Serious reffing discussion

atilladehun

The media coverage is frustrating but it is an issue I think most people want sorted. Trying to avoid personal witch hunts and highlighting flash points there's probably a few things most fans, players, managers and even ref's would want.

I think it's is all down to fairness. If less people felt hard done by (or cheated or conspired against) then more would enjoy the game.

• Obviously if there's a goal that's not given even though it was over the line then people feel aggrieved. So goal line technology is a must.
  
• Offside - letting play run until a video ref called it right wouldn't be that different from the current set up.
  
• In game video ref - probably the biggest change, could be the hardest one to bring in.
  
• Post game video ref - (even if the ref has seen it) It could improve the game a tremendous amount. It could be just any dangerous play or it could include things like diving too. If players knew their actions would be assessed then it would cut down a lot of bad behavior I believe. Like rugby citing.

Just wondering if people think there will ever be change in this area. Wouldn't it be nice if the players lead some sort of change in this area, instead of being doped up with money. I'd say even the ref's would love to not feel like a complete monkey

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I've no probelm with cideo decision, but the team should be limited to the number of challenges they can make. E.g., one per half.

Laois_Man

UEFA\FIFA will never give the go ahead to changes that remove their potential to influence a result.

The fact that these organizations are very highly corrupt is a fact that shouldn't even be in dispute!

SirDelboy18

There is a danger that the game will be slowed down too much with measures like this. Obviously goal-line technology is a must, but other than that I think it should stay the way it is. Otherwise the game will be stopped every 30 seconds for some video ref to view something.

Jesus Wept

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

I've no probelm with cideo decision, but the team should be limited to the number of challenges they can make. E.g., one per half.

That's a poor idea imo.

SirDelboy18 wrote: »

There is a danger that the game will be slowed down too much with measures like this. Obviously goal-line technology is a must, but other than that I think it should stay the way it is. Otherwise the game will be stopped every 30 seconds for some video ref to view something.

This would just not be the case at all.

eagle eye

I think video refereeing should be used, both live and in hindsight too.

I think you should get one rolling challenge per game, as long as you are found to be correct you get to challenge again. If you are wrong once then you can't challenge anything for the remainder of the game. This would put the onus on clubs to have their own experts who would review the play and then send a message to the bench to challenge.