Poll: Bodies, Technology or Leave It Be?

The lads at UEFA experimented with a 5 man refereeing crew in Cyprus a couple weeks back, sitting an extra referee behind each of the goal lines to keep their eyes glued to the penalty areas looking for fouls, balls cross the goal line and inappropriate touching – with or without the ball. In other words, looking to avoid situations like the one yesterday in Twente v Schalke. Rob Wielaert was having a cup of tea all by his lonesome on the goal line when the ball bounded to him for a simple tap in, all of a nautical mile offside. As is always the case, Twente won by a goal. (Not that Schalke fans really seem to think it made a difference.)

Would another referee hovering over the goal line have gotten this one right? Probably.

Of course, this is still open to human error, the greatest problem gripping the system. Which leads to the other option the big acronyms (UEFA, FIFA, etc) stick their fingers in their ears and sing lalalalalalala at the top of their lungs whenever it’s to be mentioned: technology. More specifically, instant replay.

As is the case with the extra officials, it too has its advantages and disadvantages. The overwhelming advantage being high levels of accuracy and, shall we say, “justice”. This would require a clearly defined set of rules and regulations as to what is reviewable, how it is to be reviewed, and also where and when. None of which should require flying in a committee of stunningly brilliant minds the likes of which the world has never seen.

The disadvantages are typically seen as two fold: interrupting the flow of the game and sacrificing “purity”. Leaving a minimal footprint in the game may require that committee of minds, but I trust someone out there with knowledge of the technological capabilities can figure somehow, someway to make it happen. And even if not, I seem to find myself bemoaning the “interruption in flow” of games every time a player gets hit by the sniper in the upper deck, rolls on the ground for 45 seconds like he’s starring in a stop, drop & roll tutorial, only for him to get up and take his own free kick. Perhaps getting a bit stricter in that department could do wonders in opening up some time to leave the net interruption change hovering somewhere around zero.

(Another potential detraction, not so much a disadvantage, is cost. However, it hasn’t been explored far enough to have a sound figure, so that point is moot for now.)

Of course, then there’s the “leave it be” argument. Making account for and accepting human error as simply a part of the game. Leaving the game as it was generations ago. An argument which speaks to the emotional aspects of the game – by no means a less deserving argument.

As it goes, I’m fully in line with technology, eliminating as much human error as possible. And not so much the goal line technology, something which seems to be just on the horizon, as that involving offside and penalty calls. Whether a ball is in or out of the goal mouth doesn’t seem to arise nearly as often as the questionable offside call or the penalty that never was. Tis now a digital world, and though there’s still plenty of room for romance, there’s also room for accuracy and correctness.

But where do you stand? Give your vote and thoughts on this hot button issue below.

Extra officials, technology or nothin’ at all?
( polls)

Follow The Offside on Twitter

Some Related Stories:

Category: Polls, World Football