pete 2,499 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I have long been a supporter for a video referee. If you have the technology then why not use it. A video referee is a referee who can quickly look back at a video and help the referee make a correct decision. Yesterday it could have changed the game to our disadvantage if Forrester had received a red card but it could also have made the score 6-0 if the referee could see that the Waghorn disallowed goal was well onside. It will sometimes go against us but at least the decision will be fair. In the Dutch FA cup tonight Ajax v Willem 2 and Feynoord v Oss tomorrow, a video referee will be in use and the game will be stopped for important decisions. Last season they had a few trial runs without stopping the game. This can only be better for the sport in my opinion and clear up a lot of those borderline decisions. Hopefully other nations will quickly follow suit including Scotland 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,146 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I enjoy the video referee in rugby and Hawkeye in tennis but if you're in the actual crowd and there's no massive screen to view the replays, then I'd imagine it won't help the match-day experience. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,234 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Still don't think Forrester's was a red card challenge ... (though one can argue the challenge on him before was) perhaps MW's comments about him being a street footballer is gladly taken up by some folk in the media. When it comes to video technology, the world of football is still running at the pace of a mammoth. In many ways, actually. Just remember how long they dwell on goal-line technology. Then you have extra-refs watching the penalty area at greater events and ... have you ever seen them take any part whatsoever in the game? IMHO, the Scottish clubs, not least those beyond the Premiership, won't have the money to have enough cameras and people about, to give such a video ref the pictures required. And the SPFL, well ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSocksRedTops 3,473 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I enjoy the video referee in rugby and Hawkeye in tennis but if you're in the actual crowd and there's no massive screen to view the replays, then I'd imagine it won't help the match-day experience. I also enjoy the role of the Video referee in those sports but the major difference between other sports who use video refs (including cricket and NFL) is that these sports are stop-start by nature. Rugby (League and Union), Tennis and Cricket all have periods of "inactivity" that suits the use of the video. Football on the other hand is a very fluid game with very little room to breath. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
onevision 1,441 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I like the idea of this but don't see it catching on. Big decisions, like seen in rugby, can take a few minutes to decide as replays are watched many times over and from multiple angles and us football fans are wired differently from other sport fans and don't have the patience to sit around and wait. Add to that differing opinions, how many replays of incidents have you watched over and over again and still have a different opinion from the next guy? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blinkyman 0 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I enjoy the video referee in rugby and Hawkeye in tennis ................ I too like the idea of a 'second opinion' as it has a finality to it that allows everyone to move on. As witnessed in the Olympic field hockey the idea of a challenge whether instigated by the referee &/or team captains worked very well. The NHL is a good example of video review success where the sport is a 'religion', especially in Canada . Perhaps it's introduction could save the SFA/SPFL a bundle of money on 'Compliance Officers' who continue to be more than a few days late and selective in their decision making. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooponthewing 1,139 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 I like the idea of maybe two challenges per team per match(off side/penalties etc) tbh I'm actually quite old fashioned when it comes to this. I like that football is different and the game flows. We have plenty of talking points. I watch a lot of cricket and you can watch a catch from many different angles and still not be fully 100% on it. I have to admit that although nothing can stop progress, im not a big fan. If it must come in then the challenge scenario is most appealing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,234 Posted September 21, 2016 Share Posted September 21, 2016 Speaking of which, has the compliance officer reacted on Curran's unseen and unpunished attack on Clint Hill at the weekend? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted September 21, 2016 Author Share Posted September 21, 2016 I never seen a lot of the game but unfortunately there is no fan participation on the big screens it is just contact between the Ref. and the Video Ref. The one incident I did see was a yellow card being changed to a red card after communication with the Video Ref. The communication took seconds and was easily covered by the time taken to take the free kick. They reckon the average time is 11 seconds for a decision. The pundits agreed it was definitely a red card so I think this must have gone down as a successful step to using it for all competition matches. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rousseau 9,360 Posted September 22, 2016 Share Posted September 22, 2016 (edited) I've always been in favour of video referrals; so much can depend on a certain decision that it's imperative a team be able challenge it. However, I agree with Coop that there should be a certain number of challenges to keep the flow of the game, rather than every little decision being referred -- maybe more than 2 challenges, though? Although, Cricket has 2 and that sport can potentially have challenges every delivery. As long as they get the challenge back if they are proved correct. To be fair, I don't think it'll eradicate mistakes out of the game, for much comes down to interpretation. Edited September 22, 2016 by Rousseau 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.