Technology in Sport

[Mike]

Technology in Sport

I just watched a tennis match where they used technology to check if a ball was in or out when it was a close call. Played back on a big screen (very clearly : Big black dot against the lines) for all to see….........similar to the big screens at a ruby match but instant !

A couple of times players appealed to the umpire and then as state above it was played back instantly and except by the players and the audience loved it too. No arguments with the umpire or players screaming to see the tournament referee !!!!

So why o why is this not brought into the game of football……the game if full of cheats diving all over the play or holding the head as if they had been punched !!!

Referees can be along way from the action and can make mistakes but how annoying when a goal is given to have a replay seconds later which shows the player off side, a penalty given to see on a instant replay there was no contact, or players having to be held back from trying to attack the refree when a decision is given against them. What example does this give to the children playing on a Sunday morning or at school !!!

Technology is now in tennis,ruby,cricket...there is big money in football and I believe this is now long over due !

[Russ]

Apparently the FA are considering trialling this sort of technology at Highbury to see how much punishment it can handle per game....

[Halcyon]

I agree that this should be used. If it can be done quickly as it seems to be, then this would make matches a lot fairer.

[pedantic]

Originally Posted by Russ D

Apparently the FA are considering trialling this sort of technology at Highbury to see how much punishment it can handle per game....

Think I'll watch this thread and wait for BB's response

[Hom3r]

With prize money in sport running in to Hundreds of thousands, I think this will be a good idea.

(Look at the infamous 1966 world cup final goal. yousing todays technology, British experts said that it wasn't a goal, and German expert said that it was a goal.)

[Chrysalis]

I am for it to be honest, the ref's are making more and more mistakes and their decisions are never punishable. Only last saturday leeds 2nd goal against leics hit a offside player, the linesman raised his flag but decided to change his mind before the ref seen him, this resulted in us going behind and having a man sent off.

I cant see it happening tho since too many argue that it will affect the free flow of the game, and those big clubs who always seem to get ref's favouring them would be stuffed

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I am for it to be honest, the ref's are making more and more mistakes and their decisions are never punishable.

I don't think that Referees are making any more mistakes than they ever have before, but now, with a dozen or more cameras covering every angle of big games, all decisions are subject to microscopic review, playing the tape back time and again, when the Ref gets just *one* shot at it.

And what message would this send out? The Referee's decision is supposed to be final, but still we see players trying to argue, intimidate or browbeat the Ref into changing his ruling (which they must *not* do) and were every slightly controversial decision go to video it would only say that "what the Ref says is unimportant, it's the video camera that's really running the game")

This should not happen.

[bmxbandit]

Originally Posted by Mike

So why o why is this not brought into the game of footballââ‚à ƒâ€šÃ‚¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¦ÃƒÂ¢Ã ¢â€šÂ¬Ã‚¦th e game if full of cheats diving all over the play or holding the head as if they had been punched !!!

because it would quite possibly end up like american football, where a 60 mnute game ends up taking 4 hours!

video footage is still quite subjective when it comes to some fouls etc. i can see a good case for testing whether the ball is over the line (whatever line that may be) but otherwise i think it'd interrupt the game too much.

---------- Post added at 18:34 ---------- Previous post was at 18:32 ----------

also i think football can take something from rugby, in that arguing with the referee should not be tolerated in any shape or form.

[gazzae]

Originally Posted by bmxbandit

because it would quite possibly end up like american football, where a 60 mnute game ends up taking 4 hours!

Only about 3 hours. Anyway thats not down to video reviews.

In gridiron a Coach can only challenge a play two times a half, and there are penalties for a coach if the play isn't over turned. Not all plays are challengeable, and big mistakes still happen.

[bmxbandit]

Originally Posted by gazzae

Only about 3 hours. Anyway thats not down to video reviews.

i've seen plenty hit 4 :P

no, it's not down to video revews but it is a game that naturally stops and starts and so lends itself well to video reviews.

football is a flowing game, and if any reviewing was introduced i'd hope it's use would be restricted to very few circumstances to keep it that way!

[sherer]

as stated football is a fast flowing game and can't be stop every 5 mins to go to a video ref. it wouldn't work the game would have no flow to it.. the players would end up getting cold and cause them injuries etc

what should be done is bring it in to check whether the ball has crossed the line for a goal or not and that should be it.. it can be checked quite easily and quickly and done disrupt the game

it was tried in peru for the FIFA under 17 championship but i'm sure sure what came of these trials

what should also happen is that after a match all the diving, pretending to be injured etc can be looked at and players banned for 15 games.. but this would have to be done with FIFA all over the world we couldn't just have it in England.. at the weekend one player was fouled from behind but went down and held the front of his knee!!!! surely the refs must know that is impossible

for the referrees ONLY the captain should be able to talk to them anyone else should be banned and carded if they do

[ian@huth]

The problem with video replays is that the angle of the shot doesn't always reflect what has actually occured. I have seen fouls being analysed with shots from several different camera angles all appearing to show that a serious foul has been committed. A further shot from a different angle has shown a completely different story with it being evident that no foul had been committed. That further shot took some finding and many minutes of analysing all the different shots in slow motion were needed to arrive at the correct interpretation of what had happened. A referee with only one angle of sight and everything happening at full pace cannot always get things right. Stopping the game for several minutes to watch several slow motion replays of an incident is just not on.

In football technology could be used to verify if a ball had crossed a line or if a player was offside without affecting the flow of a game. Video replays could be used after the game by the referee to decide if a yellow or red card was justified or not. Perhaps in the case of a red card the player could be put in a sin bin with a fifth official studying video footage and advising the referee of his findings with the referee having the option if he thinks fit of allowing the player to return to the game from the sin bin.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by sherer

<snip>

it was tried in peru for the FIFA under 17 championship but i'm sure sure what came of these trials
<snip>

I heard on the radio the other day that the results of these trials were inconclusive. The technology will therefore not be used at the World Cup (yet).

[gazzae]

You could always just go for the low-tech solution, ala ice hockey and have a man behind each goal.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by ian@huth

The problem with video replays is that the angle of the shot doesn't always reflect what has actually occured.

Yep. Just look at England's 3rd 'goal' in the 1966 world cup final.

Everyone outside England knows it was never in but the replays aren't 100% conclusive either way.