Match Day Thread Manchester United vs Southampton EFL CUP Final Sunday 26/02/2017 Kick-Off 4:30PM

Nah, I'm with a 5th official sitting in a dark room communicating with the ref if a big decision needs eye in the sky. It would barely have an affect, in fact sometimes I wonder if they get info from elsewhere anyway.........like sir alex sitting in the stands...........

 

Why don't we just do away with offside. It is a very difficult rule to apply given that you have to be looking in two directions at once.

 

So while this 5th official is sitting in a bunker somewhere, with his headset on, analysing everything in slow motion and freeze frame, who is refereeing the game? The ref? Let's just leave him to do that then.

 

But that's it, you wouldn't even know, unless there's a ridiculous off side, a dubious red or a Burt brain fart of some other distant order. Millions of people could see that decision was wrong on Sunday, yet no-one could convey it to the guy who matters......no not Jose......the ref.

 

I agree with that. The other aspect is that a correct decision can just as easily be reviewed into a wrong one.

But to be fair, the right approach is being taken at the moment. I have no problems with trials and reviews of different systems taking place. What I think might happen though, is someone says "that didn't really work", and then implement it anyway.

PS all comparisons to rugby/tennis are automatically invalid. The decisions we are talking about here are down to interpretation and the ref's judgement, in those sports they are not. That's the no.1 reason I don't think this can work.

 

Just to put things into perspective, many people on this forum were dead against goal line technology when it was first trialled, but now it's a universal feature of all top flight games hardly anyone has a word to say against it. 2 recent examples of its excellent application are, of course, Fraser Forster's amazing recovering save at Anfield, and Lincoln City's goal against Burnley. In the absence of the technology, either or both of those decisions could have been reversed by human error, just as Gabbiadini's first goal at Wembley was.

As for how offside technology would work, surely the hardware is already in place? The GPS sensors all players wear so Opta can work out their performance statistics could be used to detect whether or not a player is beyond the last defender when the ball is played forward. OK, the GPS may not yet be accurate enough for the very closest decisions, but technology can always be improved upon. The point is, human error can't be altogether eliminated.

 

.

 

Manolo's goal put in from his arm/chest recently would have come under scrutiny. Yes, it was probably his arm, but he was being held back....do you cancel goal and award penalty or do you just cancel the goal. What decision? How long to make that decision? In the end it comes down to a human being....whether the ref, lino or video judge...and it isn't black and white. In rugby, the video judge only responds to the question....so if asked was it off the arm, he wouldn't mention other issues. I cannot see it being used in anything but straightforward situations....I've given a goal....any reason I shouldn't? So only when the ball is dead. Do not want the situation where the game is interrupted constantly by arguing players and managers. Football by its very nature has only limited opportunity for technology....otherwise it becomes a whole new ball game...literally.

 

What if he doesn't see something very, very obvious because he happens to be blocked by a player in the way?

 

Then he has two linesmen - or "referees assistants" - to see it for him.

 

Its certainly not as simple as just implementing it. I don't want every decision in every game looked at in slow mo, hell sometimes when we have all seen the replay we don't agree do we! But that offside was such a terrible decision, shouldn't need a guy on a monitor to tell Burt that Ryan didn't score or impede the goalie, it was so obvious. What would have been truly beautiful if Jose had been on the receiving end, he'd still be stamping his feet now. I imagine something similar will happen in a play off final and then they will be forced to act on it.

 

I might have been a lot more upset if that offside decision occurred in the last 10 minutes of the game rather than the first. My response when we realised it had been disallowed was, "oh well, it was too early anyway". Memories of early goals vs Spurs and West Ham at St Marys this season.

 

But it denied MG a hat-trick in a cup final, it took away a piece of history, and that's disregarding what other impact it has on the game. Me, I reckon if we score that, they play into our hands more. I still feel robbed. It was just such an obvious one. And were's the apology, where's the guy in a suit saying we made a mistake, nah, its just Southampton, they didn't expect to win, Utd pay the bills......

 

Thank you Chilco. Voice of reason.

 

By the way, instead of arguing the toss over whether it's a good thing or not, or how it might or might not work, why not read up on how it actually IS working under tests: http://quality.fifa.com/en/var/

 

Someone want to start a new topic on this and move the last 2 pages over...?

 

As soon as the ball goes over the goal line play stops anyway, whether or not a goal is awarded, so where is the problem? As you say, a goal/no goal decision based on offside only ever needs to be made when the ball is dead, and it can be made almost as quickly as the goal line technology works already.

As for Manolo's "hand of God" goal, that's a more complex decision which I don't suppose technology will ever be up to deciding by itself, but it would have been easy enough to do a quick video review and cancel the goal, award a penalty, and send O'Shea off for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity. Job's a good 'un!

 

Good post, I didn't even get to raise the point of a lot of rules handball/offside etc. Being up to interpretation. You could still end up with different decisions for similar incidents.

Ah, but goal line technology is a different kettle of fish really as it's an absolute. A yes/no situation with no interpretation possible.

You can't say that about the current offside rule or many of the contentious issues we see.

 

Which is probably where a comparison to cricket comes in. It's a lot better now in cricket (a few years into having video assistance), but far too often in the early days, when it came down to the interpretation-type decisions the TV umpire was making his decision based on what he would give. Now it's very much a case of the onfield umpire who made the decision is correct, unless you can see a clear and obvious reason to overturn the decision - ie the TV umpire isn't re-refereeing the incident, from a blank canvas.

 

Or not see it.....