How long will it be?

[Son of a pitch]

We've seen it happen in the World Cup, we've seen it happen in the Premier League, let's face it, we see it happen week in, week out.

So why has nothing been done to rectify the problem?

I am of course referring to these countless errors being made by referees on a weekly basis. We've seen them for decades now, and astonishingly the technology to avoid them has been available since the invention of something called 'Video'.

Rugby makes use of it, Tennis makes use of it, Cricket makes use of it... shall I really go on? What I don't understand is, why hasn't the richest sport in the world managed to make use of it? How hard is it to stick a man in a room with a tv and a walkie talkie?

This is a subject that really riles me, especially after the Lampard goal in the world cup, De Jong's tackle on Hatem and today's decision involving Rooney. Why of all sports is Football stuck in the stone age?

What are your thoughts on this subject? Will the FA or UEFA ever shell out a few hundred quid for a TV, a walkie talkie and a man to use them?

 

[overseasTOON]

Always said that a TV set up with a 5 second delay from a live feed and a man in a box watching with a radio link up to the ref is all that is needed.

He'll see the on the ball incidents that the ref etc may miss and tell him.

Won't hold up play as ref can choose to ignore it if he thinks he's seen it and deams it OK but the TV ref can have his reports included for analysis.

 

[Smudger]

The commentators could even do it, there's some form of TV coverage of every major game, if only for the highlights.

 

[Son of a pitch]

Always said that a TV set up with a 5 second delay from a live feed and a man in a box watching with a radio link up to the ref is all that is needed.

He'll see the on the ball incidents that the ref etc may miss and tell him.

Won't hold up play as ref can choose to ignore it if he thinks he's seen it and deams it OK but the TV ref can have his reports included for analysis.

Even without a delay, the ref could pause a game and order an official to check video footage. I can do it with Sky+ or a Freeview recorder and they do it in all major rugby matches. I'm confused as to why this method hasn't been adopted.

 

[overseasTOON]

Even without a delay, the ref could pause a game and order an official to check video footage. I can do it with Sky+ or a Freeview recorder and they do it in all major rugby matches. I'm confused as to why this method hasn't been adopted.

I can understand this as it breaks up the game.

If you can stop the game for a video ref then why not allow managers a certain number of 'calls' to question a refs decision?

It would just be stop/start and the natural flow of the game is lost.

The ref can still play advantage and then take play back with a 5 second delay.

 

[Son of a pitch]

I can understand this as it breaks up the game.

If you can stop the game for a video ref then why not allow managers a certain number of 'calls' to question a refs decision?

It would just be stop/start and the natural flow of the game is lost.

The ref can still play advantage and then take play back with a 5 second delay.

I see your point, pauses in play do suit Rugby more. Either way, The FA and UEFA need to grow some balls when it comes to the use of video technology. Today's decision over Rooney is a prime example, why can The FA not undermine a ref's decision? It's ridiculous.

 

[overseasTOON]

The FA could have and should have used retrospective evidence. The ref may or may not have seen the incident bit that matters not.

Players should be aware that whilst on that pitch; any actions that are against the nature of the game can be punished and will be punished.

The FA just haven't got the balls to undermine (or even assist the refs) they have assigned to run the game.

 

[Agent Bruce]

No good having the technology if you don't use it. It would be better for the game and save all the arguing afterwards about whether it was or it wasn't.

 

[TheLittleGeordie]

"rooneys blatant elbow on Pederson"
Edit it quick, you appear to have gotten it confused with another 'incident'

 

[Rafa's Championship Party]

FIFA won't do it as they want it the same at all levels, yet last year went to Durham for the cricket, one week the game was on SKY TV, therefore there was video replay on debatable incidents, the next week there wasn't and a clear mistake was made. So this its got to be the same for everyone is a joke.

 

[Blacker-than-Knight]

The simple answer is to actively use the 4th official who is usually a top referee, they should be far more actively involved and could quite easily have a review screen on the touchline, the other problem seems to be the assistants lack of vision or unwillingness to make a decision at times.

 

[Agent Bruce]

The ref looks at the assistant, the assistant looks at the ref and neither of them do anything. Why can't they just react instantly to what they see.

The crowd see things and react immediately, it's not such a hard thing to do.

 

[LTF]

I know it is going back to the Rooney incident but whilst we know nothing could be done to alter the result of the game, it was an act of violence which should not be ignored. If he has cheated in some way, i.e. handled the ball you may think, "Well it's one of those", it happens he was lucky the Ref missed it. How do the FA rescind a red card if it is challenged?

 

[iToons]

One could argue that you cant judge the offside rule through technology since its a split second decision but if we replace Linesmen with a camera following the back line whilst a bloke is watching that camera, the match can continue while the guy watching the camera decides whether the attacking player was offside or not. If the attacker scores, that allows the guy time to check whether he was offside or not before making a decision. If the attacker doesn't score then it's fine and no decision needs to be made.