Coming sooner or later. Good or bad? FOOTBALL history was made this weekend in the United States where, in a game between New York Red Bulls II and Orlando City B, video review technology was used for the first time in a professional match. The International Football Association Board this year gave permission for their Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system to be trialled in the American third division, the United Soccer League (USL), with one eye on rolling the technology out across the world for the 2018-19 season. As part of the trial, an additional referee sits in a booth with access to video replays from all available cameras and angles. His job is to advise the head referee on ‘game-changing’ decisions, such as goals, penalty decisions, red cards and cases of mistaken identity. This weekend’s match between the reserve sides from the Red Bulls and Orlando City saw the technology used for the first time, with referee Ismail Elfath and VAR Allen Chapman making the historic decisions. Elfath and Chapman invoked the use of replay technology on two incidents deemed controversial in the match. please log in to view this image Referee Ismail Elfath signals to the players that he will check the decision using video technology.Source:Supplied The first came in the 35th minute where Orlando defender Conor Donovan fouled New York forward Junior Flemmings on a counter-attack. Elfath’s immediate decision was to award a foul outside the Orlando box, but a review was called for as it was not clear whether or not Donovan was the last defender. Upon inspection of the video it was determined that the 20-year-old was indeed the last man and he was subsequently sent off for denying a goalscoring opportunity. The second review came with ten minutes to play in the match, where Orlando’s Kyle McFadden received a second yellow card after the severity of his tackle on Florian Valot was reviewed and deemed worthy of a booking. please log in to view this image After reviewing several angles, Elfath decides to send off Orlando’s Conor Donovan.Source: Supplied Early reports of the trail have been positive, with NYRB II boss John Wolyniec saying that the use of video replay technology didn’t have a negative impact on the match. “It’s a credit to MLS and to USL that they want to be on the front foot as far as technology, the game of soccer, advancing the game of soccer and advancing the product,” Wolyniec told reporters after the match.
Use it for me. Bored of people bitching and moaning about refereeing decisions. Let them try disagree with video footage based decisions... Pretty sure they still will. Big Brother is out to get us.
I don't like technology in football. In the not too distant past, when the ball pinged off my shin at a strange angle on some mudbath of a pitch each Sunday morning, I was essentially playing, despite perhaps a minor difference in quality, the same game as Man Utd, Barcelona, or even Sunderland had played that same weekend. If you add technology to the elite levels of the game you take something away from amateur players and the simplicity that has made football the global game.
I don't think lads playing Tennis on the local courts, Cricket on the local oval or Rugby on their local playing fields are playing with Hawkeye/Snicko/a video ref and they're still the same games that the pros play.
But that's my point, football is as popular as it is because its so simple. Only tennis comes close to the global popularity of football. Admittedly cricket and rugby were more complicated before the addition of technology but adding that technology to football only increases its level of complication.
I don't see it personally. It just ensures the right decision is made. The world's changing and sport's going to change with it. When, not if.
My older age says it should not be allowed simply based on marginal decisions are part of the make up of football. We have three referees looking after the flow of the game and the sooner people live with their decisions, right or wrong, the better for me. When the game is reduced to sorting out who was last defender and red or yellow card then the passion and commitment goes out of the game. Red, yellow or none, let the ref decide.
I'm all for it, it means more correct decisions will be made and ideally every decision should be correct.
Not sure on this one. It's "how far do you go?" Technically, against the mags last season, Sissokho was on the field when he took a throw in around 30 seconds before they scored. This changed the game (kind of) but would a foul throw he included? Every decision at every point of a game impacts on what happens. If a defender trips over accidentally and gets a defensive free kick as the attacker is about to score, would they give a drop ball? It's a game changing decision which, I guess, would still be made by the on field ref. If he got it wrong then you can't necessarily give a goal but it is a game changer!
Against for me. Sometimes there are grey areas in football even after showing replays from 6 different angles. If some video referee makes a decision deemed wrong by, lets say 90% of the viewing public, after seeing it numerous times on his telly, then he'll be lynched. In cricket umpires have become lazy because they now rely heavily on replays. If this comes into football I can just picture the referee sitting on the centre circle on a deckchair supping an exotic drink with a brolly in it!
Contentious decisions are part of the folklore of the game. Within the space of 20 years, England were involved in two World Cup-defining moments that are still talked about and debated decades later. With video technology there will never be another 'Russian Linesman' or 'Hand of God'. Its undeniable that those events have become defining cultural moments in English football and without such events the game loses part of its sole.
Whether the ball crosses the goal line and possibly offsides that results in goals. Anything else will cause complications.
I'd have it for diving. I'd prefer the blight of modern technology and replays to the blight of diving.
Lets say 90% of dives are obvious when seen on replays. There is that 10% where people can argue whether it is or isnt even after seeing a replay. If a referee with a telly decides that he didnt dive whilst the majority of the footballing world decides that he did then there will be hell on and the video ref would have to sneak out of the stadium. At least the ref on the pitch can hide behind here and now 'human error', the ref watching the video will be ****ting himself, 'eeeee I dont know, cant decide, lets give the diver the benefit of the doubt!' Another question, will these video replays be beamed onto the large screens at the stadium? If not as a supporter at the ground I would be pretty anxious to see what the video ref is seeing. If it is shown on the screen a wrong decision cold cause riots!
The crowd sees the replays at Tennis, Rugby/Cricket matches so I'd have thought so. Technology won't help 100% of the time but if 99% of diving twats are being punished for diving it will soon dry up.
Cricket, tennis, Rugby etc are all stop/start games which affords appeals for decisions. Ours is a free flowing game until the ref blows or the ball is out of play. Chances could be lost if it is found that the ref got it right or there had been no infringement thereby penalising the team that had not created an offence,
Today there is a vast difference between the amateur game and the professional game. A wrong decision can cost a club millions of pounds in lost revenue due to a lower placing in the league, or worse still relegation. The pro game is so much quicker these days, because players no longer drink 10 pints and smoke 20 ***s the night before a match. Modern day players are athletes, some of whom are able to sprint almost as fast as an Olympic sprinter, so it's no wonder that match officials sometimes struggle to keep up with play and miss things. You've only got to look at previously relegated clubs to see what relegation can do to decimate a clubs squad, so I'm in favour of technology in the professional game.
But am I right in saying that clubs do not show replays of potentially controversial decisions on big screens at present in case it causes hell on?
