

Poll: Bodies, Technology or Leave It Be?
By: chris | December 4th, 2008
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)
![]() |
Soccer Forums | Team/International Results | |||
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share
![]() |
Comments
-



I really don’t care either way. I think it’s the kind of thing that evens itself out over time. Sometimes it benefits you, sometimes it happens against your team. It goes both ways.
I think they should get even stricter with the diving. They should place extra cameras on the field to catch those dirty divers. Fine the whole team after someone is caught diving. That’s the crap I’m getting tired of seeing.
Posted from
United States

-



You can’t fine a whole team for an individual taking a dive?!? Players make decisions to dive because they want a better contract, because they are trying to reach some bonus milestone, or because they are trying to draw a foul (like in Basketball).
Fine the player, not the team, and not the club.
Posted from
United States

-



Don’t care. First of all, players are less likely to do it if they know that the entire team will be fined. Secondly, is that the only player that benefits from the dive? No. If the ref calls a penalty, the TEAM has the opportunity to score a goal. If the dive results in a free kick, the TEAM has the opportunity to score a goal from it. Finally, the manager should have control over his players. When a player dives, it shows disrespect to the sport, to the refs, to the organizer (FIFA, UEFA etc) and to the supporters of either team. It’s a slap in the face and it should NEVER be justified OR condoned. Ever.
Posted from
United States

-



Video.
More men just adds the possibilty of more human error.Posted from
United States

-



I would actually like to see people apply the supposed holy grail of perfection that is the instant replay. In France, the cahiers du football (www.cahiersdufoot.net) regularly show that the french TVs are wrong because they don’t know the offside rule. They place the offside “line” (revelateur) where they want to (at the feet of the defenders, or at the attackers’ hands, depending on if they want to show the player was offside or not), and quite often manage to call offsides when the ball has already left the player’s foot. What’s more, in the french Coupe de la Ligue Final last year there was an injury time call that can, sadly, not be resolved at all by instant replay. Was it a foul, a mere touch, or a dive? ask five people and you’ll get all three answers, as well as ridiculous “you can’t give a penalty in injury time” (why not? do some rules not apply in injury time?). The ref gave a penalty (that went on to win the match), whilst the commentators were claiming it shouldn’t have been a penalty, dismissing the fact that even just slight contact at full speed -will- knock a player down.
Video and technology is far from being the holy grail it is touted as being. And given a 50-50 call on the edge of the box, I’d prefer the referee to choose in a split second rather than have a video that doesn’t show anything and have a far more debatable (and far more likely biased) call given with it.
Posted from
China

Comments are closed











