Yesterdays Linesman Judgement

[SpeedEFC]

Wasting their challenges? What if you get more than three of those decisions in a game? What if something happens in the first minute and a manager thinks, you know what best not waste our challenges as that looks a close call - but in fact turns out to be a clear goal? You're never going to eradicate incorrect decisions completely so I think the question is, is the effect on the nature of the game worth it?

I wasn't entirely clear before but when I said wasting challenges I meant using them cynically to waste time which would result in their challenges being used up; if they got the calls they flagged right then they would get that challenge back. Also, the odds of having three legitimate and significant (i.e. red cards, disallowed goals) calls going against you in a game are slim and if they do that game would be the exception that proves the rule. Overall though the 3 challenge video review system would do much more good than harm in my opinion, although I am heavily in favour of getting as much technology as possible in the hands of officials.

 

[DMOEFC]

Hi don't normally post here one of those "lurkers" but i have to add my 2 cents.

First of all doing the video replay like they do in hockey (im also in Canada) wont work, video replays take way to long in hockey as it is but I do feel there is a simple solution. There is already a 4th official so why cant he have a monitor, yesterday it would have taken him seconds to see it was a goal so why not allow him to review and tell the ref "its over the line". This would take no time at all. Im not saying use it for everything just goal incidents like last night.

I'll never understand why the 4th official can't help out the other officials by verifying if a ball went over the line or not, it could be implemented tomorrow and wouldn't change anything about the game except getting goal decisions correct.

 

[carlos_the_jackal]

I wasn't entirely clear before but when I said wasting challenges I meant using them cynically to waste time which would result in their challenges being used up; if they got the calls they flagged right then they would get that challenge back. Also, the odds of having three legitimate and significant (i.e. red cards, disallowed goals) calls going against you in a game are slim and if they do that game would be the exception that proves the rule. Overall though the 3 challenge video review system would do much more good than harm in my opinion, although I am heavily in favour of getting as much technology as possible in the hands of officials.

Ah right, makes more sense if they get to keep those challenges if they're validated.

 

[toffeestillidie]

I wanted to correct something, in Baseball, they do have reviews for some things, but they don't review strikes/balls because they recognize that human error is part of the game. To me, Football is the same way. Its not an exact science, they call it the beautiful game, not the precise game. Sure, I feel robbed after last night but I think this thread very much demonstrates the logistical complications involved with adding a review process.

For me, the "three challenges" idea fundamentally alters the way the game is played. I think teams would burn them to waste time when they want to run out the clock, and it gives managers another thing to worry about in late stages of games. It also could be an effective way to stop an opposing teams counterattack (keeper saves on the line and the other team is breaking up the field, might as well use a challenge).

I would be okay with automated goalline technology. It would have to be nearly 100% accurate though, as I would hate for goals not to be given for malfunctions. Even a fourth official review of a camera would be fine with me, because that should not take more than 10 seconds for a layperson, let alone a competent official.

I would not be okay with reviews of offsides calls, if we had this, linesmen would tend towards not flagging close calls (knowing that if the result is a goal, it'll be reviewed). This both changes a linesman's job, and it would lead to many more plays being allowed to carry out, only to be called back later. I think this would disrupt the flow of games, with many goals being scored, only to be called back.

Would you really feel much better about a goal disallowed because a millimeter of a striker's boot was passed the defender at the precise second a ball was kicked, just because it is consistent with the letter of the laws of the game? To me thats just as bad is if its disallowed when the players are about even, with no review.

The best solution to offsides problems for me, is to instruct linesman to call offsides the way the rules specifies PRESENTLY, which is to give the attacking player the benefit of the doubt if the two are about level. It will no doubt take some adjustment since so many teams play a tight offsides trap, but I think it would get rid of a lot of the inconsistency.

 

[n8ly]

The hockey reviews take a while due to a list of things:
1) The net is so small
2) The puck is so small
3) The goalie tends to take up a lot of space and has equipment partially covering the puck
4) There is sometimes multiple players in the net during a questionable call
5) It is difficult to see thru the meshing

With a soccer net, there is more space, and the ball is easier to identify. Yesterday, one could have concluded within seconds of seeing a review that it was a clear cut goal. That is why I think its unfair to say that because in hockey it ends up being a 3- 5 minute interval, that it will end up the same in soccer.

SO far I am quite intrigued by everyones responses. Thanks

 

[Fensta]

Every time a situation like last night happens it makes FIFA look more and more incompetant. They will never learn, bunch of old fools stuck in the past.

 

[manxtoffee]

A pigeon would've done a better job than that clueless twonk. I declare pigeons as the way forward..

 

[Fensta]

What most of us wanted to do to him last night....

[video=youtube;ZLtuu3g6utg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLtuu3g6utg&feature=player_embedded[/video]

 

[adamrowden]

What is all this nonsense. It is mindbogglingly simple, you just have the fourth official looking at a screen and let the game continue as normal.

Then after 10 seconds (the time it took for Sky to show us all that it had crossed the line) the decision can be made as to whether or not the goal stands. If Newcastle ran up the other end and scored then their goal would not count as video evidence proved the Everton goal crossed the line. If the video evidence proved otherwise then the game just continues as normal and we can all calm down and have a drink of tea (or coffee).

With regards to sendings off after the 'goal' I am not sure how we would approach this, but I am sure we could sort something out couldn't we? Also, no limited number of challenges, if it crosses the line it is a goal, and if it doesn't then it is not a goal. And video replays should only be used on goals, otherwise football will turn into some futuristic game governed by robots... Which no doubt would be awesome but if Hollywood has taught us anything, robots are best kept under a watchful eye.

 

[Philw]

What is all this nonsense. It is mindbogglingly simple, you just have the fourth official looking at a screen and let the game continue as normal.

Then after 10 seconds (the time it took for Sky to show us all that it had crossed the line) the decision can be made as to whether or not the goal stands. If Newcastle ran up the other end and scored then their goal would not count as video evidence proved the Everton goal crossed the line. If the video evidence proved otherwise then the game just continues as normal and we can all calm down and have a drink of tea (or coffee).

With regards to sendings off after the 'goal' I am not sure how we would approach this, but I am sure we could sort something out couldn't we? Also, no limited number of challenges, if it crosses the line it is a goal, and if it doesn't then it is not a goal. And video replays should only be used on goals, otherwise football will turn into some futuristic game governed by robots... Which no doubt would be awesome but if Hollywood has taught us anything, robots are best kept under a watchful eye.

Serious foul play should still count, anything else is voided.

 

[Titus Bramble]

The best way forward is to have the 4th official keep an eye on his monitor and advise the ref on any potentially game changing decision, i.e. dodgy goals/disallowed goals and dodgy sendings off. If a mistake has been made then it's a free kick, if not carry on as normal.

You can still be booked/sent off when the ball isn't in play and even after the final whistle so they should be upheld even if the game is taken back.