|
|
I am curious what everyone's opinion is for instant replay in World Cup. Many people argue against it, but given what happened to England yesterday...I would argue for it. Not necessarily to review corner kicks or small mistakes but a missed goal is huge.
What frustrates me most is that the head of FIFA "likes" these mistakes because it generates controversy and appeal for the game. I don't know if I agree with that. I am not even a fan, but ENGLAND WAS ROBBED.
england rightfully lost, sorry but we were shite and germany were playing well.
now about the goal yes it could have turned the game around, no doubt about it, and i am all for a video referee like the system they use in rugby, i honestly cannot understand why the head of FIFA is so against it, when all the players/managers and prolly 99% of fans are all for it. it works perfect in rugby, and it SHOULD work fine in football aswell, they could atleast run a trial, see how much it affects the gameplay.
yes, true -- England probably would have lost because Germany played much better -- but if the technology is there why can't they just prevent this from happening again?
Players take flops all the time and then everyone has to wait for them to get carted off the field. I doubt it would take more than 30 seconds for the refs to walk to the side and check on a goal. This time could then be added back as injury/replay time.
Even more farcical was the first Tevez goal,he was at least 2 yards offside and the goal was given,the farcical part was that for some reason it was shown on the big screen (This isn't usually done during games) and the ref and linesman saw that he was a mile offside,but because they had already ruled it a goal they had to stand by their (Wrong) decision.
England won the worldcup by the ball not crossing the line
44 years on approx, it evens out.
Im not English but support them due to all the players in the premiership i watch every week.
Goal line technology isnt hard the cameras are already there, just get the ref to speak to the studio on a two way and they can say.
In Rugby an official sits in the replay truck where the host broadcaster plays the replays for TV they just use those pictures, its simple.
If that goal had of gone in and England won the game, which i think they would have still lost, we would have missed a great display by Germany beating Argentina 4-0.
If i was Spain i would be worried because Germany are only getting better
There is no need to reply a whole tournament, even rematch of England vs. Germany will not do a favour for the beautiful game.
Only football fans need to organise a world-wide demonstration against Blatter and his shameful denial of using technology to convince both ends of playing parties.
I feel sorry for the disallowed goal of England, and I believe should that goal allowed, England would not push forward a lot.
Yes, Germany looks amazing. They destroyed their quarterfinal opponent.
I feel that instant replay should be used in goal situations only. The refrees are already communicating by headsets anyway and there are cameras in the nets. It would take the fourth offical less then 30 seconds to see if a ball completely crossed a line. But replay should be used only for the goal. Offsides should be left alone. Anyone who knows anything about football/soccer knows that offsides is one of the most subjective calls in all of sports.
I believe that goal-line technology + more official on both side of the goals will solve most of the decision argument. Because usually the most "incident" we cared about happened in or near the penalty box, and with those two solution above, i'm sure most of the penalty or "cross-the-line" goal decision will not be a problem at all. I think tv replay will have some side-effect such as slowing down the game, or cause controversy on when the referee should look at the replay at when not ( he couldn't watch replay for every decision, right? ).
It would not be up to the center to review the replay that would be the fourth offical's call. The game would not be prolonged any more than it already is. The center already will stop the game to confer with a linesmen. It would not take any longer than that to say that the ball crossed the line. If it didn't there is no need to stop the match. It will fall on the fourth offical to say yea or nay just like it is the linesman's call to say it the keeper left his line before a penalty shot. I am for replay in a goal situation only. Did it or did it not cross the line? Replay in any other aspect would taint the game. IMO.
Instant replays help decide the accuracy of crucial calls especially if it involves scoring a goal, FIFA should adapt it if they really still want the officials to have the final say (so as not to remove the human aspect that I guess they want to preserve). Otherwise, an automated goal-line technology as mentioned by r4inm4ker would be good. 
| Futile wrote: | | It would not be up to the center to review the replay that would be the fourth offical's call. The game would not be prolonged any more than it already is. The center already will stop the game to confer with a linesmen. It would not take any longer than that to say that the ball crossed the line. If it didn't there is no need to stop the match. It will fall on the fourth offical to say yea or nay just like it is the linesman's call to say it the keeper left his line before a penalty shot. I am for replay in a goal situation only. Did it or did it not cross the line? Replay in any other aspect would taint the game. IMO. |
But once you introduces replay for goal decision, then people will still start to argue whether to use replay for professional fouls, diving, harsh tackles, etc. I imagine the lines would be along something like this when there's a bad tackle incident : "if the officials use replay to see the tackle, it would've certainly been red. why not use it when we already do for goal decision?".
I'm not against video technology though, i just think it must be carefully planned and the rules must be clear and fair.
| r4inm4ker wrote: | | But once you introduces replay for goal decision, then people will still start to argue whether to use replay for professional fouls, diving, harsh tackles, etc. I imagine the lines would be along something like this when there's a bad tackle incident : "if the officials use replay to see the tackle, it would've certainly been red. why not use it when we already do for goal decision?". I'm not against video technology though, i just think it must be carefully planned and the rules must be clear and fair. |
I agree with you 100%. As I have stated previously replay should only be used in goal situations. There is no way to "fairly" use video replay in pitch play. Football/soccer is not like the NFL, basketball or most other sports where the rules are clean, cut and dry. Anyone who has ever played or watched soccer knows that the flow play (pushing, grabbing, tackling, etc.) is purely dictated by the center official. What one official may have not called last game, the present official has no leeway for this game and both officials are legally right within the rules. Soccer officiating is subjective to the center's interpretation of the play much like the strike zone in baseball is interpreted by the umpire behind home plate. There is a set "standard" or "guideline" but there is a huge gray area that is purely for the official to decide how to rule. Unless something is obviously blatant or intentional every whistle blown could be replayed depending on the eye of the viewer. FIFA usually has their heads up their collective asses, but I believe that they will get this right. If they do go to video replay it will only be for goals only (there are already cameras in the nets). Anything more than that will be a Pandora’s Box that they don’t want to open because of the reasons several of us (yourself included) have already stated throughout this thread.
|
