Wenger says yes to video, I say no!
Posted by Martin in Arsenal, Arsene Wenger, Referees | 26 October 2006
Following the gunners defeat against CSKA Moscow where Henry was ruled to have handled the ball, it’s not surprising that Arsene has come out and raised the thorny question of using video footage help decide the correct cause of action for such incidents.
There have been arguments in the past that the cost of such technology would be a barrier to it’s adoption. However, that doesn’t stand true anymore. Most clubs use video to analyse what’s happened after the game, so it’s not as if the technology doesn’t exist.
There are those who hold up rugby and cricket as prime examples of where video technology has worked and so why not adopt it for football. But if you take cricket as an example, it’s such a stop start game, that having to wait the odd minute or two, rarely interrupts the flow of the game. Equally with rugby, whilst a bit more flowing, having to wait a minute to see whether the try was over the line or not, doesn’t seem to have a big impact.
Football on the other hand is a much more flowing game (especially the way Arsenal play!). So you get interruptions, fouls accounting for most of them, but I wouldn’t like to see additional interruptions holding the game up.
O.k so it’s starts with refs asking for a video check on a potential penalty, then it moves onto was it a foul just outside the box or in it, then it’s was the player really offside or not and before you know it, was that throw in o.k. or not. I think it’s a slippery slope!
Call me old fashioned if you like, but I think it should be down to the officials on the pitch to make the decisions.
After all, if all the decisions were perfect, we’d have less to argue about!
Comments
I think though that the implication is that it's STILL the ref's call.
But he can goto video for clarification
OR
the 4th/5th ref (on vid) can alert him when they see something, then he can make a judgement call.
It can be done intelligently, after all, you've got to say that MOST of the time (whether we like them or not) the ref is probably the one with the most brains on the field.
This is an easy one, mate. Yes we SHOULD use video. This would be one case where we can really learn from American football. In the U.S., it's quite simple: twice per half a head coach for either team can go ahead and drop a red flag on the field signifying they want to CHALLENGE a call on the pitch. There are only a few specific types of calls that can be challenged. (For proper football, I would say those would be balls crossing the goalline, offsides calls, handballs, and red cards.) This way, coaches only can challenge things that are truly game-changing, and their incentive is to never challenge unless soemthing really bad happens. I think this could easily be adopted. Le Boss could have challenged the onsides call on Etoo's goal in the CL last year... as well as Henry's fake handball in the CL this year. But its so limited that it won't interrrupt game flow. What do you think?
I don't see the point, personally.
Now, at least, when there is a goal, you celebrate or get depressed right away, at the worse maybe you realize a flag has been raised or foul been blown, but the elation is quasi-instantaneous.
But in ice hockey, for example, whenever there is a goal you are always waiting to be sure it is a true goal. It is not as bad as it used to be, because the referee does not go to replay as much as when they first introduced it, but it is still a pain.
You end up cheering the video judge harder than the player who scored, which is pretty ridiculous really.
I have to say, I'm none to convinced either. Should we really allow managers to question the refs decisions? Lets leave it to the refs.
Isn't part of football arguing after the event? Take this away and we won't have those entertaining discussions that go on for hours and hours by so called experts (including me). I don't agree with Le Boss on this one.
Well, simple it should be the referee who should ask for video technology as they make mistakes, I think there should be a statistic for each referee for the mistakes they have made in fottball to judge them. Let's say if they make more than 10 mistakes, they should be suspended for the season. Simple, with this kind of pressure on the referee. They will ask for video technology. Referee is saying that they can make mistakes and it is excusable because they are human, that is wrong. Referee have video technology to help them. If they chose not to use it, I say crucify them and suspend them after a certain amount of mistakes.
There are natural breaks in the game for goals, penalties, injuries, red and yellow cards.
Video review in any of these instances should be automatic and the ref told by short wave radio if anything untoward has happened before play recommences. This will not stop the flow of the game and will help ensure correct decisions. Corners, free kicks and throw ins should not be involved as they may be taken quickly.
I say yes, as long as it is only questionable goals and red cards that the pauses are made for.
if the referees didnt make mistakes all the bloody time, it wouldnt be needed. and the mistakes they are making can be pretty serious.
really, there are only a few occasions in a game where it would be needed, there are not that many really contentious decisions in a game, and if an official was watching a tv all game, he would see the fuckups and be able to let the ref know.
the ref and linesman could do their job as per normal and the only time video would come into it would be when the ref is alerted to a serious mistake, or if he asked for help, which would take about 5 seconds for the tv official to tell him what he saw.
Of course it makes sense to use video.
1. Forget about the cost. There's tons of money available in football. Very lame excuse.
2. A goal deprived or wrongly given decides a game. You don't want that to happen in an important game (like qualifying or knockout, or even semi/finals).
3. Referees in England are, sadly, very poor, makes mistakes. Look at the WC. Partly due to speed of the game (all the more they need help from video). And the FA's not doing anything about it. That's why you see players complaining - almost every week.
4. Spoil the flow of game? Well, there's always a way to do it without breaking the flow. Notice how refs. let game play on despite some fouls commited but later on penalise players. It is possible to find a way.
5. Win or lose, you want to fair.
video should be used. no question about it. are we going to allow officials to ruin the game because of their inability to spot certain incidents correctly, when a technology is readily available to help reduce monumental errors? it is more depressing when a legitimate goal is disallowed than waiting for a confirmation from video judge.
