Do you have a link? Every item I've read on it says it fails to meet the requirements. In any event, even if it works, it'll make a handful; of difference globally. There are far better things to waste money on before it.
You're just being silly. Each player and the ball should be followed by their own individual camera. A panel could then continually review each camera angle to get a full and complete picture of the happenings. Marching bands, beer vendors and concession retailers could use the down time when teh panel are reviewing to display their goods. In fact, every fan could have their own monitor so tehy could view the camera of their choice, and a text line could be set up so they too could contribute. That'll help those that have to watch a live game get the same effect as the fortunate ones watching on TV.
Letting technology make decisions for us? Isn't that how Skynet started? Though seriously, technology might work for lesser sports such as Rugby and Tennis - but football is the sport, it is a great sport, and any change such as this should have real justification. Technology that may or may not be fully accurate, would be used sparingly, and for things that officials usually get right anyway is certainly not justification.
Some good ideas but I still want to see a robot ref. One of the commentators who's commentating ( it's what they do) on the Euro's used to do Robot Wars so we're heading in the right direction . Introducing a robot ref is the next, logical step to make. I'm not fussed it's really small like a Big Trak or really big like one of those 'At At' things off of The Star Wars. They could be in place by the next world cup.
the problem is how far back through a game should the video ref analyse ? the decision should be a yes/no "did it cross the line?" though we know the video ref would be watching the last few seconds and may see handballs / offsides in the immediate run-up and be powerless to call on it . All around the pitch things are missed that lead up to goals its part of what makes football a talking point after the whistle - i am in favour though
I don't agree with this viewpoint that we should strive to maintain incorrect decisions so we can still talk about them. If it wasn't for all these bad calls we coujld just talk about the football instead, we could be discussing great goals or saves instead of injustices.
Does anyone remember a game against Brighton at BP on a Tuesday night around '90 '91 when the ball was stuck in between the net & the post for about 5 seconds when their defender couldn't get it out? Final score 0-0! As it turns out this 'goal' made no difference to the final outcome of the group, however it does raise issues AGAIN with FIFA & Blatter in particular. However that's a different topic that is in the same league as politics & religion! Answer to half time, pre match entertainment is.... Cheerleader strippers!
The problem is when it is available in rugby, obvious decisions are referred to the video ref when they could easily be given without it, the ref becomes to rely on it and use it to 'check' the decision he's made is right rather than use it to help him when he doesn't see something. As such if there is a video ref at a game most tries have a 30-60 sec delay before the are confirmed this kills the atmosphere as the initial excitement of scoring has died down. I'm not saying it would be exactly the same in football, but I can see it getting used just because it is there and the ref wants to double check his decision and not because he actually needs it.
