances.

    There are too many potential outcomes if offside is reviewed...thats why I say it shouldnt be apart of instant replay. Because they are way too many "might have beens" with many offside calls. With red cards, all you need to answer is did the player commit a card offense? How severe was the offense? And if there wasnt an offense, was someone diving?

    And with PKs usually all you need to answer is, was the player fouled in the box? If yes, give a penalty...if not...give a free kick to the defense...or craft rules around who is awarded possession if a penalty shot is not to be awarded. There are far less "might have beens" with red card and PK calls with comparison to most offside calls. With many offside calls we dont have a clear idea of what the offense or defense may have done on the play. With red cards and PKs we see a play develop and the suspected foul occur.

    Those situations are far simpler than figuring out how to reset a play that may have been called offside incorrectly...or letting a play continue only to review it later, thereby having to stop play anyways. Which is exactly why such calls are not reviewable in the NFL or NHL. Either way, while replay helps make a system better, it wont completely rid a system of flaws.
     
  11. GKbenji

    GKbenji Member+

    Jan 24, 2003
    Fort Collins CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    And you don't think there are any might have beens with a foul called or not called? Seriously? What if the referee doesn't call a foul, and his team then quickly scores a goal--do you pull it back? Or what if the referee whistles a foul on an attacker who breaks free to score... and then replay shows it wasn't really a foul on the attacker. You just took a valid goal away--you can't unblow the whistle and make it whole again. The same what-ifs apply to ANY possible stoppage or non-stoppage. That's why we don't get you... you're saying offside is different, but it isn't.

    We're talking about real-time review here, not retroactive punishment after the game.
     
    unclesox repped this.
  12. Paper.St.Soap.Closed

    Jul 29, 2010
    Yeah, you are not alone. I feel like the referee forum drinking game tonight is to take a shot every time he says outcome.

    There really isn't any good, logical response here. It's just more words each post.
     
  13. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Whats so hard to understand? The reason common fouls will not be reviewed in soccer is the same reason they wont be reviewed in the NBA.

    Instant replay is for the most game changing of game changing calls. And everyone can see this usually is PKs and red cards...which is why you hear more uproar for instant replay when those calls happen vs when offside calls happen. What-ifs do apply to many plays, but they are A LOT more with offside calls.

    And like I said, theres no proper award that can be given if the offside was incorrect on a team. What would you give the attacking team that got offside reversed?

    We all know what can be done if a PK call is incorrect....you simply dont give the PK. Or in a red card situation, you simply dont give the red card...maybe a yellow...or maybe no card at all. What can be done with regard to offside? Seriously I want to know.

    If my team is attacking and incorrectly called offside...nothing can be done to remedy that. But if my player is incorrectly sent off...it can be reviewed to keep him on the pitch. Or if a PL is given on a foul by my defender, review may find that a PK was no deserved. So please tell me...how can my team benefit from having an offside call overturned that was called against us.

    THATS why I say its pointless to review. Theres no way to appease the team that may have been wrong by the call.
     
  14. GKbenji

    GKbenji Member+

    Jan 24, 2003
    Fort Collins CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Because you can't UN-CALL a penalty if the ref has decided to blow the whistle. That's why. If you don't get that, it's no use.
     
  15. puyol

    puyol Member+

    FC Barcelona
    Dec 24, 2009
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Ref blows his whistle for a penalty , review shows it was a dive , referee gives a yellow card instead for the diver and a free kick , that's how you UN-CALL it ...
     
    jaycrewz repped this.
  16. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    #116 jaycrewz, Jul 4, 2014
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2014
    You can with instant replay!

    Do you not see what thread you are posting in? We are discussing instant replay so plays like red cards and PKs can be altered or reverse if necessary to getting the call right. But because PKs can be given on fouls or handballs there are kinks to work out in coming up with any replay system.

    And someone pointed out earlier, that there can be times where a PK is incorrectly called, and after review a clear assumption can be made that another offensive player wouldve have gotten the ball back after the defense knocked it away from the cleanly tackled player. How do you properly compensate the offense now? That can be a conundrum cant it?

    Id rather come up with something FIFA members can agree on in terms proper rewards to a team after a review in situations like those...rather than living in a world with no review, and bad calls leading to undeserved goals.

    I will say video review is hardest to implement and properly compensate teams with it comes to offsides and with certain PK situations. As I throw scenarios around in my head, the only situations where I see video review as almost fool proof is in reviewing red cards during a game, and reviewing simulation post game (handing out fines and bans if dives are detected). Thats the only way I can see the flow of the game not being too hampered, and only reviewing calls where there are the least "what ifs".

    PKs have less what ifs than offsides, but still have situations that would be hard to hammer out without a lot of deep discussion. At least with red cards, you are generally gonna have a situation where you either send someone off, reduce it to a yellow, or book someone for simulation.
     
  17. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    Let me add though, that in almost all PK situations I see...the whistle is blown as the offense completely loses the ball to the defense on a play deemed illegal by the ref. I dont really spot plays where if the whistle had not blown during a dispossession, that the offense would have been likely to retrieve the ball. Seems to me the whistle is blown in the first place because the defense gets the ball after a suspected infringement.

    Im sure there are FIFA guys sitting around discussing this though.
     
  18. guignol

    guignol Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 28, 2005
    mermoz-les-boss
    Club:
    Olympique Lyonnais
    Nat'l Team:
    France
    this is about the LAST thing that replay would be able to handle. it would take a camera dedicated to every player to make it work (kind of. almost. with all the provisos indicated elsewhere). 22 cameras beyond the ones covering the game for entertainment purposes.

    otherwise the quest for fair-play ambushes itself: "why did player X* have a camera on him all the time and player Y almost never? who in da MAFIFA decided even before kickoff to screw us with this technology?"

    there's another very important point: the policy of having the means of officiating be homogenous on all levels is ESPECIALLY important as concerns off-ball VP. because this is the plague that is attacking football from the top down... and proliferating and perpetuating itself from the bottom up.

    *suarez. doh.
     
    AremRed repped this.
  19. waitforit

    waitforit Member+

    Dec 3, 2010
    Valcea
    Club:
    FC Steaua Bucuresti
    Nat'l Team:
    Romania
    Yes you can. And it happened several times.
    Do some of you people even watch this sport?
     
    jaycrewz repped this.
  20. guignol

    guignol Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 28, 2005
    mermoz-les-boss
    Club:
    Olympique Lyonnais
    Nat'l Team:
    France
    first part: but those naughty kittens will have no pie!

    second part: one often wonders, doesn't one?
     
  21. AremRed

    AremRed Member+

    Sep 23, 2013
    Nicola Rizzoli begs to differ!
     
  22. unclesox

    unclesox BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 8, 2003
    209, California
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    [​IMG]
    I feel so much better.
     
  23. GKbenji

    GKbenji Member+

    Jan 24, 2003
    Fort Collins CO
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Okay, well, let me clarify: you can't un-blow the whistle and guarantee the game will be reset to where it was before based on what might have happened (jaycrewz contention). Scenario: Ball swung into the penalty area, on the initial challenge it bounces to the foot of a striker with open net... but ref blows the whistle for a foul on the attackers. Then replay clearly shows there was no foul on the attacker. You can't ever make the game "whole" again based on that. Instant reply may be able to be applied in some scenarios, but in others it might create more controversy than it solves.
     
  24. jaycrewz

    jaycrewz Member

    Jun 27, 2014
    Club:
    Real Madrid
    ^How is that any different from referee blowing the whistle...making a call, only to be corrected by his assistant and then going with the call his assistant gave?

    I dont see people get up in arms about assistants correcting the referee after a whistle and call has been made. Achieves a similar thing to replay in my book. Replay assistance and assistant referees make the game more whole than referee errors based on dives, incorrect penalties or incorrect red cards.

    The game is not whole right now as it stands.
     
  25. waitforit

    waitforit Member+

    Dec 3, 2010
    Valcea
    Club:
    FC Steaua Bucuresti
    Nat'l Team:
    Romania
    If you saw Villareal Barcelona 2-3 this year you wouldn't say that.
     

Share This Page