Goal-line technology and reviews

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

On MOTD they can't always agree about contact v dive when they've spent ages looking from every angle.

That's why you'd have referees, not ex-players looking at it. Unlike ex-players, refs judge by what the rules are, not what they think the rules ought to be.

[leon]

defend properly and you won't have the issue of handballed goals.

[Royal Rother]

As soon as you stop the game for a replay it's a different game - but if you don't stop it for a replay you then risk wiping out something that happened between the incident in question and the replay.

So what?

That even happens now occasionally when a linesman spots something a referee has missed, and play carries on without the ref seeing him.

It's easy when a ball appears to be scored and a replay says it shouldn't have been, but if a goal doesn't appear to have been scored and should have been awarded play might carry on for 5 minutes or so - and a goal at the other end might have been scored, a player sent-off or injured in that time. Cancelling that out would be a nightmare and completely unworkable - and give us a completely different game.

Are you thick or something?

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Ah, abuse. Always the first resort of the person who's run out of cogent arguments.

[From Despair To Where?]

Shit happens, that's life, get over it.

[RoyalBlue]

Out of interest, wonder what would have happened if they had had the extra official behind each goal?

[parky]

This could work in two different ways, firstly having all moments when a controversial goal has been scored ie there is some element of doubt in the referees mind as to whether a goal has been scored or not the referee immediately stops the game and asks for a review possibly with only a number of questions such as 'Is there any reason I cannot award a goal?' Thus removing any possibility of a counter attack, but this has to be the one negative that will only happen in a handful of cases and wont matter compared to justice being done. Take yesterday for instance, the referee isn't 100% as an element of doubt has been placed in his head by Karacan who protested immediately he asks pauses as the replay is shown and then Reading are awarded a free kick. This ruling has to be that there must be clear evidence to overturn a decision as is the case with any other sport so you cant have people still arguing afterwards, if it isn't clear on the video it stays with the referee.

Secondly you give each team two reviews for the course of a game, which can only be used to change a decision and must be asked for immediately if you're wrong you lose one of your challenges, this disadvantage of this is I'm not sure how it can work in open play. The advantages are that clubs would have access to the footage upstairs as nobody would want to waste a challenge somebody would be watching a feeding to the manager whether they should challenge. Also this is stronger in terms of goals missed if two referees are adamant that a decision is correct they may not wish to review it such as could have been the case yesterday, Mcdermott would have had Hammond or Gibbs possibly watching upstairs who would know before the kick off it wasn't a goal and would challenge.

With both of these we need to define what we are reviewing, if this is simply goals and penalties which more times than not lead to goals then either can work as there is more likely than not an easy breakdown in play when this occurs. If it leads to every decision I will concede it will lead to stop start game which nobody wants however a lot of games pass without controversial incident and this is simply about removing those moments from the game so we aren't cost points which could cost us safety and whole lot of money.

Discuss?

[Ian Royal]

Ah, abuse. Always the first resort of the person who's run out of cogent arguments.

It is a pretty ropey argument though. You're assuming it takes ages to get a result in the first place, and you could have exactly the same problem with the delay in a ref giving a decision, or a linesman giving a decision the ref doesn't immediately spot.

You're best argument is it effecting the flow of the game, and its a valid one. Dredging up some spurious crap about what you'd do if a goal is scored at the other end or a player sent off is nonsense.

If the ball crosses the line and the ref doesn't give it not noticing the lino flagging for a goal, and the ball comes back out and then an attacker goes in two footed on a defender trying to win the ball taking him out dangerously and the ref blows for a freekick and a red card. Then the ref notices the lino. Gives a goal, freekick overturned, red card not rescinded.

Exactly the same situation as you're saying mustn't be allowed to happen by introducing video replays. The replays just gives a little extra time window for these things.

[larry1971]

They need to sort it out this could cost us in the long run


First chelsea now today were not having much luck

wrong - it's how we perform over 38 games that will decide Reading's fate it's all to easy for fans to point the fingure at certain decisons during a season and say that's why we're going down but at the end of the day we have another 30+ games to get it right and if come May we are in the bottom 3 it will be only us to blame and not because a few bad decisions went against us.. As one poster said I'm happy to be a dinosaur I'm all for goal line technology but I draw the line at it being used for every singal contested decision.

[windermere_royal]

Howa about each team being allowed one review per game? now surely that is the way forward.

[Barry the bird boggler]

Stuff technology. It's a game FFS, people make mistakes so just deal with it.

[Lovely hot donuts!]

This seems to be going round in circles as an argument but basically I am absolutely against video replays. Ok yesterday one might say that looking at the goal again once it had been awarded wouldn't have been an issue... and you're probably right. But let's imagine that the handball wasn't the final touch but was on the halfway line and punched onto a player who got the assist to a goal. Is that still enough reason to look and rule out a goal. What about when, in April 09 (I think?) when West brom started a goalscoring move with an obvious foul-throw, would you look for that? What if there was a foul several minutes earlier but the next stop on play was for a goal scored by the fouling team, could you pull it back then?

That's a really long-winded way of saying that there is no definite start of the move towards their being a goal. Everything since the previous goal will have somewhat led to the goal! You could end up disallowing a goal for something that happened 10 minutes earlier!!

if they bring in video replays I will just stop watching football!!

[larry1971]

just a series question yes it is frustrating to lose a goal like that but would the O.P be kicking up such a stink if the rolls were reversed and it had been a Reading player handballing the ball into the net and the goal given.

[The Real Sandhurst Royal]

FIFA need to sort it out as there are always cheats in the football game who will do anything to gain an advantage.

A deliberate handball resulting in a goal being scored should be retrospectively punished with TV evidence... A six game match ban would do for me.

BA now joins a list of players who cheat on this game.

[Rex]

Howa about each team being allowed one review per game? now surely that is the way forward.

And which one do you chose. Is there a sliding scale to review at the end of the match where you pick the best one out.

[creative_username_1]

IS THERE A WAY WE COULD TEST THIS OUT AND TAKE THE GOOD THINGS AND REMOVE THE BAD

#justsayin'

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

Howa about each team being allowed one review per game? now surely that is the way forward.

And which one do you chose. Is there a sliding scale to review at the end of the match where you pick the best one out.

During the game, not afterwards.

Same as in tennis (although they have three) or hockey. You are allowed to make a certain number of appeals during the game. If you choose to appeal or not is up to you. I don't like the idea of loads of things "going upstairs" as it would cause too many delays, but allowing a couple a game would be OK. The game would not need to be stopped for the review to take place, although if the game was stopped before the appeal, you wouldn't restart.

[Ian Royal]

Howa about each team being allowed one review per game? now surely that is the way forward.

And which one do you chose. Is there a sliding scale to review at the end of the match where you pick the best one out.

Same way as in hockey, signal to the ref, the game stops. Restart with the relevant method, kick off, throw in, goal kick, penalty, drop ball. Doesn't affect the flow of the game because it can only happen twice.

[OldBiscuit]

... Is even more of a ****ing moronic dinosaur than I previously thought you were.

No other way of putting it, sorry.

That's intelligent! (ironic). You hadn't even had a discussion with rational views against your argument before labelling any one that doesn't see it your way as some kind of 'dinosaur'. But then with a tag like yours, what should we expect?

PS. I thought that people that fought in the wars were fighting for democracy.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

Howa about each team being allowed one review per game? now surely that is the way forward.

And which one do you chose. Is there a sliding scale to review at the end of the match where you pick the best one out.

Same way as in hockey, signal to the ref, the game stops. Restart with the relevant method, kick off, throw in, goal kick, penalty, drop ball. Doesn't affect the flow of the game because it can only happen twice.

I at least would prefer that method. You get one/two reviews and thats it. If anything else happens, tough titty.