• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.
  • Our prediction league is now available for the 25/26 season. Click here to join.

Video Assistants!!

Do you want video assistance to be used in games?

  • Yes

    Votes: 44 73.3%

  • No

    Votes: 13 21.7%

  • Cheese on toast

    Votes: 3 5.0%
  • Total voters
    60
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
The Cowboy said:
Firstly, they're not incompetent. They're calling it as they see it. Secondly, he didn't ASSUME anything, he called it as he saw it.

There is simply no proof that videos won't just cause even more contention.
Click to expand...

Every single replay of that incident clearly shows the ball going off of Vokes arm. I cant't see why the split second view of an individual many yards away, trying to see through a pack of bodies is preferable to clean video evidence
 

The Cowboy said:
Define 'correct'.
Click to expand...

I guess you're trying to point out the fact that some decisions are contentious, which is a fair point but I think the refs will still have the final say but they'll have a more informed decision by listening to what the 4th official is telling them. Refs get big decisions wrong, call penalties wrong, send wrong players off at world cups. Any self respecting professional sport wouldn't allow that to continue when it has the means and technology to stop it from happening.

Every single professional sport that has introduced video footage to help officiate the game has improved it's standard of decision making in games, otherwise they wouldn't have kept it.

Even if you're against video evidence surely when it's tested in the FA cup it'll be proven to be unfit for purpose. On that basis I don't understand why anyone is objecting to it for just one season, if they truly believe it won't be a success then it'll be proven when it's a huge failure next season.

There were some people objecting to the removal of the backpass rule, objecting to goal line technology. They've all been big improvements to the game over non contentious decisions. I see no reason to think video technology won't be the same.
 
USABlue said:
Every single replay of that incident clearly shows the ball going off of Vokes arm. I cant't see why the split second view of an individual many yards away, trying to see through a pack of bodies is preferable to clean video evidence
Click to expand...
Contact is only one aspect of handball, you have ball-to-hand, and the 'unnatural position' thing. So even if the video shows contact on an arm, that's not conclusive. So who's decision is taken - the refs, or the video refs?

Offsides would be a million times worse.

I see why people want it, but it's a terrible direction to go in.
 
The Cowboy said:
Contact is only one aspect of handball, you have ball-to-hand, and the 'unnatural position' thing. So even if the video shows contact on an arm, that's not conclusive. So who's decision is taken - the refs, or the video refs?

Offsides would be a million times worse.

I see why people want it, but it's a terrible direction to go in.
Click to expand...
My point was the ref (due to his poor vantage point) said the ball went off a Swansea player when it clearly was handled by a burnley player. Ball to hand and "unnatural position" are irrelevant, Burnley shouldve never had a pen as it never touches a swans player. I understand your agrument if it was a handball situation like in the UTD game this morning. I just think there are some very clear cut calls that would be simply resolved given a 2nd look.
 
The Cowboy said:
Contact is only one aspect of handball, you have ball-to-hand, and the 'unnatural position' thing. So even if the video shows contact on an arm, that's not conclusive. So who's decision is taken - the refs, or the video refs?

Offsides would be a million times worse.

I see why people want it, but it's a terrible direction to go in.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty confident the ref will have the final decision on anything but he'll be able to ask the video assistant if he wants a 2nd opinion on an incident. Surely that's better than just having to guess, which is what refs do if they're not sure at present.

I don't think the video official will be used for offside calls, just key incidents.
 

whiteshadow said:
I'm pretty confident the ref will have the final decision on anything but he'll be able to ask the video assistant if he wants a 2nd opinion on an incident. Surely that's better than just having to guess, which is what refs do if they're not sure at present.

I don't think the video official will be used for offside calls, just key incidents.
Click to expand...
Offside is a key incident, no? It's by far and away the primary reason why iffy goals are given/disallowed.

I know that there are decisions that refs get wrong, that video could easily clear up. I'm not denying that. But there are far more which endless reviews don't provide a conclusive answer. So just let the ref get on with it.
 
On this point though, they just said the key phrase on MOTD:

'If he can't see it, he should've give it'. Yes! Penalties are game-changers. Not giving a surefire pen is far better than giving a pen that turns out to be illegal.

This is where the refs need to step up and stop being so ready to award pens and red cards so willingly.
 

The Cowboy said:
Offside is a key incident, no? It's by far and away the primary reason why iffy goals are given/disallowed.

I know that there are decisions that refs get wrong, that video could easily clear up. I'm not denying that. But there are far more which endless reviews don't provide a conclusive answer. So just let the ref get on with it.
Click to expand...

You're right on that, sorry. I just tried finding out some more info on it, not 100% but reading one newspapers website it does sound like offsides are included in it.

I need to find more info on how it's implemented but I'm assuming maybe they judge any offside infringements once goals are scored, rather than have input on every possible offside decision.

I get why you've got reservations the more I think about it. It'll all come down to how it's implemented and what exact input they have on decisions. It'll be interesting and worth trying I reckon.
 
The Cowboy said:
What makes you think the video assistant will be more impartial than the ref? They'll have to be refs as well.

I hate the idea of video ref. It's a definite no from me.
Click to expand...

This is what i agree with, take that united game yesterday for instance, there's every chance the video ref may have thought mings' stamp was accidental. And also thought ibrahimovic's elbow was unintentional too, it's still all subjective. But that can't change, retrospective action handed out? It's still subjective, so for things like that, i agree.

My main worry is that people these days don't seem to understand diving, people are saying if there's contact, it's not a dive and i'm totally against this, because i believe it should be hard enough contact for actually constitute obstruction. But then again, that leaves it open to subjective thinking, whereas having "any contact is a foul", is at least a law.


The main reason i want video tech is to stop all this pulling, holding and cheating that goes on at every set play. I think if they start using it for that and start by saying, everything benefits the attacker. e.g. if three strikers are pulling, but one defender is also pulling someone else, give a penalty. This will stop the pulling eventually from defenders and then any done by any attackers (even if nowhere near the ball) could be punished when viewing a replay. The amount of time taken out of the game by celebrations etc, in that time, video refs could have looked at the replay and determined if there was any infringements. ... again subjective, but hey, everyone should notice pulling and shoving.

There will still be controversies, but it would see a massive clamp down on cheating imo which will only improve the game, and then the absolute howlers like we saw at swansea (how crucial could that have been at the end of the season?) would be eradicated.


The way i see it, with all the moaning and surrounding of the refs that goes on at big decisions, there is much more time taking out of the game than there would be to take one or two looks at a replay. Football is not the free flowing game it used to be, there's oh so many stoppages.
 
USABlue said:
How's it slow it down anymore than 10 players surrounding the ref while he tries to sort out what just happened? Couldve watched the replay 3 times at least today while Friend was deciding what to do with ibra
Click to expand...
He didn't have to 'do' anything - just listen while Ibra ('he jumped into my elbow') told him what was what
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top