I've said it many times before. I think they should introduce video-refereeing to football.

Why? Because I think referees make too many bad decisions nowadays. The problem is that just one bad decision can change the whole outcome of the game.

You saw it this night in the game between Portugal and England. In my opinion the campbell goals shoul've never been disallowed. But that's not the point I want to make clear...

The referee at that moment was miles away from the spot. The linesman allowed the goal, but the referee turned down his decision, and he thought the goal should not be allowed. I'm not having problems with referees making decisions, but I've got problems with referees making decisions based on 'nothing'...

Imagine we would have had video-refereeing at Euro 2004. At that moment, the referee could've just stopped the game for a minute or two, watch some video-replays, and afterwards make his decision. It works in the NHL (North American Ice Hockey League) and in the NFL (American Football league in the USA), so why not in soccer?

There have been some really bad decisions made by referees the last couple of years. Remember Italy and Spain against South Corea two years ago? Spain and Italy would've both won from South Corea if the ref had made good decisions...

I've said many times that video-refereeing should be introduced, but many times people tell me it's not a good decision because than the game stops. I actually don't get that point. For example Rui Costa's goal against England a few hours ago; the celebrations took for over 2 minutes! In two minutes the referee should have plenty of time to watch some video-replays in order to be able to make a good decision.

Also substitutions take a long time, and sometimes free-kicks and goal-kicks...

I just think it would be more fair for the both teams playing football. I just think it happens too often that a team wins because of a referee's bad decision. Therefore I say: Get those camera's to the side of the pitch and let's have football-matches with referees having the possibilty to watch video-replays!

nope.

video ref would kill the game.

I say yes.

Time to modernize one aspect of the game for the better. Game breaking errors by the refs are entirely too common.

Originally posted by ShearerM4
nope.

video ref would kill the game.

Agreed. Sometimes the decisions go against us and sometimes they're on our side. That's sports for you.

YES, Because those 2 minutes that the players waste ARGUING with the ref can be used for the ref or 4th official to review the Replay from 2 or 3 angles and come to a better conclusion.

nope.

video ref would kill the game


Well, I'd like to hear why...

It's not that they'd use it for every decision. That doesn't happen either in the NHL or NFL. Just on the decisive moments. It wouldn't happen more than one or two times in a game that the refs steps to the side of the pitch to watch some replays...

I don't think it would kill the game. There are already a lot of moments in a football-match without any action, so 2 minutes of a match wouldn't be too much being asked I think...

No to video refrees! On the spot decsions help make the games exciting.

i am for it but it would slow down the match so much

Don't like it. slows down the game too much. If you've ever seen NFL video replays, they take anywhere from 5-10 minutes.

Ya well im for bcuz after all the bad decisions i've seen in my lifetime im really starting to get pissed off on refs making the wrong decision because there so slow to rin back to the other side of the pitch. I vote yes for the videos.

i've always said, video ref ONLY on two things:

1. Penalty Decisions
2. Goals

Penalties and goals are already natural stoppages in the game and wouldn't slow the game down. Fouls, offsides, ball on the line, etc. should not be reviewed.

Originally posted by illafied
i've always said, video ref ONLY on two things:

1. Penalty Decisions
2. Goals

Penalties and goals are already natural stoppages in the game and wouldn't slow the game down. Fouls, offsides, ball on the line, etc. should not be reviewed.

Agreed.

Originally posted by illafied
i've always said, video ref ONLY on two things:

1. Penalty Decisions
2. Goals

Penalties and goals are already natural stoppages in the game and wouldn't slow the game down. Fouls, offsides, ball on the line, etc. should not be reviewed.

Red cards?

No. Because some people think it was a goal and some people think it wasn't so either way a video referee will decide on a desicion and either way someone wont agree with it, so what good would it do?.

No way. Luck is part of football, and wrong referee calls are too. It's part of the game.

Originally posted by Spurs4Life
No. Because some people think it was a goal and some people think it wasn't so either way a video referee will decide on a desicion and either way someone wont agree with it, so what good would it do?.
yeah people would be unhappy, but it'd be the right call. they can complain all they want but the proof would be right there in the video.

Nah, it would disrupt the flow of games too much.

Luck is part of the game. People get real emotional about some of the games and complain about referee decisions and the like. It's like taking away drama out of a movie. All that's left is just bad acting and special effects done by computer.

Originally posted by Nuno79
Agreed. Sometimes the decisions go against us and sometimes they're on our side. That's sports for you.

... says the Portuguese fan.

i would say just 2 opportunities for each side max 2 mins tha woul not slow the game in any aspect

Originally posted by americangreg
Imagine we would have had video-refereeing at Euro 2004. At that moment, the referee could've just stopped the game for a minute or two, watch some video-replays, and afterwards make his decision. It works in the NHL (North American Ice Hockey League) and in the NFL (American Football league in the USA), so why not in soccer?


the reason video-replay shouldn't be allowed is because just as u said in your post...it would AMERICANIZE the sport....that's what we don't want happening.....why not? if you hear carl fletcher's analysis on TSN......that's what North Americans do to soccer...they butcher the sport.......and the korea stuff......who really cares what happened 2 years ago? spain and italy had their chance at euro and blew it, and that was fair...so oh well tough luck........:kader:

Originally posted by santino
the reason video-replay shouldn't be allowed is because just as u said in your post...it would AMERICANIZE the sport....that's what we don't want happening.....why not? if you hear carl fletcher's analysis on TSN......that's what North Americans do to soccer...they butcher the sport.......and the korea stuff......who really cares what happened 2 years ago? spain and italy had their chance at euro and blew it, and that was fair...so oh well tough luck........:kader:

........

It would "Americanize" the sport, and then you talk about a ******* Canadian television network's game announcer. What, are you ******* retarded?

hey bud....canada is america junior;)

oh, and did i mention TSN is owned by ESPN...an AMERICAN company if i recall correctly? f*cking retard

NHL and NFL the game stops anyway.. in the nfl it stops after every play.. so it doesnt affect the flow..

videoref in soccer.. no.. never..

There are natural stoppages in play in soccer as already pointed out. They could easily adjust the concept of replay to fit soccer matches (and so as not to "americanize" the sport... which makes no sense, but a different topic altogether). Limit the review of a goal to 2 minutes. It really shouldn't take any longer if you have cameras in the right places and celebrations last just as long and no one is calling to eliminate all expressions of joy from the sport. Cards and penalties outside the box wouldn't be reviewed, and probably not even in the box because they are judgment calls and always will be.

It is fine to argue that it is pure and traditional to take the good with the bad. It is a game created and played by humans not highly-accurate computers. However replays could prevent biased-refereeing on big calls, could it not?

there is no question the refeere has made the right decision...the other english player has attacked the keeper in the keeperzone and has avoided the keepers chance to fight for the ball..to attack keepers in the keeperzone who fight for the ball are not allowed...there are clear rules...

pitt

Originally posted by santino
the reason video-replay shouldn't be allowed is because just as u said in your post...it would AMERICANIZE the sport....that's what we don't want happening.....why not? if you hear carl fletcher's analysis on TSN......that's what North Americans do to soccer...they butcher the sport.......and the korea stuff......who really cares what happened 2 years ago? spain and italy had their chance at euro and blew it, and that was fair...so oh well tough luck........:kader:


americaniSe it ;)

the z is americanised ;)

__________________________________________________ __


how about lets not have video referees :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Fogs
There are natural stoppages in play in soccer as already pointed out. They could easily adjust the concept of replay to fit soccer matches (and so as not to "americanize" the sport... which makes no sense, but a different topic altogether). Limit the review of a goal to 2 minutes. It really shouldn't take any longer if you have cameras in the right places and celebrations last just as long and no one is calling to eliminate all expressions of joy from the sport. Cards and penalties outside the box wouldn't be reviewed, and probably not even in the box because they are judgment calls and always will be.

It is fine to argue that it is pure and traditional to take the good with the bad. It is a game created and played by humans not highly-accurate computers. However replays could prevent biased-refereeing on big calls, could it not?


yes, and we can wait two minutes for every offside, every shot on goal that hits the inside of the post, every tackle in the box......... while we'ere at it, maybe we may as well make stoppages to set up plays, and maybe allow them to pick up the ball and trow it forward so that guys can run to the other end and score a touchdown :rolleyes:

football is a flowing game, and everything is done to minimise stoppages. if you happened to know the rules, or even bother to read them, you would realise that offsides and fouls are "in the opinion of the referee" or "considered by the referee"..... therefore no matter what you think, the referee was right. and how exactly do you expect the referee to see this replay? he goes off the field and looks at it himself? or maybe a video referee..... but then where is the consistency in calls if thirty billion different people are making decisisons



look, i'm sorry that football isn't more similar to gridion, but unfortunately it is. it did not become the most popular game in the world by accident, and it certainly didnt become the top sport by immitating other sports. the fact is, referees and refereeing errors are part of the game. if you want everything to be flawless, we may as well make perfect robots play it (because they won't make bad challenges or stupid passbacks) and watch the perfect defences and goalkeepers hold out for amazingly boring 0-0 results :rolleyes:

my idea...the 4th referee should 'do some homewrok on the game' if there's controversial decision...

i remember at 2002WC when a manager...(italy i think)...angrily shout to the first & fourth ref...then he showed his hand to a small tv (on the 4th ref bench) to see what's happen actually...

Originally posted by Parra Power
yes, and we can wait two minutes for every offside, every shot on goal that hits the inside of the post, every tackle in the box......... while we'ere at it, maybe we may as well make stoppages to set up plays, and maybe allow them to pick up the ball and trow it forward so that guys can run to the other end and score a touchdown :rolleyes:


I don't think anyone that even brings up the idea of video replays suggest stopping EVERY call, foul, offsides,etc , like you're pointing out. Nobody is saying that at all. We all know that would kill the game. What most people are calling for are video refs for goals/disputed goals only, which happens what, three to five times a game on average? How is that going to slow down the game when it's pretty much stopped when the goal is allowed/disallowed anyways.

of course it probably won't happen anytime soon. the only thing that'll probably make people change their minds is during a world cup final when one country gets shafted because of a disallowed goal and fans go nuts and people die because of it.

its stopped for 15 seconds of arguing and a freekick is taken........ five minutes to go and check whether or not it was a foul for those three to five times a game makes it immediately nearly half an hour longer.

modern world cups are pretty high security...... dunno if that will really happen too much

the most extravagent celebrations dont last as long as a video replay would

keep in mind that videos don't necessarily confirm everything. people still argue whether or not totti was hit or it was a dive, whether portugal's goalkeeper was impeded, whether or not the ball crossed the line in england v germany in 66, whether or not buffon's view was impeded in that one dissallowed goal in last year's champions league final, etc even after countless replays. we've got video replays here in rugby league and cricket and guess what.............. they make mistakes :o

Of course they can still make mistakes. The fact is that referees will have a better opportinity to make a correct decision.

And talking about the flow of the game, isn't Ice Hockey a flowing game? They only use video-replays when needed there, and that's what should happen here with football. And indeed, it would be a good thing to put the 4th official behind a tv-screen, not the referee himself. Then, the 4th official could already watch the replay, and by the time the ref gets to the side of the pitch it should only take about 30secs/1minute more...

That wouldn't slow down the game in my opinion...

Originally posted by Grunger0x
No way. Luck is part of football, and wrong referee calls are too. It's part of the game.

That is very true. Our sport would not be as fun to watch if there was no luck, that's what makes it interesting to watch and with video refereeing it would be less dramatic.

Refereeing a match is sort of like running a country, sometimes the leaders make mistakes (i.e. g.w.b) but you have to live with them and there's no turning back.

Besides, I don't think Campbell's goal should be allowed, from my view it looked like Terry was blocking Ricardo's path to the ball, but that's my opinion.

And I'm not English, maybe if I was I'd see it differently. But I'm also not Portuguese so I have a mutual outlook.

The ref made the correct call so this is a poor supporting reason for the case of video refs.

Totti diving - very close and even after replays you're right, it'd be a judgment call.
WC66 - If they had as many cameras on goal then as they do now, like the camera from inside the net, it'd be easy to see if that was a goal or not. Replay would be useful in a situation like this.
Maradona's hand of god - probably wouldn't exist if there was a replay system.
Buffon's view vs Real Madrid in CL semis - i think that was more due to the interpretation of the passive/offside rule, which FIFA still hasn't made clear. Nothing to do with a replay system.
Sol Campbell's goal - even with replays it's a judgment call.

Having the fourth official watch a replay and communicate to the ref on the pitch surely wouldn't take five minutes.

Yeah mistakes are going to happen and whatever system they do have will take a while to perfect, but i do think it'd reduce alot of the controversy and blown calls significantly.

campbell s goal was rightfully disallowed

lets face it portugal were better than
england

Originally posted by dudubrdx
lets face it portugal were better than
england
no one is denying that.

very often we don't agree even watching it on tv.


I say NO to videoref. There are other easier things to improve before that.

They should use a system similar to the NHL. It doesn't slow down the game at all.

It would only be used on goal scoring situations, and the play leading directly up to the goal, such as a long through ball to the striker who puts it in. Instead of the assistant raising his flag if it is very close, you just let play go on, and if ti goes in, check the replay.

In most games it would never be used. And in thsoe that it is, it would only come in 1 or 2 (maybe 3) times a game. And it would onyl be used once the ball is already in the goal, so it will have very little affect on the game.

Another thing I liked is what they do in south america sometimes, where the ref sprays a little line of powder on the field to mark the wall on free kicks. Actually saves time, because they don't sit there arguing about if the wall is too close.

Wow you people are still arguing. Football with video ref isnt football. Like i said, wrong referee calls are part of the game and that's what makes it so beautiful sometimes. What about we add timeouts and limited number of fouls? So we can transform football in NFL and NBA at the same time.

That would sincerely screw up the sport if you ask me. People still debate watching the video. If someone gets to a conclusion during the game, and someone still disagrees even after watching the video, what would we do? Decide it on coin toss?:crazyboy:

no. affect the flow of the game. waste time. if everything need to be decide by video refree. thats plenty of thing can be decide. disallowed goal, offside, red card, even keeper are in correct position whilte penalty taking also. so, no..no way nothing is perfect

Originally posted by Grunger0x
wrong referee calls are part of the game and that's what makes it so beautiful sometimes.

wrong calls arnt beautiful

wrong calls just piss everyone off

Originally posted by turnips
wrong calls arnt beautiful

wrong calls just piss everyone off
They're beautiful when it comes to luck and results. It pisses some people off, but they make some other people happy. That's why a minnow can be a giant sometimes. If the better team won 100% of the times, if referees didnt commit mistakes and if the world class players played well 100% of the time, football would be boring.