Will Football ever come out the dark ages and use TV replays?

[MB62]

Last night's cheating by Henri could have cost the Republic of Ireland Millions of Euros as they were denied a place in the World cup finals by the French.

If ever there was a case for an incident to be reviewed by T.V. replays, this was it, yet football still hides its head deep in the sand by refusing to use the technology available.
By the time the game had restarted after the goal, the T.V. had showed about three or four different angles on Henri's hand ball so the arguement about slowing the game does not hold water.

Rugby, Tennis and even cricket all use video replays but football seems to think we are above this and refuse to take their heids out of their :asshole:

[Woody1985]

This is needed now.

It's a joke that teams are potentially missing out on big prizes, tournaments because of this.

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

After this disgrace I think so, it seems to me that football bigwigs seem to think referee's are untouchable and their word is final but now I think after so many high profile gaffs from refs and assistants that they will be forced to do something about it, how many times are we going to see a terrible injustice like this before something is actually done

[cwilliamson85]

FIFA is corrupt. It sits on it high horse saying they want to small countries to host tournaments and do well but when it comes to big nations doing things wrong nothing gets done about it. Could you imagine if Ireland handed the ball into the net to go through. Do you think it would have been given! I think not.

FIFA SFA FA is all the same. Look after the wee teams until they play the big teams and then :rules: goes out the window.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I have to say there used to be great enjoyment in reconstructing incidents using only you and your mates memories. Undoubtedly we got them wrong more often than not. However, controversy has always been part of the game.

I think the issue nowadays is that most people watch their football on TV. More games are televised than before. For example there are highlights of every league match in England every weekend.

This means that if something does get missed by the referee, he is the only one. A couple of million viewers see, time after time, that a mistake has been made. IMO replays are needed at the ground for that reason.

It's not just that people have a sense of injustice anymore. They have actual evidence that they have been cheated. Not using replays spoils the TV spectacle.

[Booked4Being-Ugly]

Good post - We are told football is now a business and when, like you say, the ROI FA have been denied a few million there must surely be a case for an appeal, especially with a handball so blatant as Henri's. I feel the time is coming soon for court action being taken by a team being denied entry into say Europe over a similar injust action and missing out in millions as a result.

[blackpoolhibs]

I cant understand why having camera evidence is not in place now. Although i can see teams like Italy, Argentina and Turkey, basically your regular cheating *******s, complaining about every decision. The games could take hours to complete with these nations.

Any video evidence would have to be restricted to goals against only. If we had it for every foul, offside, the game would just be turned into a farce, we wouldn't need a ref, just a camera crew.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Good post - We are told football is now a business and when, like you say, the ROI FA have been denied a few million there must surely be a case for an appeal, especially with a handball so blatant as Henri's. I feel the time is coming soon for court action being taken by a team being denied entry into say Europe over a similar injust action and missing out in millions as a result.

And when that happens, the game is well and truly *****ed. League seasons would never finish as appeal and counter appeal would drag on, leaving fans confused as to what is actually happening.

I think the decision in the ground should be final, but agree that TV replays should be allowed. Especially given the fact that some stadums have giant screens playing back the TV coverage - it can't be ignored.

[deek]

If we never had the controversy in a match to chat/moan about what would the discussion be like on these boards. It would turn the game stale and clinical. To me that is not football as I know and love it. Technology has it's place but I don't think it belongs on the pitch to deprive us of these moments of madness or pleasure whichever way you look at it.

[JimBHibees]

Why did we need tv evidence when the linesman would have had a clear view of the incident.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Why did we need tv evidence when the linesman would have had a clear view of the incident.

Guys like Andy(?) Davis? I'm not sure we can trust them.

[JimBHibees]

Guys like Andy(?) Davis? I'm not sure we can trust them.

Difference being Andy got involved when he shouldnt have when this guy didnt when he should have. :greengrin

[Killiehibbie]

If we never had the controversy in a match to chat/moan about what would the discussion be like on these boards. It would turn the game stale and clinical. To me that is not football as I know and love it. Technology has it's place but I don't think it belongs on the pitch to deprive us of these moments of madness or pleasure whichever way you look at it.

Which is all very well if 10 million people don't see how wrong the decisions are. TV cameras are at most games showing multiple angles and should be used to aid the officials.

[deek]

Which is all very well if 10 million people don't see how wrong the decisions are. TV cameras are at most games showing multiple angles and should be used to aid the officials.

I see the wrong decisions too on the TV, but it's all part of the game. I know that bad decisions will happen, but do you really want to turn the game into a clinical form of big brother football?

[Gatecrasher]

And when that happens, the game is well and truly *****ed. League seasons would never finish as appeal and counter appeal would drag on, leaving fans confused as to what is actually happening.

I think the decision in the ground should be final, but agree that TV replays should be allowed. Especially given the fact that some stadums have giant screens playing back the TV coverage - it can't be ignored.

If the NFL tennis rugby and just about every other major sport in the world can do it there is no reason to have an official with a monitor viewing replays

there is too much at stake to allow a refereeing blunder cost your or anyone elses team the correct decision

[Killiehibbie]

I see the wrong decisions too on the TV, but it's all part of the game. I know that bad decisions will happen, but do you really want to turn the game into a clinical form of big brother football?

I'd prefer they still wore big baggy shorts, played with 5 forwards and barging the goalie into the net with the ball resulted in a goal but times have changed.

[deek]

I'd prefer they still wore big baggy shorts, played with 5 forwards and barging the goalie into the net with the ball resulted in a goal but times have changed.

I never seen the match last night, but what if the guy in the box with the tv evidence ruled it was ball played man? Who is to say that the person or persons, sitting with the over riding rule is as much a numptie or have a hidden agenda, as the guys on the pitch. Also at which point do you stop the game? I did used to think that cameras would be good, but have changed my mind as I think it a step too far. Maybe more trials with golamouth cameras and take it from there.

[Phil D. Rolls]

If the NFL tennis rugby and just about every other major sport in the world can do it there is no reason to have an official with a monitor viewing replays

there is too much at stake to allow a refereeing blunder cost your or anyone elses team the correct decision

Agree, but I don't think we can go down the road of appealing against decisions afterwards. I don't think they can do that in other sports either, to be fair.

[Dashing Bob S]

It'll happen. But football is very change resistant so it may take some time.

[Craig_in_Prague]

If we never had the controversy in a match to chat/moan about what would the discussion be like on these boards. It would turn the game stale and clinical. To me that is not football as I know and love it. Technology has it's place but I don't think it belongs on the pitch to deprive us of these moments of madness or pleasure whichever way you look at it.

respect your opinion, but totally disagree.

Football is much bigger than other sports, they mean a lot more and also financially has bigger impact.

We don't need TV evidence for everything that happens in a match, but last night the ball has hit the net, it should not have stood, and would have taken a matter of seconds for an official to have checked this.

Things like diving, or things the ref. missed at the time (or called wrong), can still be reviewed with the use of TV evidence afterwards, to tighten up on cheats in the sport, or to just simply clear players from wrong decisions. This is happening better I would say now....

But to still not use any technology at all, in this day and age - is ludicrous, and does no justice to the professional players that work their socks off to get where they are.... no justice to managers who've spent years getting licences etc, and no justice in the end, to the public.

There will always be a teething period, a small introduction of technology, and no doubt adjustments made over time, but to just ignore technology is crazy.

[Killiehibbie]

I never seen the match last night, but what if the guy in the box with the tv evidence ruled it was ball played man? Who is to say that the person or persons, sitting with the over riding rule is as much a numptie or have a hidden agenda, as the guys on the pitch. Also at which point do you stop the game? I did used to think that cameras would be good, but have changed my mind as I think it a step too far. Maybe more trials with golamouth cameras and take it from there.

Have the monitor set up beside the tunnel let the ref run over have a look at the angles and make a decision.

[Kaiser1962]

As one who has not been in favour of TV evidence during a match I have to say that the time is here. Last night we saw an example of excellent officials, who it is almost universally agreed had a superb game, who were conned and cheated by a senior pro and captain of his country. Henry cheated plain and simple. To say its the ref's fault is a bit like saying a housebreaker has done nothing wrong UNLESS he gets caught and its the job of the police to catch him. And if they dont well tough. Henry should be punished retrospectively (as should Anelka for diving) and as long as FIFA Uefa allow this cheating to go on it will continue. Despicable behaviour and it is Henry's responsibility not to cheat, not the ref's to spot it. :grr:

[ancient hibee]

The only time it is used in rugby is for a try-the game has already stopped.

Cricket-for run outs-the game has stopped.

Much more difficult for football.

[David@EasterRoad]

The Europa league extra officials would have spotted this one for sure, FIFA will probably introduce this at the world cup.

[Lucius Apuleius]

My view is quite simple. If they use TV cameras retropectively to punish players for things that happened off the ball then they should use them for decisions like this. I just saw it on Sky news at lunchtime and if I was Oirish I think I would be visiting Mr Henry and having a quiet word in his shell like.

[jgl07]

Last night's cheating by Henri could have cost the Republic of Ireland Millions of Euros as they were denied a place in the World cup finals by the French.

If ever there was a case for an incident to be reviewed by T.V. replays, this was it, yet football still hides its head deep in the sand by refusing to use the technology available.
By the time the game had restarted after the goal, the T.V. had showed about three or four different angles on Henri's hand ball so the arguement about slowing the game does not hold water.

Rugby, Tennis and even cricket all use video replays but football seems to think we are above this and refuse to take their heids out of their :asshole:
But Tennis, Rugby and Cricket are essentially staccato sports. Football is continuous.

Do you stop play to check with a video referee every time a decision is disputed? I would hate to go down the route of Rugby League where most decisions are handed on to the video referee.

This could be done in the case of disputed goals without fuss if the fourth official has access to video replays and can contact the referee.

If this is formalized it will add a new way for teams to waste time by appealing for spurious decisions to be settled by vidoe replay.

[mim]

TV replays work well in other sports because they are all stop/start by nature - cricket after every ball, NFL after every play, Rugby League after every tackle and so on.

Football is very different. It is continuous, until the ball is out of play, a goal is scored, or the ref stops it.

I can see a strong arguement for reviewing incidents leading up to a goal, like last night, but there are many other cases of injustice in football that it would be difficult to fix with tv replays.

For example; Imagine last night's handball happened, but didn't lead immediately to a goal, say because Gallas hit the bar and the ball was cleared. Are we really wanting to stop play then? France may then have got the ball back and scored 30 seconds later. Ireland may have gone up the field and scored. As long as the ball is still in play, at what stage do we decide to stop the game and possibly overturn the referree's decision and in what circumstances?

It all seems too complicated to me.

Goal line technology to decide whether the ball has crossed the line is a must. A review of play immediately leading up to a goal is a possibility, because the game has stopped. Anything more than that would see our beautiful game changed into a stop/start fiasco.

There would still be significant incidents missed by the referree, but that would be better than changing the flowing nature of our game.

[erin go bragh]

why dont fifa throw the french out of the world cup for cheating.
wonder what would happen if it were brazil that got ko that way.
:bitchy: its so wrong

[Craig_in_Prague]

TV replays work well in other sports because they are all stop/start by nature - cricket after every ball, NFL after every play, Rugby League after every tackle and so on.

Football is very different. It is continuous, until the ball is out of play, a goal is scored, or the ref stops it.

I can see a strong arguement for reviewing incidents leading up to a goal, like last night, but there are many other cases of injustice in football that it would be difficult to fix with tv replays.

For example; Imagine last night's handball happened, but didn't lead immediately to a goal, say because Gallas hit the bar and the ball was cleared. Are we really wanting to stop play then? France may then have got the ball back and scored 30 seconds later. Ireland may have gone up the field and scored. As long as the ball is still in play, at what stage do we decide to stop the game and possibly overturn the referree's decision and in what circumstances?

It all seems too complicated to me.

Goal line technology to decide whether the ball has crossed the line is a must. A review of play immediately leading up to a goal is a possibility, because the game has stopped. Anything more than that would see our beautiful game changed into a stop/start fiasco.

There would still be significant incidents missed by the referree, but that would be better than changing the flowing nature of our game.

I think you basically did answer your own questions there.

Last night, they did score - and in a matter of seconds the goal could have been disallowed. So the cheats celebrations would have been cut short.

IF they hadn't had scored, play would continue....... why should it have been stopped? they hadn't gained an advantage, (or a goal, which is what matters),
we are not wanting to eradicate all cheating or ref. mistakes, but purely in the critical / crucial moments that decide outcomes, technology can play a part. Not fix everything, but aim to serve some justice.

[millarco]

The only time it is used in rugby is for a try-the game has already stopped.

Cricket-for run outs-the game has stopped.

Much more difficult for football.

:agree:The same with tennis. It's a lot harder when play is still going. Would you wait until the ball goes out, or does the ref have to blow instantly? Is the game immediately stopped, and where does play restart if the ref says it's not a goal?

What decisions would you be allowed to bring it in for? Would Celtic have been able to check Eduardo's dive? Would Aberdeen have been able to check the sending's off of Ross and Maguire a couple of weeks back? Or is it just goal-line's and incidents like last night?

And what level's do you enforce it? Some leagues simply won't have the finance do implement such technology. I'd sooner see our money spent on the squad/infrastructure than on cameras.

The bigger scandal IMO is FIFA's decision to seed the draw at the last minute.

[duncs]

I hate to stop the conspiracies that are going on at the moment but the reason TV replays haven't been used it quite simple:

FIFA have stated many times that the reason TV replays won't be adopted is because they want football to remain a universal sport - that the game is played in exactly the same way in the Stade de France as it is on a Sunday League match. I think the reasoning behind that is sound (and admirable) and needs to be reiterated more often.

Furthermore, unlike tennis, cricket etc that use TV replays is that most decisions is those cases are straightforward. Whereas in football, most decisions are down to interpretation of the rules.

Personally I would like to see TV replays (it could be easily done - teams have two chances a half to make a challenge etc) but I can't see it happening. We already have a shortage of officials as it is. TV replays in the SPL might actually help in getting rid of the OF bias in refereeing.

[HibeeB]

If this is formalized it will add a new way for teams to waste time by appealing for spurious decisions to be settled by vidoe replay.

Exactly.


Constant whingers like anybody playing for Alex Ferguson, Barry the Fud, Mikey Stewart, Scott MacDonald etc, etc, will contest every decission that they can.

And players will only be able dispute it if the referee hasn't seen the incident so he (the ref) will have no option but to go to video replays (because he hasn't seen it first hand).

There will still be room for biased refereeing as well. They will still be able to say "I seen the Celtc goal clearly and there is no dispute so no video replay. Go away".

Video evidence will not end controversy.

[heretoday]

Perhaps each team could allowed to appeal one decision per half and one in extra-time?

[MacBean]

The idea of the 5th/6th officials would have HOPEFULLY worked last night as they would be in an ideal position to see the incident!

[Jack]

Its was not unheard, not so long ago, of for ass. referees to stick their flags up and not be noticed by the referee while the game went on, only for it to be called back when the ref did notice, maybe not so much these days with the 'high tech' communications they use.

So there's a precedent for delayed decisions.

There's no reason the 4th official with the monitor shouldn’t be in touch with the referee in the same way as the ass’s are so the game would/could be pulled up just a quickly as it is now.

More often than not the ball is out of play within a very short period of time so the thought of minutes going by just isn’t going to happen normally. Like last night, the ball become ‘dead’ within a few seconds of an incident.


Thinking of last night, the 4th official notices the hand ball, says so to the referee and he could have blown before the ball hit the net, certainly in the slow motion replys :agree:

I think it would be important that not all decisions would be subject to the 3rd eye, which ones could would be the subject for a much more in depth discussion, but it really does have to happen before what credibility football has is lost.

[clerriehibs]

:agree:The same with tennis. It's a lot harder when play is still going. Would you wait until the ball goes out, or does the ref have to blow instantly? Is the game immediately stopped, and where does play restart if the ref says it's not a goal?

What decisions would you be allowed to bring it in for? Would Celtic have been able to check Eduardo's dive? Would Aberdeen have been able to check the sending's off of Ross and Maguire a couple of weeks back? Or is it just goal-line's and incidents like last night?

And what level's do you enforce it? Some leagues simply won't have the finance do implement such technology. I'd sooner see our money spent on the squad/infrastructure than on cameras.

The bigger scandal IMO is FIFA's decision to seed the draw at the last minute.

It wouldn't work successfully enough to justify the cost; you'd still have endless arguments over many, probably most, decisions (did the ball cross the line or not, was a player off side or not, was the ball played intentionally by hand by the player). And surely deciding on whether a goal was scored or not is just as important as a goal that was not scored. A player stops a goal bound shot with his hand, the officials miss it, play continues on, the attacking team are outraged and one of their players gets sent off ... If it should be ok to review actual goals, then it has to be ok to review actual should have been goals. What does the ref do in that scenario; rescind the red card for the attacking player, then send off the defensive player for his on the line hand ball.

Piece of nonsense. Keep the game flowing, absolutely no point in paying for technology that doesn't actually solve anything.

Although I would agree with some kind of electronic device that could confirm whether a ball had crossed the line or not. Not that I think the tennis one works correctly, it just stops arguments. It doesn't take into account the amount a ball can misshape by when it hits the surface, which is considerable at the speeds the tennis pros serve.

[mim]

I think you basically did answer your own questions there.

Last night, they did score - and in a matter of seconds the goal could have been disallowed. So the cheats celebrations would have been cut short.

IF they hadn't had scored, play would continue....... why should it have been stopped? they hadn't gained an advantage, (or a goal, which is what matters),
we are not wanting to eradicate all cheating or ref. mistakes, but purely in the critical / crucial moments that decide outcomes, technology can play a part. Not fix everything, but aim to serve some justice.

You are missing my point. If Henri had not handled the ball, the ball would have gone out for a goal kick. If his deliberate hand ball had not led to a goal immediately, but the ball had remained in play and France had scored a goal 30 second later, what would you do?

Not so simple.

So, you're right. I did partially answer my own question. Goal line technology and a review of incidents leading up to a goal may be workable, but how far back do you go in reviewing the lead up to a goal?

[Craig_in_Prague]

You are missing my point. If Henri had not handled the ball, the ball would have gone out for a goal kick. If his deliberate hand ball had not led to a goal immediately, but the ball had remained in play and France had scored a goal 30 second later, what would you do?

Not so simple.

So, you're right. I did partially answer my own question. Goal line technology and a review of incidents leading up to a goal may be workable, but how far back do you go in reviewing the lead up to a goal?

I do get your point,
If play continued and they scored 30 secs later, goal is going to stand.

We can't eradicate all mistakes/cheating that go on through the course of a match, but 2 wrongs don't make a right IMO,

1/ Could technology have been used to chalk off last nights goal?
answer, yes, in a matter of seconds.

Because it may not be feasable for other things that'll happen in a match, doesn't mean it's right to ignore such situations like last night.

I am well aware there is difficulties in making it work, but all I believe is technology should be used to help in someway.

[Gatecrasher]

Agree, but I don't think we can go down the road of appealing against decisions afterwards. I don't think they can do that in other sports either, to be fair.

I agree once the video ref has made the decision it should be final :agree:

[PeeJay]

I cant understand why having camera evidence is not in place now. Although i can see teams like Italy, Argentina and Turkey, basically your regular cheating *******s, complaining about every decision. The games could take hours to complete with these nations.

Racist nonsense - no excuse for comments like this - as if cheating never occured in Scotland/England/Ireland/Wales?? :grr:

[Peevemor]

Racist nonsense - no excuse for comments like this - as if cheating never occured in Scotland/England/Ireland/Wales?? :grr:


Ding ding! :take that

[mjhibby]

I think what is more galling for the irish is that henri has admitted he handled it and the goal shouldnt have been given.There was a precedent in germany where a german cuptie(i think it was anyway)was replayed when a goal wasnt given where tv should it had clearly crossed the line.Surely it is only that it happened against the irish team that is stoppoing them replayiing the game.If that was the other way round platini would be going ballistic about cheating.Sums him up perfectly that he says nothing as had it been robbie keane getting away with it im pretty damn sure fifa would have stepped in.
Now we are going to spend a whole world cup(or until they get knocked out blaming the heat,too many games etc etc)listening about 1966 during the algeria versus slovenia game and how only brazil or spain can stop them.Btw will they now pipe down about the hand of god.I doubt it,it will just be a great excuse to mention it over and over again.

[Mikeystewart]

Dont think anything will be done about it. Would be very suprised if platini or sepp blatter came out and said anything, especialy platini being french wont give a toss about how pissed off ireland are.

[blackpoolhibs]

Racist nonsense - no excuse for comments like this - as if cheating never occured in Scotland/England/Ireland/Wales?? :grr:

Thank you, thats twice i have been called a racist on here.:thumbsup: Yes we all cheat, even hibs and Scotland. Although these contries i mentioned, there are more, Uruguay too, other highly strung nations who dispute every decision, and chase the ref all over the pitch. Its not exclusively them, Southern Irish player Roy Keane did, when playing for Man United.

If you think the cheating is just as bad here, than in those countries i mentioned, you don't watch the same game as me, and giving them another bullet to add to their ammunition is just not on. Racist. :faf::faf::faf: I'm proud to be known as that now.:top marks

[MB62]

Refs are generally 'Miked' up in premier league games and above these days, and they seem to be in constant touch with the 4th official.

IMO, it would be the 4th official's role to be watching his monitors and calling major incidents to the ref on his review. If he can't decide within a minute or before the game re-starts, then the refs decision stands.

As an example, as previously mentioned, we must have see about 4 replays of the hand ball on T.V. before the play re-started. By the time the Irish had stopped chasing the ref and his assistant, and were then ready to kick-off again, it was blatantly obvious to everyone Henry had cheated.
The 4th official could easily have informed the ref by 'mic' that it was hand ball and award a free-kick, and there would have been no additional time having to be added on.

[s.a.m]

I think what is more galling for the irish is that henri has admitted he handled it and the goal shouldnt have been given.There was a precedent in germany where a german cuptie(i think it was anyway)was replayed when a goal wasnt given where tv should it had clearly crossed the line.Surely it is only that it happened against the irish team that is stoppoing them replayiing the game.If that was the other way round platini would be going ballistic about cheating.Sums him up perfectly that he says nothing as had it been robbie keane getting away with it im pretty damn sure fifa would have stepped in.
Now we are going to spend a whole world cup(or until they get knocked out blaming the heat,too many games etc etc)listening about 1966 during the algeria versus slovenia game and how only brazil or spain can stop them.Btw will they now pipe down about the hand of god.I doubt it,it will just be a great excuse to mention it over and over again.

The way I remember that incident (if we're thinking about the same one) is that FIFA threatened to throw out the German Federation if they went ahead with the replay and, as a result, it didn't take place? However, I might well be wrong. Anyone remember?

[Ell_Chrisso]

If the NFL tennis rugby and just about every other major sport in the world can do it there is no reason to have an official with a monitor viewing replays

there is too much at stake to allow a refereeing blunder cost your or anyone elses team the correct decision


Im a HUGE NFL FAN. Love the sport.

As for the replays, yes it does stop the game. Coaches get TWO challenge flags a game. If they think the referee's have made a bad call they get to challenge the play, providing they have any left, (and its not in the last 2 mins of either half)

This either consists of something like, field position, spot of the ball, wether it was a fumble, wether a reciever got two feet down in bounds, etc etc... People who watch the sport will know what im talking about.

My point is.. alot of my friends, dont mind occasionally watching this sport, because of the fancy big plays, big hits etc.. but get alot of people saying aww, i cant stand all the stopages, and breaks, Which half the time is because of reviewing calls.

But even still, Yes, the referees review plays, they change the outcome of what was originally called on the field, only if there is Conclusive Visual Evidence... But even that still calls up for controversy!

People say, aww, i dont want video evidence in Football, because it will take away all the fun parts of the game reagarding officials getting things wrong etc.. But at the end of the day, how many times have u watched footy on the tv, or andy gray, match of the day etc.. Debating things after games, and people still have different views, regardless of seeing dives, handballs, bad tackles, violent conduct etc...

This would still cause controversy. Regardless of reviewing things. So like many of you on here say, I don't know why they haven't already brought this review policy into the game. (Especially at BIG tournements.)

[MacBean]

Im a HUGE NFL FAN. Love the sport.

As for the replays, yes it does stop the game. Coaches get TWO challenge flags a game. If they think the referee's have made a bad call they get to challenge the play, providing they have any left, (and its not in the last 2 mins of either half)

This either consists of something like, field position, spot of the ball, wether it was a fumble, wether a reciever got two feet down in bounds, etc etc... People who watch the sport will know what im talking about.

My point is.. alot of my friends, dont mind occasionally watching this sport, because of the fancy big plays, big hits etc.. but get alot of people saying aww, i cant stand all the stopages, and breaks, Which half the time is because of reviewing calls.

But even still, Yes, the referees review plays, they change the outcome of what was originally called on the field, only if there is Conclusive Visual Evidence... But even that still calls up for controversy!

People say, aww, i dont want video evidence in Football, because it will take away all the fun parts of the game reagarding officials getting things wrong etc.. But at the end of the day, how many times have u watched footy on the tv, or andy gray, match of the day etc.. Debating things after games, and people still have different views, regardless of seeing dives, handballs, bad tackles, violent conduct etc...

This would still cause controversy. Regardless of reviewing things. So like many of you on here say, I don't know why they haven't already brought this review policy into the game. (Especially at BIG tournements.)



:top marks:top marks:top marks

[MacBean]

[QUOTE=Ell_Chrisso;2246587]Im a HUGE NFL FAN. Love the sport.

QUOTE]




He seriously is!
He's 7ft 6!

[Craig_in_Prague]

Refs are generally 'Miked' up in premier league games and above these days, and they seem to be in constant touch with the 4th official.

IMO, it would be the 4th official's role to be watching his monitors and calling major incidents to the ref on his review. If he can't decide within a minute or before the game re-starts, then the refs decision stands.

As an example, as previously mentioned, we must have see about 4 replays of the hand ball on T.V. before the play re-started. By the time the Irish had stopped chasing the ref and his assistant, and were then ready to kick-off again, it was blatantly obvious to everyone Henry had cheated.
The 4th official could easily have informed the ref by 'mic' that it was hand ball and award a free-kick, and there would have been no additional time having to be added on.

:agree: :top marks

Tried to make this point as well.... I mean, if an official looked at a video, Ireland got a free-kick, no-one would speak about it again.

Just because they can't 'correct' every single piece of cheating, or just ref/human mistakes..... doesn't mean they should just ignore something like last night. I don't think we even expect as fans, that all things are corrected, but something so easy to fix, so important to many, should surely be sorted there and then, with a simple check on a video screen, a quick word to the ref, and done - like a few seconds work.

[Hibs7]

Simple way forward is to have 4 linesmen then they only have to watch a quarter of the pitch, that would have been spotted last night if this was the case. Should be implemented world wide in all proffessional football matches.
SIMPLES :greengrin

[MacBean]

Thank you, thats twice i have been called a racist on here.:thumbsup: Yes we all cheat, even hibs and Scotland. Although these contries i mentioned, there are more, Uruguay too, other highly strung nations who dispute every decision, and chase the ref all over the pitch. Its not exclusively them, Southern Irish player Roy Keane did, when playing for Man United.

If you think the cheating is just as bad here, than in those countries i mentioned, you don't watch the same game as me, and giving them another bullet to add to their ammunition is just not on. Racist. :faf::faf::faf: I'm proud to be known as that now.:top marks


Michael Ballack & co - Chelsea vs Barcelona Champions League semi ring a bell

[blackpoolhibs]

Michael Ballack & co - Chelsea vs Barcelona Champions League semi ring a bell

As i said, bloody foreigners, :greengrin

[soupy]

Its aw Petries fault:wink::wink:

[euro Hibby]

simple money talks.....France how many people 70 m versus ireland 3 million.

TV money so its better that France qualify and by not using technology it is still possible to decide who wins a game. There is in my view no reason not to use technology.

Its a pity that the Ref never asked Henry if he handled ? In the end the Irish players took it really well and its a shame that so much effort and work can go up in smoke in a second.

[PeeJay]

Thank you, thats twice i have been called a racist on here.:thumbsup: Yes we all cheat, even hibs and Scotland. Although these contries i mentioned, there are more, Uruguay too, other highly strung nations who dispute every decision, and chase the ref all over the pitch. Its not exclusively them, Southern Irish player Roy Keane did, when playing for Man United.

If you think the cheating is just as bad here, than in those countries i mentioned, you don't watch the same game as me, and giving them another bullet to add to their ammunition is just not on. Racist. :faf::faf::faf: I'm proud to be known as that now.:top marks

Proud to be a racist - have you by any chance played football for Scotland - c'mon own up???

[blackpoolhibs]

Proud to be a racist - have you by any chance played football for Scotland - c'mon own up???

Yes proud but no, never had the pleasure of playing for my country. I'm also bigoted too. You should try it some time, its fun.:thumbsup:

[Horse]

Last night's cheating by Henri could have cost the Republic of Ireland Millions of Euros as they were denied a place in the World cup finals by the French.

If ever there was a case for an incident to be reviewed by T.V. replays, this was it, yet football still hides its head deep in the sand by refusing to use the technology available.
By the time the game had restarted after the goal, the T.V. had showed about three or four different angles on Henri's hand ball so the arguement about slowing the game does not hold water.

Rugby, Tennis and even cricket all use video replays but football seems to think we are above this and refuse to take their heids out of their :asshole:

True but dodgy decisions are part of the game and always have been. Sure, we all hate it when one goes against us but no-one complains when they go for us. If there wasn't human error from refs it would remove alot of talking points that are discussed over a few pints after the game. The handball last night was blatant when watched in replay but to be fair to the officials I think they simply missed it as oppose to anything sinister. The linesman was however at fault big time for missing the offside just prior to the handball.

These decisions are part of football and I wouldn't change the Maradona "hand of god" goal for the world! Having said that if TV replays were brought in here in Scotland the OF dominance would be shattered in an instance!

[HibbyAndy]

True but dodgy decisions are part of the game and always have been. Sure, we all hate it when one goes against us but no-one complains when they go for us. If there wasn't human error from refs it would remove alot of talking points that are discussed over a few pints after the game would disappear. The handball last night was blatant when watched in replay but to be fair to the officials I think they simply missed it as oppose to anything sinister. The linesman was however at fault big time for missing the offside just prior to the handball.

These decisions are part of football and I wouldn't change the Maradona "hand of god" goal for the world! Having said that if TV replays were brought in here in Scotland the OF dominance would be shattered in an instance!



Thats the mane point TBH you just trotted out there.

[blackpoolhibs]

Thats the mane point TBH you just trotted out there.

Yip, well spotted, the mane reason the old firm would be against video evidence is, it would stop them winning everything in a canter.

[CB_NO3]

Football will never move out the dark ages until the old football romantics like Blatter and Platini move away from their posts. As for the video referee, do you only make it decisions in the box e.g hand balls in the box or to see if the ball went over the line.

[blackpoolhibs]

Football will never move out the dark ages until the old football romantics like Blatter and Platini move away from their posts. As for the video referee, do you only make it decisions in the box e.g hand balls in the box or to see if the ball went over the line.

I think it has to come in soon, BUT only for goals. We cant have the game stopped for throw ins, or free kicks, although i can see that happening, once it is in.

[Horse]

Thats the mane point TBH you just trotted out there.

Aye, it would be wrong to saddle the game with TV evidence. Derby's just wouldn't be the same.

[Jones28]

NEVER!!!
Football is going to stay this way unless clubs kick up a huge stink about it :agree:

[MB62]

No.
As it stands all games are officiated in the same way whether it's champions league, EPL, SPL, Sunday League or schools football.


Can't say the last time I watched a schools football match or a game up at Inverleith on a Sunday afternoon, I remember seeing two refs assistants running the line, or an extra assistant behind each goal, I must have just missed them.
However, it's comforting to know that the wee laddie that should have been sent off playing for his school team on Saturday morning at Warriston playing fields, will get his red card once the ref watches the game back on T.V. :wink: :greengrin

[King Paddy]

I agree Football must move with the times, technology has give us an opportunity to correct in an instant an injustice like the hand of god and the hand of gaul. Come on FIFA get your act together, now is the time.:grr: