http://www.comeonthearsenal.com/2010/06/30/video-technology-debate-football/ ...a not quite dead yet Arsenal blog! Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:03:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.comeonthearsenal.com/2010/06/30/video-technology-debate-football/#comment-614 Sonuvagun Thu, 01 Jul 2010 00:04:15 +0000 http://www.comeonthearsenal.com/?p=738#comment-614 I guess the main problem is if open play continues is it fair for the ref to stop and consult? In Lampard's case the keeper got hold of the ball giving the ref a chance to blow (although technically the ball is still live and the keeper of course wanted to play on), but if the ball never goes out (or is not judged to have gone out) you are ruining the chance for a counter attack. That's the bottom line. It means that for some would-be penalties etc, where the ball goes flying out, you could stop and consult without detracting from the game (just the seconds required to consult) but for many you would actually have to stop open play. Either that or wait until the next time the ball goes out of play and then review. That could mean taking the play back several minutes - would goals and yellow cards that took place be rescinded? Also as the author of this article points out, most fouls and therefore penalties are a matter of opinion. There would be a heap of pressure for referees to give soft penalties every time a striker was kicked or pulled in the box... technically they are fouls. One solution would be that a coach call challenge 1 or 2 plays a game (like in American football). It is still disruptive but it puts a limit on the disruptive influence and would neutralise 95% of game-ruining calls. I guess the main problem is if open play continues is it fair for the ref to stop and consult? In Lampard’s case the keeper got hold of the ball giving the ref a chance to blow (although technically the ball is still live and the keeper of course wanted to play on), but if the ball never goes out (or is not judged to have gone out) you are ruining the chance for a counter attack. That’s the bottom line. It means that for some would-be penalties etc, where the ball goes flying out, you could stop and consult without detracting from the game (just the seconds required to consult) but for many you would actually have to stop open play. Either that or wait until the next time the ball goes out of play and then review. That could mean taking the play back several minutes – would goals and yellow cards that took place be rescinded? Also as the author of this article points out, most fouls and therefore penalties are a matter of opinion. There would be a heap of pressure for referees to give soft penalties every time a striker was kicked or pulled in the box… technically they are fouls. One solution would be that a coach call challenge 1 or 2 plays a game (like in American football). It is still disruptive but it puts a limit on the disruptive influence and would neutralise 95% of game-ruining calls.

]]>