Video technology is coming...at long last?

[Don Diaz]

France lost 2-0 at home last night to Spain, but without the assistance of video replay technology the score would have been 1-1. France's goal was ruled out after 1 minute of assessment for offside having initially been given by the referee and Spains second goal was completely the opposite having first of all been ruled out for off side and then correctly awarded 40 seconds later.

Video Assistant Referee (VAR) who in effect in this case was a man in van outside the stadium, is currently undergoing trial runs, with Fifa president Gianni Infantino keen to employ the system during the World Cup in Russia next year.

So what's your view - get the right result, so there's no debate, there's too much at stake these days, financially mostly, with Champions League, promotion and relegation, titles and cups at stake. Or is it too much intervention, where do you draw the line? Offside goals, penalty decisions? we already have 'did the ball cross the line' technology.......bit late for England and Frank Lampard or own back for Germany in 1966.

Football has been great without technology for about 130 years......but things have changed haven't they?

 

[Finchbee]

Personally I disagree with it because as you say we managed for 130 years. But its such big business, TV can show replay after replay and so there is just too much focus and arguing over decisions.

If you have it needs to be quick and seemless.

If you dont have it ban replays in some way but that would be just too difficult

Or have it but really only for goal decisions as where do you stop.....penalty decisions fould red cards etc

 

[Dorset]

France lost 2-0 at home last night to Spain, but without the assistance of video replay technology the score would have been 1-1. France's goal was ruled out after 1 minute of assessment for offside having initially been given by the referee and Spains second goal was completely the opposite having first of all been ruled out for off side and then correctly awarded 40 seconds later.

Video Assistant Referee (VAR) who in effect in this case was a man in van outside the stadium, is currently undergoing trial runs, with Fifa president Gianni Infantino keen to employ the system during the World Cup in Russia next year.

So what's your view - get the right result, so there's no debate, there's too much at stake these days, financially mostly, with Champions League, promotion and relegation, titles and cups at stake. Or is it too much intervention, where do you draw the line? Offside goals, penalty decisions? we already have 'did the ball cross the line' technology.......bit late for England and Frank Lampard or own back for Germany in 1966.

Football has been great without technology for about 130 years......but things have changed haven't they?

Yes mate, we now have 800 camera angles, slow motion and hi-def telly. In the olden days we had to see stuff in real time or on poxy quality black and white tellies, who knew who was offside?

I am a supporter of video technology, I think it would take a lot of pressure from the referees. They are useless cunts, we all know that, we can all see quite clearly on TV when a bloke is 1mm offside, but these visually challenged officials miss everything - a helping hand of a video ref or a guide dog would help. Technology works well in most other sports, rugby, cricket and even girl's sports like tennis, so why wouldn't it work with football?

I need only say fucking fuck face Foy the fucking fuckfaced fuck. If there had been a video ref that day then we would not have been fucked over by the fuckfaced fucker. Foyism must not be allowed to raise it's ugly fuckfaced head again, a video ref must be there like Big Brother watching over the watchers, then we need a video-video-ref watching the decisions of the video ref.

I would like an appeal system, the captain could call for a decision on let's say three occasions in a match, if he was wrong then he loses on appeal, if he was right then the ref would be allowed to reverse goal decisions, award penalties, bring back blokes sent off incorrectly etc. I also want any player who is not the captain to be red carded for gobbing off at the ref, the pansy-arsed FA said they were going to stamp out the mobs screaming at officials this season, it ain't happened, it gets on my tits.

 

[Finchbee]

I would like an appeal system, the captain could call for a decision on let's say three occasions in a match, if he was wrong then he loses on appeal, if he was right then the ref would be allowed to reverse goal decisions, award penalties, bring back blokes sent off incorrectly etc. I also want any player who is not the captain to be red carded for gobbing off at the ref, the pansy-arsed FA said they were going to stamp out the mobs screaming at officials this season, it ain't happened, it gets on my tits.

Thats the bit that makes all viable to me. Like in Cricket. Happens in NFL as challenges. I think it would work

 

[skiathospurs]

I would just say 40 secs is too long.Thats 40 secs you could be paying £70 quid for a ticket to endure,i guess they dont stop the clock?My reckoning is if its about the time it takes to take a goalkick (unless you are blatantly timing wasting) then thats fine,but if it requires that much scrutiny then go with the refs call if its only marginal.It is only a matter of time before the incorrect "video linesmans "call,did they dive or was it a foul,is their toe offside.
I agree if it stops blatant cock ups but fine margins,questions of intent,simulation,who`s throw in is it,who`s corner is it?I wonder where it will all stop.

 

[corroded]

So the prevailing thought with goal line technology was that it had to be fast enough to be seamless. Hence the whole watch, and hawkeye business.

The video referee in football, at least in the Premier League I don't see as a go-er. It's too slow. It's perceived as such, and actually I think that perception is correct. Faster decisions tend to be made by Hawkeye, than a video referee. Adding a stoppage to the NFL is hardly a game changer, especially in a game with roughly two minutes of stoppages for every minute of playtime (roughly 3 hours for a 60 minute game... where I could watch a game with extra time in football, and the penalties and already be on the bus home in the same timeframe)

http://www.rugbyworldcup.com/news/96575 -> 28% of all stoppages in the first match of the RWC 2015 Opening Match was due to the TMO, and even then it can only be used in certain circumstances.

Now, the computation task involved in the goal line technology is no meagre feat. We actually had a demonstration at work about this, showing how a TV cameras frame rate would often suggest a ball had not crossed the line, 100% of the way, when it in fact had. This is due to the frame rate, even at 60fps it's possible for a ball to cross totally, and not register on TV. The cameras in the system deployed by the Premier League are HFR. I forget the exact figure, but at 120fps that's double the usual frame rate, so twice as complicated as 60fps... it has to make this decision in under five seconds.

Now, five seconds for an offside sounds fine... but is it? We all complain that a late offside is called. So in an automated system it needs to know where all the players are, where the ball is, and detect any touches... and decide if those touches were intentional, or not, probably within a second. A video ref is going to take multiple replaces, 40 seconds of video ref for an offside just doesn't fly. If you use it alongside a conventional linesman, what happens if he makes a false offside decision, which then goes through to a referee in a one on one situation... how do you even give value to the attacking side then?

I think realistically we're a good few years away from being able to process offsides on the fly. Even then a referee or similar will have to adjudge whether certain touches were intentional or not. Even then you'd argue potentially the ref would need to be able to over rule the system... like with his.


Before the replays, did you even see it?

 

[Don Diaz]

One thing to consider and currently being overlooked is the time that the typical 'goal' celebration takes. I would guess that is easily 30secs to a minute, during which the 'goal' could easily be reviewed. The Rugby Union system is starting to get on my tits, especially with that Ben Skeen bloke from NZ. I'm sure he thinks it's all about him and takes forever to make a decision.

It's a valid point about subjective calls - penalties, red cards etc. even with the benefit of video replays and super slo-mo former players and experts can't always agree after they have seen it 50m times before match of the day. Technology can only be used in binary decisions.

 

[Yid]

Not for me...I've expressed this view many times before.

With jumpers as goalposts the kids down the wreck can play the same game as the fellas getting paid billions of quids in the world cup final.

Making it a different game increases the divide between them and us who dream of being in their position.

I want to be able to see and discuss the controversy over the was it wasn't it a goal, throw in, offsides etc... that what makes it my game one I'm passionate about and will discuss with the lads down the boozer or at work on a Monday morning.

 

[Ted the Yid]

I don't see why a fourth referee can't simply communicate a wrong decision to a referee and he then pull play back and rewind the clock. No need to actually stop play whilst each individual decision is being made.

 

[Nundy]

I'm fickle. If Kane was offside and scores a goal against the chavs and the ref gives it, I want it to stand and no technology !! Lol but if it's Costa neverless , I do want video technology in that situation and to run that smile of the pile of shits face haha

 

[corroded]

Yeah, we've got more chance of it working the other way round @Nundy

 

[Don Diaz]

Video referee is being used tonight in the FA Cup tie between Brighton and Palace....

Credit to John Moss yesterday with the decisions he made at Forest. Got every single one right!!

 

[Yid]

Where is the dislike button... 100% not a fan...!!!

 

[skiathospurs]

The video assistant referee (VAR) will be used in the FA Cup third round replays between Chelsea and Norwich, and Leicester City and Fleetwood Town.

 

[USspur]

The video assistant referee (VAR) will be used in the FA Cup third round replays between Chelsea and Norwich, and Leicester City and Fleetwood Town.

to what extent? goals? offsides? will be interesting to see how often it is used during the games

 

[skiathospurs]

to what extent? goals? offsides? will be interesting to see how often it is used during the games

Where a review is used, it will normally be triggered during stoppages in play and limited to four types of match-changing incidents:

• Goals
• Penalties
• Straight red cards
• Mistaken identity

So, for example, if Murray had clearly scored with his hand and Marriner had not spotted it, the VAR would contact him via an audio link and tell him to reverse that decision as soon as possible.

"What the referee doesn't have the option of doing is saying is 'I don't know if that was a penalty or not, I'll look at the replay'," added Elleray.

"We are requiring the referees to carry on refereeing as if there is no video assistant referee. If they make a clear and obvious error, they get told about it and I think most referees will welcome that."

VAR can only be used at Premier League stadiums where there is a direct link back to the Premier League studios west of London.
@USspur
They reckon VAR will only be used once every 3 or 4 games if it stays this format.

 

[Don Diaz]

First VAR goal tonight. Originally wrongly given as offside. System worked perfectly Leicester 2-0 Fleetwood.

 

[Flump]

Utter bollocks. Mistakes are made in football as in life. The game survived for 150 years without this.

 

[Don Diaz]

Utter bollocks. Mistakes are made in football as in life. The game survived for 150 years without this.

I agree, but now it's a multi billion dollar industry, with places at World Cup's (Thierry Henry handball) and Champions League etc at stake. People can lose jobs and vast sums of money over it as well as (in theory) making the game better (cutting out diving for pens etc). I'm ok with it at least on trial basis for red cards, goals and pens, and see what happens. If it turns out to be too intrusive then fine get on with it as before, it hasn't ruined Rugby Union though, so we'll see.

 

[Havocc]

Ok, this is the scenario I am confused about.

A through ball is played and the offside flag goes up. The goalkeeper sees the flag and makes no attempt at saving the ball (which is common) and the striker scores

VAR confirms the player was not offside and the goal stands.

Is it a simple as the goal stands as the keeper should have played to the whistle?

 

[Don Diaz]

Ok, this is the scenario I am confused about.

A through ball is played and the offside flag goes up. The goalkeeper sees the flag and makes no attempt at saving the ball (which is common) and the striker scores

VAR confirms the player was not offside and the goal stands.

Is it a simple as the goal stands as the keeper should have played to the whistle?

Don't know, they asked that last night......no-one seemed to know when John Moss blew his whistle.

I think you play to the whistle?

 

[Don Diaz]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42712905

 

[skiathospurs]

I wouldnt mind VAR as much if it was all inclusive about errors,but it isnt and is taking too long to communicate to the refs at present.These minutes taken up,the clock doesnt stop and like all things wont be properly added at the end,when you`re paying £70 for 90 mins you are losing again.

In my mind you can review diving now but not a blatant hand of god handball,isnt that too deceiving the ref?you can review a straight red but not a 1st or 2nd yellow leading to a red,its so incomplete as a fair review system because the laws simply havent been amended yet.Ball over the line, goal or not we have that now,exactly the same technology ball over the by-line fair cross or a corner/or not,often resulting in a goal nothing checked.Its still just pushing contentious decisions down the road,i mean in the size of the error.How many times is a goal scored and 6 secs before there was a foul,say like liverpool this year,kane fouled they score 3 passes later,no review possible.You either do it all or not at all.

The real trouble for me is match attending fans are the ones without a clue as to what is going on,sky/bt talking "oh thats being looked at surely",seeing replays seconds after as a viewer and in the ground the FA do not allow replays of contentious errors,now how the fark is that right?

Maybe its not so much the principles of reviewing stuff either during or post match that bug me,its just so not set up correctly at the moment,you can point to so many holes in it,that it just cant be right at this time.I cannot wait until a VAR decision is proven wrong or subjective at best,because it will happen,and when thats debated really what is the whole point if it isnt failsafe?

 

[Dorset]

I wouldnt mind VAR as much if it was all inclusive about errors,but it isnt and is taking too long to communicate to the refs at present.These minutes taken up,the clock doesnt stop and like all things wont be properly added at the end,when you`re paying £70 for 90 mins you are losing again.

In my mind you can review diving now but not a blatant hand of god handball,isnt that too deceiving the ref?you can review a straight red but not a 1st or 2nd yellow leading to a red,its so incomplete as a fair review system because the laws simply havent been amended yet.Ball over the line, goal or not we have that now,exactly the same technology ball over the by-line fair cross or a corner/or not,often resulting in a goal nothing checked.Its still just pushing contentious decisions down the road,i mean in the size of the error.How many times is a goal scored and 6 secs before there was a foul,say like liverpool this year,kane fouled they score 3 passes later,no review possible.You either do it all or not at all.

The real trouble for me is match attending fans are the ones without a clue as to what is going on,sky/bt talking "oh thats being looked at surely",seeing replays seconds after as a viewer and in the ground the FA do not allow replays of contentious errors,now how the fark is that right?

Maybe its not so much the principles of reviewing stuff either during or post match that bug me,its just so not set up correctly at the moment,you can point to so many holes in it,that it just cant be right at this time.I cannot wait until a VAR decision is proven wrong or subjective at best,because it will happen,and when thats debated really what is the whole point if it isnt failsafe?

Swings and roundabouts innit? I would like a proper system, either like in cricket where the captains get 3 appeals or preferably a system like in Rugby where the ref asks if he ain't sure on any decision, but they would have to make sure that only the captains could talk to the ref or they'd get mobbed every 5 minutes - I want to see bookings for that. If we can't have either or both of those systems then fuck it, swings and roundabouts like I said, one week you'll get fucked over wth a decision, next week you'll be doing the bottom penetration.

 

[Yid]

Utter bollocks. Mistakes are made in football as in life. The game survived for 150 years without this.

IS THE 100% RIGHT FUCKING ANSWER...!!!

I don't want it to be black and white. I want it to be somthing I row about with the lads down the boozer.

 

[Yid]

Ok, this is the scenario I am confused about.

A through ball is played and the offside flag goes up. The goalkeeper sees the flag and makes no attempt at saving the ball (which is common) and the striker scores

VAR confirms the player was not offside and the goal stands.

Is it a simple as the goal stands as the keeper should have played to the whistle?

Play to the whistle you mug is what his manager would scream at him.

 

[Yid]

Swings and roundabouts innit? I would like a proper system, either like in cricket where the captains get 3 appeals or preferably a system like in Rugby where the ref asks if he ain't sure on any decision, but they would have to make sure that only the captains could talk to the ref or they'd get mobbed every 5 minutes - I want to see bookings for that. If we can't have either or both of those systems then fuck it, swings and roundabouts like I said, one week you'll get fucked over wth a decision, next week you'll be doing the bottom penetration.

We have that system now.... its called luck. I'm cool with that because if you play well you will create your own luck. I don't think we need it.

 

[Glenjamin]

Ok, this is the scenario I am confused about.

A through ball is played and the offside flag goes up. The goalkeeper sees the flag and makes no attempt at saving the ball (which is common) and the striker scores

VAR confirms the player was not offside and the goal stands.

Is it a simple as the goal stands as the keeper should have played to the whistle?

I'm with you there. The thing about that goal last night was it was so quick. The ball hit the back of the net as the linesman flagged.

What happens when a striker correctly plays a high line 20 yards from goal and gets 5-6 yards on the defense, and is flagged. He's storming towards a 1v1 but is gonna be say 6 seconds from a shot on goal. What does the ref do. Let it go to the conclusion of the attack or give the offside. The offside rule is a very difficult thing to try and use VAR with as its so broad.

 

[Yid]

Welllllllllllll... it certainly wasn't very fucking good tonight. 2 pens 2 sending offs. Load of old shite.

 

[Finchbee]

Welllllllllllll... it certainly wasn't very fucking good tonight. 2 pens 2 sending offs. Load of old shite.

I dunno worked quite well for the Chavs ;o)