I understand there are numerous debates on the subject of electronic reviews. I just wonder if we have ever taken a vote?
I voted yes, but I think it's a lot more complicated than yes or no. There would definitely have to be a lot of ground rules first.
For two uses only: 1. Goal/no goal -- did the ball cross the line or not 2. Offside when a goal is scored on the play -- before play is restarted with a kick-off someone should confirm that there was not an offside infraction on the play. No review of the awarding or not of PKs, fouls, or any other judgment decisions.
For one use only: Goal/no goal -- did the ball cross the line or not Just like ice hockey. (Abstaining from the actual poll because I don't want to give impression that I'm generally in favor of video review)
I considered that position first, but then thought that the cases of #2 are far more frequent and thus have proven to have had even greater impact upon the games during the WC Finals, so I was compelled not to exclude these situations.
The ball over/not over the line is a very specific thing, like ball in and out of play. Either the ball went over the line or it didn't. I am also in the group that would relegate it to goal/no goal only. Offside is completely a judgement call, and I don't like the idea of reviewing judgement calls. In addition, "close" calls are to go to the attacker. One AR's idea of "close" may be different than another's. I think there are only 2 good ways to do this with the conditions that currently exist. I don't like the additional AR's. Either put a microchip in the ball that will signal the CR in his ear, (no red light above the goal), or put a video screen behind the 4th official and give the reserve AR, who is already assigned to the match, something to do. JMO
I understand. But what are we going to do if the AR signals offside when it's not (upon video replay)? How do you undo the stoppage of the game? Or do you let play go on (and until when?) to see if a goal is scored and then review it? Or only use it when an AR does not signal offside and a goal is scored that shouldn't be? So it can only take away goals and not help add to them. I'm open to persuasion but I admit I'm heavily skeptical towards using video review for offside. Using it only for #1 obviously limits the number of times it's used but Germany/England shows that it would be worth it at the World Cup. (I'm also open to persuasion for reviewing incidents of diving, not during the game but afterwards for possible disciplinary action. )
I don't believe that offside position is a judgment decision. The player is either in an offside position or he isn't. The only judgment part comes in participation, and I would not have that aspect be reviewable. The video could only be used to determine if the player was in an offside position at the moment the ball was struck by a teammate. I would not include plays in which the offside flag is raised. It would be limited only to those instances in which there was no flag and a goal was scored. Red cards, cautions, diving, and fouls in general are all judgment decisions and thus would not be reviewable under my proposal. I simply wish to make sure that the goals which are scored are legitimate.
I think we're over-reacting on the Offside call. It was a fluke doesn't happen like that often enough to justify butchering the game for it. The England No goal is something that should be looked at.
Do you know the number of goals which have been scored during this WC which shouldn't have counted due to offside?
I bet someone's studied this. Wouldn't surprise me if ARs in top leagues and top tournaments like this get the offside calls wrong 10-20% of the time....which would be massive, not flukey. My guess too is that calling offside when it is not is far more common not calling offside when it is. Just guessing though....someone's probably researched this actual question though.
My short list (have there been others?)... (GRP) NZL Goal #1, ITA-NZL, Goal Counted, was Offside (GRP) ARG Goal #3, ARG-KOR, Goal Counted, was Offside (R16) ARG Goal #1, ARG-MEX, Goal Counted, was Offside (GRP) ITA Goal, ITA-SVK, Quagliarella, Goal Denied, was Onside (borderline) (GRP) USA Goal, USA-ALG, Dempsey, Goal Denied, was Onside (borderline) It is clear that Italy got jobbed... they could have had 5 points instead of two and advanced in the tournament if they got the call against Slovakia. Argentina, on the other hand, has been blessed, although it probably hasn't mattered.
100% there should be an immediate review of goal line plays using whatever is determined to be the best technology. I think there should be a video review of all cards after the match. I think an IMMEDIATE review of certain cards involving contact within a match, leading to an ejection. If a PK is not involved, the review could be made without stopping the match and if a video official sees that no contact was made on a tackle/hand ball, the ejected player could be returned to the pitch. If a PK is involved, a decision would be rendered before the PK attempt. I envision the review to be more a way of reversing untouched dives or players tripping over their own feet/ball. I would also be in favor of a 1-time per match ability to appeal non-calls on hand balls in the box and non-calls on offsides immediately before a goal. With offsides appeals, I think any reversals would have to be defined sitautions of egregious errors in judgement.
I agree. If the game is going to be at a natural stop anyway, (goal celebration and then kickoff) there's no real reason to worry about interrupting the match to ensure that indeed a goal was scored. 4O can review via video monitor and communicate with ref via RefTalk if there's something wrong with the goal. There's already an appeal process in place in almost all leagues across the board. There's no need to implement this on a match to match basis. Players/Coaches, with limited exceptions, can appeal to their respective FA's. Impractical/Impossible. We all know, once play is restarted you can't change your mind. This would require a rewrite in the Laws of the Game which is highly unlikely to come from the IFAB. After the game, I have no problem going back and disciplining players who try to take dives to deceive the referee. This kind of action is unsporting, it's cheating, and it ruins the game for everyone else who plays by the rules. However, through the course of the game, if we reviewed every play where someone fell down, we'd never finish the match. Save it for after the game is concluded. You can't. Would require another obscenely unlikely re-write of the laws of the game. As wish we could point out to un-educated parents from time to time, there is no such foul named handball. There is handling the ball, however this infringement is subject to ITOOTR. If the referee determines it was not deliberate, it's not handling. End of story. For all of the people saying that the NFL has video replay, in the NFL pass interference is subject to ITOOTR, and is non-reviewable. You just can't review something that isn't a foul unless the referee thinks it is. Again the problem here is what if there's a false positive? Linesman flags offside, challenge flag goes out, play is reviewed and we see the player isn't offside. How do we restart play? Do we give a dropped ball at the site where the player was when he was flagged for offside? Kind of defeats the purpose of an attempt on goal when there will be 18 people behind the ball now that play has been stopped. Do we give a free kick? That seems unfair to the opposing team, being forced to defend a set-piece because the AR screwed up. Personally, I'm all for video review of goal/no goal, given the proper implementation. I really don't buy into FIFA's excuse of "We want the rules uniform for all levels of the game." Reviewing whether or not a goal was scored with technology doesn't change LOTG. The NFL has video review, and last I checked the peewee league down my street still plays with the same (generally) set of rules. Their touchdowns don't change because of video review. And 22 kids playing soccer on the streets of Brazil won't change because we use video monitors to make sure England's goal gets counted properly.
Using your convention, I'll add these FOUR to the list: (GRP) Chile Goal #1, CHI-SUI, Goal Counted, was Offside (GRP) France Goal #1, FRA-RSA, Goal Counted, was Offside (GRP) Slovakia Goal #1, SVK-NZL, Goal Counted, was Offside (GRP) Uruguay Goal #2, URU-RSA, player fouled resulted in PK and red card, goal scored on PK, fouled player was Offside That makes SEVEN offside goals so far in WC 2010.
RobtheRef - I don't see any issue at all with the setup I described for in-game review of player ejections. Very simple. Play never stops. The player is sent back on just as an injured player is, if the 4th official sees some defined set of circumstances that invalidate the ejection. In the case of PKs... yeah.. you take an extra minute. They are THAT important in the game - so you make sure handling wasn't called when the ball only touched a knee... you make sure a player wasn't called for a rough tackle when he never touched the attacker. My off-sides/handling appeal suggestion was only applicable immediately after made goals. There is no problem there... the appeal will either be denied - goal stands.... or upheld... defending team gets a free-kick(as they would've if the violation had been originally called). These suggestions don't really help disallowed goals that should've been goals - but should help prevent allowed goals, that should not have been. This plan would require a 4th official, and it would require him to have a certain degree of responsibility separate from the referee on the field.
I could make the argument that in the Italy/NZ game, Cannavaro made a controlled play on the ball and spilled the cross to a NZ attacker (forget his name) Offside plays do sometimes involve the judgement of the official. I am in favor of replay at these sorts of matches but there is a disconnect as to in what matches it should be applied. FIFA should let independent leagues use it as they see fit. However, I do understand Blatter's point that the game should be as consistent as possible throughout the whole world
Easy. Tell ARs to keep the flag down and let the play run to completion unless they're 10000000%, iron-clad, bet-your-mother's-life-on-it-certain that offside has occurred. (They should be doing this anyway, but with video review, there would really be no excuse.) This will eliminate false-positives. Video review will then take care of the false-negatives.
Just replay in/out on goals. Beyond that, if you want to review other things after the match with video, feel free, but not during the match.