Should we use technology for more than just goal line decisions?

I personally think we should. I'm sick of all this cobblers about "having faith in humans" and being traditional and all that ****.

I don't think technology should be used in every single situation, but I believe it could be used to decide critical decisions like penalties. If the referee thinks there's a strong possibility it is a penalty, he can review it, or if it looked like a penalty from his angle, he could point to the spot, but see a replay, and see for definite that it is a pen, and if it is, then at least we can be sure and no one complains, and if it turns out a player has dived, the cheater can receive punishment for his simulation.

This would give games fairer outcomes, and stop diving for pens. So what if there's 7-8 mins added time? It doesn't really matter how much is added on to the end, as long as the correct amount of minutes are played.

 

Nice idea Tash, but many against technology in the game worried it would be disruptive and slow things down, owing to the amount of diving and play acting we have at the moment it probably would be disruptive.
I once said a while back, (as a joke) players should be named and shamed officially, obviously results can't be changed but some sort of retrospective action might be appropriate to persistent offenders, it may make them think twice.

 

Surely stopping the clock would be fairer if we're going to use technology like Rugby? Don't see why we don't do that now with injuries to be honest.

The problem with your proposal is that humans are actually still able to feck it up, until we have a refbot who can tattoo "cheat" with lasers into the skulls of divers... Decisions, even in slowed down replays, are not always straight forward, in which case you have to apply benefit of the doubt, but does that go to attacker or defender again? And if it's attacker, what if the tackle is last man, should we send off the chap who may have just done the greatest Habib Beye like track back of all time?

That's why Fifa just want the definite, did it cross the line, yes or no, technology. All else is potentially subjective and is just as likely to be abused as normal refereeing positions.

It would be interesting to see what it'd be like, though, and I don't see why they couldn't at least have a friendly match played out under these conditions so the whole world could see what it'd be like...

 

Perhaps they should do the same to Sunderland fans... Or do you all still love Martin?

 

I understand your point. But it would not take long for teams/managers to say that in situations where the ref didn't go to the tech and the tackle was a bad un etc then the ref was wrong not too etc....

The reality is there will always be doubt in game regardless.... However. Once the game has finished a panel could review certain incidents and retrospectively give out punishment. Referees are only human and thus forme and as always the refs decision is final.

 

We don't wish to sanitise the game, and who knows, if we did take technology further, some would be calling for to do without ref's completely, where would you draw the line?
We'd lose at least half of our chants.

 

No need for it, perfectly good cameras around the ground. Adopt a rugby video ref system but only allow 2 appeals per half. If an appeal is successful you keep them, if not you lose one.

Would sort out more than just the goal line controversies but would also stop appeals dominating the game

 

they already use technology,
they pick up on things that the ref doesn't see and ban players latter.

So why not use it during the game
If the incident is serious enough to warrant a red card, then the game should be stopped anyway
if the incident only merits a yellow card then yellow card the person at the next stoppage of play
most incidents where technology would be used is when the game has stopped anyway, ie a goal, a penalty, or a bad foul
how can this slow the game up

 

Some decisions will be debatable, and I agree technology wont make it straight forward, but different refs have different opinions and their own way of dealing with things, with or without technology, but at least with technology you can see blatant dives and handballs on the line, like the one Larsson did against us a couple of derbies ago, and things like that, that were unseen before.

I don't see why violent conduct is punished after games, but diving and cheating isn't.

 

Goal line only for me.

 

Why? It accounts for only a fraction of controversial game changing decisions

 

No. Technology should only be used to prove facts. Very few penalties these days are clear cut, certain penalties, it's all a matter of interpretation. Using GLT can be instant and it's a factual case of "Over the line" or "Not over the line". There's no in between. All other sports are the same. Tennis, in or out. Rugby, Try or no try. Cricket, Wicket or no wicket. There could potentially be a challenge system, but a maximum of one challenge per game per team.

 

That's the sort of thing I think we should do. Like in cricket, a couple of challenges a game.

I don't think it should be used 20x per game. But I think teams should be allowed to challenge things, and if we only did a couple per game, it would only stop it for 1-2 extra mins.

 

THISSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!
DOLE OUT suspensions to the serial divers or fine them. I'm perplexed why nothing has been done to try to stop the diving. Ivanovic, Suarez, A Young... It's horribly tough enough to referee a game without the diving as it is...

Also, I think the goal-line sensor technology needs to be in place as well.

 

I think the problem with retrospective action against divers would be the possibility of affecting match outcomes. 0-0, 85th minute and a player dives to try and win a penalty which is given and converted. After the game it's shown to be a clear dive. What do the FA do next? Do they revoke the goal causing someone to get relegated/knocked out of the cup, or do they just hit the cheating bastard with the ban hammer and fine them? Refereeing after the game has ended could bring up a lot of controversy, more-so than what currently surrounds the game.

 

For me often the decision as to a dive or not or a foul or not is very debatable even with technology. The game could be endlesley stopped and still the wrong decision reached. Someone has to make a decision and that is the ref with help if he wants it from the linesmen. Possibly if he gives a foul anyway he could ask for video ref help as to whether or not it was in the box for a penalty or outside the box if he isnt actually sure or he could be advised if wrong as the game has already been stopped for the foul anyway. Other than that its goalline only for me.

 

Game's would take twice as long if every controversial decision was looked at.

 

I think they should use xray HD cameras at the next World Cup when scanning the crowd for Brazilian hotties.

GLT is a load of crap. Both recent incidents (England/Ukraine and Newcastle/Everton) showed how football simply evens itself out. Ukraine "goal" would have been given, yet was offside. Everton "goal" would have been given, yet from a free-kick that should never have been. The problem is that's exactly what will happen - there'll be something goes wrong, ref misses it, play carries on, ball JUST goes in, justice not done. Besides that, didn't FIFA find that during the last 20 years of Champs League, total matches were over 1000, total GLT incidents....zero. Summat like that - basically saying it would have such a minimal impact, it just isn't worth it. Sh*t happens, it just does.

The more pressing need is reviews after the game (De Jong, I'm looking at you, you hooligan bast'd). Bad incidents (wrong red cards, dangerous play) should simply be reviewed after the game, whether in a referee report or not. All they need to do is allow a ref himself to review the game, and re-highlight anything that might have been wrong - what's wrong with that?

 

Well, iirc there was a very dodgy goal line decision in the Liverpool - Chelsea CL semi final a few years ago. Liverpool went on to win the match and the trophy.

As for the late punishment, there's every chance that could equally be like a second punishment for the opposing team. Example, player dives in the box and wins a penalty, scored, game ends 1-0. The player gets retrospectively banned, meaning he misses 3 games against teams who are rivals to the original losing team. Those 3 rivals all win, meaning the team who lost by being cheated, now lose even more ground on their rivals due to the punishment.