Video Review?

[Barkley]

In light of the invisible penalty awarded to Chelsea at our expense what do you think of a video review of penalty awards? A video review would most certainly have denied Chelsea's penalty, but it would have interrupted the match for five minutes.

[ConnieLFC]

In light of the invisible penalty awarded to Chelsea at our expense what do you think of a video review of penalty awards? A video review would most certainly have denied Chelsea's penalty, but it would have interrupted the match for five minutes.

Well, we were not the only ones who got screwed - there were horrible decisions and non-decisions in about half of this weekend's fixtures.

The question is always how would it be implemented? I really think the issue re time taken for review is a red herring - it is more about once you open that Pandora's box how far do you go with it? Goal line technology is one thing (as it's solely about answering whether the ball is over the line or not, not anything about how it got there) - this is something else altogether.

Would only penalty calls given get reviewed? What about calls not made (which is usually more common)? Would a manager/player have the right to "challenge"? Would there be punishment to keep this from being abused as a time-wasting tactic? And who would the ultimate arbiter be?

Just sort of throwing those questions out there to myself as well as everyone else. But as the final say-so seems like it would ultimately still be left to someone's personal (and therefore possibly biased) interpretation, I'm not convinced (at the moment) of its usefulness.

[STL]

Please God dont interfere with the game. Look at it this way - how many times have you watched a game on tv and only after 3 replays can you make your mind up, and most of the time the ref got it right first time. Its even more difficult at a game when you have to wait to get home to see the incident again and it may look totally different. Its pretty hard to be a ref but generally they do a good job - well a lot better than I could anyway.

In regards to Sunday decisions tend to even each other out, in fact it wouldnt have been a shock to see Lampard screw his pen wide....footie does things like that.
I can just about barely stomach the idea of goal line technology but only cause the game wouldnt contine uniterrupted if a buzz didnt go in the refs ear.
Bad decisions are part and parcel of the game though i do agree with punishing refs who screw up or miss things.
Liverpool fans are just currently pissed off (and rightly so) but what comes around goes around, (Remember the Gerrard pen incident at Sheff Utd last season?) I bet we get a well suspect decision in our favour before Christmas. I just wish we would get a real dodgy one at Old Trafford in my lifetime, but that going to require a ref with big gonads to award a pen against utd which wasnt iron clad.

[ConnieLFC]

Bad decisions are part and parcel of the game though i do agree with punishing refs who screw up or miss things.

Punish them how? Theoretically if we say it's just "a bad decision", why should he be punished at all?

That said, in Styles' case, I'm not complaining just because the penalty was one decision among *many* he got wrong (for me) during the game.

[STL]

There is a difference between one bad decision and a game full of bad decisions.
I believe the idea of having an official in the stands makes all the sense in the world, and although Im not sure Ive read that his report ultimately lead to Styles being repremanded I have to think the report on the standard of Sytles performance couldnt have been rosey in the slightest. The strange thing was he was right up with play for the penalty decision, infact he was only 10 yards away.
He was having a terrible game without even considering the penalty decision. I still dont know how Pennant got booked. On several occasions it looked like the game was going to descend into a farce.
He didnt play advantage on a few occassions when he should have and there were at least 5-8 blown throw and goalkick v corner decisions, not to mention a couple of dubious offside calls - but thats urely the fault of the linesman. Lets not also forget the Essien sending off incident that never was. The poor decisions were not always to our disadvantage, being totally honest Torres probably should have been booked for his constant efforts to win a cheap freekick.
Im just glad Carragher or Finnan werent shown red for their penalty demonstrations...maybe Carragher should have that yellow card be picked up rescinded?

If you get a chance watch the sky version of the game where the 2 fans do the commentary. Both fans were bemused by the decisions throughout the game and the crap refereeing was probably the only thing (with the exception haha isnt it great seeing man u flounder) they agreed on.

[Nomer the Red]

I don't think the answer is video review because as stated in many responses it's just opening another can of worms; what I think the FIFA should look into is the use of another ref on the field.

[Sandgrounder]

It's a hideous idea. If the ref stops the game to have a gander at the video, and decides there was no foul, what then? A scoring opportunity has just been lost. How would the game be restarted? Drop-ball in the box?

What needs to be done is to take some pressure off the referees by stopping the players from getting all up in their faces the whole time. Referees should be encouraged to issue more bookings for dissent, and take advantage of that business of moving free kicks ten yards up the pitch. Furthermore, the FA should be looking at games where players are intimidating the ref, and issuing retrospective yellow cards, suspensions, or docking points. The situation where no ref would ever dare give a penalty at Old Trafford for fear of being chased down by a pack of rabid united players and torn apart can be remedied if the officials would collectively grow a pair and demand respect from the players. Maybe only captains should be allowed to speak to the ref, as in rugby. There's lots that can be done under existing rules to improve the whole situation.

[Uncle Spike]

What needs to be done is to take some pressure off the referees by stopping the players from getting all up in their faces the whole time. Referees should be encouraged to issue more bookings for dissent, and take advantage of that business of moving free kicks ten yards up the pitch. Furthermore, the FA should be looking at games where players are intimidating the ref, and issuing retrospective yellow cards, suspensions, or docking points. The situation where no ref would ever dare give a penalty at Old Trafford for fear of being chased down by a pack of rabid united players and torn apart can be remedied if the officials would collectively grow a pair and demand respect from the players. Maybe only captains should be allowed to speak to the ref, as in rugby. There's lots that can be done under existing rules to improve the whole situation.

For me, Sandy has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments here.
There is little doubt that the pack of players screaming in their faces does intimidate referees.... you would have to be an exceptionally strong person not to be influenced to some extent by that sort of behaviour.

The glaringly obvious factor of the ridiculous lack of penalties ever awarded against the mancs at Old Trafford (as Sandy says), which goes back virtually the entire period of Ferguson's tenure as Manager, proves the point.

Other teams have learned from the mancs, and there is little doubt Gerrard was right when he said Styles was intimidated by the constant pressure from John Terry and co, and he eventually cracked.

I agree entirely that only Captains wearing the armband should be allowed to aprroach the referee to make a complaint/representations. Anyone else doing so should immediately be shown a yellow (and if a freekick has been awarded, it should be immediately moved forward ten yards). It might take a season of two of heavy bookings to get the message across, but the players would learn eventually.

I am not personally in favour of video or any other type of electronic interference with the game.

At the moment, the game of football is essentially the same, whether it is played in front of 80,000 people in one of the world's great stadiums, or in front of 25 people on a village green. Bringing in expensive electronic equipment will change the very nature of the game, and set the elite rich teams and Leagues apart from the grass roots of the game.

Referees will make mistakes. So will strikers, missing chances, or Goalkeepers dropping the ball. Human error is part of the game, and actually part of it's charm.

Lets face it, we've benefited from enough dodgy decisions in our favour over the years. You want a list? How about the following, all since 2000....

1) Andrew Johnson is brought down in the Liverpool box in the final seconds of the 2001 League Cup Final with the score 1-1. It looks a stonewall penalty for Birmingham, but the ref waves play on. Liverpool take the cup on penalties.

2) Stefan Henchoz handles the ball not once but TWICE in the Liverpool box during the 2001 FA Cup Final v Arsenal. Thierry Henry goes purple in protest, but the ref sees niether offence. Liverpool win the cup 2-1 with two late goals from Owen.

3) With Liverpool leading just 2-1 against Roma at Anfield in the 2001 UFEA Cup run, the referee awards a penalty to Roma, clearly pointing to the spot. Then, he inexpicably changes his mind, and awards a corner. Roma went ape****, and not surprisingly!

4) 2005 Champion's League Final Penalty shoot-out. Jerzy Dudek, supposed to be on his line according to the rules of the game, was standing almost half way to the penalty spot for at least two of the Milan penalties. The penalties SHOULD have been taken again.

And so on.....

Iffy decisions will go for you as well as against you. On balance, I'll take the ref's decisions in our favour since 2000, instead of video evidence. (we'd be down at least four trophies if the decisions had been right!!!! )

[Samarkand]

I can go either way on this. My number one fundamental requirement would be that a video review, if enacted, could only take 1 minute. Anything more and the ref's decision stands.

Now some are clear cut (Carragher, Villa), so maybe the request for review could only be made by the ref, not the team against which it's awarded. You know that every one will be challenged if that's the case.

For those who are adamantly opposed to a video review, I would remind you that rugby union has it in the big games and most observers believe the concept to be a success. Of course there is a difference, but many thought it would ruin that game too. It hasn't.

[Robert Briscoe]

I am in favour of video evidence, if done initially for significant goal line incidents. Like all technology, it can be modified over time.

A video can't determine intent, so the Henchoz example is not good.

I won't vote for it here as the question is poorly framed (as usual with the poll questions here). 2 Minutes? It stirs up NFL meddling and interference, where the umps like the sound of their voice on the stadium mics.

The 4th official and Video Ref is already with us as shown in the World Cup final. In that case, the decison was correct and done with the least amount of fuss.