France V Spain

Headshot

Just used the video ref to chalk off a goal for France because it was offside

Really great to see, hopefully this will be rolled out across Europe

btw the match is on ITV4

Headshot

Another great decision to use the video ref

This is brilliant use of the technology and surprisingly quick enough

Royale with Cheese

The linesmen get two massive calls wrong, the video corrects them both. It's 2-0 to Spain, it'd be 1-1 without the video ref. Why on earth has it taken this long for this to be at least trialled?

Andersonisgod

Hopefully we'll see it introduced in all major leagues quite soon.

By the way, Busquets put on a bit of a clinic tonight, without question the outstanding midfielder on the pitch.

Yep, great to see this in action. Tonight really shows why its needed. A goal initially stood, but then was rightly disallowed for offside, and then the exact opposite: a goal wrongly ruled out for offside and subsequently allowed as it wasn't.

rwbug

Ince calls Jacqui Oatley “darling”. He doesn't want video refs as “getting decisions right takes the emotion out of the game". Hopefully the last we see of him as a pundit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/paul-ince-pundit-france-spain-darling-football-about-wrong-decisions-video-a7655031.html

Andersonisgod

rwbug wrote: »

Ince calls Jacqui Oatley “darling”. He doesn't want video refs as “getting decisions right takes the emotion out of the game". Hopefully the last we see of him as a pundit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/paul-ince-pundit-france-spain-darling-football-about-wrong-decisions-video-a7655031.html

Imagine being the flagbearer for the side literally supporting stupidity and incorrectness. Somebody is on the wrong side of history, when this is inevitably implemented, those arguing against it, just like goal line technology, will look very silly and their ideals very outdated.

POKERKING

rwbug wrote: »

Ince calls Jacqui Oatley “darling”. He doesn't want video refs as “getting decisions right takes the emotion out of the game". Hopefully the last we see of him as a pundit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/paul-ince-pundit-france-spain-darling-football-about-wrong-decisions-video-a7655031.html

Worse thing is, there are plenty of people with this mentality. "Ah sure the wrong decisions are what get us talking on a monday in work"....no they are not.

With so much money involved in the game and so many things on the line, how we end up relying on the eyesight of a middle aged man on a crowded football field with two linesman to call every decision is mind blowing in this day and age.

munchkin_utd

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

The linesmen get two massive calls wrong, the video corrects them both. It's 2-0 to Spain, it'd be 1-1 without the video ref. Why on earth has it taken this long for this to be at least trialled?

simple, Sepp Blatter vetoed it because he believed the only progress in soccer needed was getting the women to wear short shorts.

greendom

I liked Rabiot's post match comments where he said it was a shame it wasn't in place for the Barca PSG match a couple of weeks back.

Billy86

rwbug wrote: »

Ince calls Jacqui Oatley “darling”. He doesn't want video refs as “getting decisions right takes the emotion out of the game". Hopefully the last we see of him as a pundit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/paul-ince-pundit-france-spain-darling-football-about-wrong-decisions-video-a7655031.html

Sadly I doubt he's anywhere close to alone there, really is amazing how much football is lagging in this front - granted American football is a much, much easier sport to implement it in but they've had a form of video refereeing for just shy of 20 years now! Rugby is more continuous in play too, and in rugby they've been using the TMO for 16 years.

It's like goal line technology, some people will be have to dragged kicking and screaming into giving change a proper go, and once it proves so much better they'll forget they ever opposed it.

ArmaniJeanss

Billy86 wrote: »

It's like goal line technology, some people will be have to dragged kicking and screaming into giving change a proper go, and once it proves so much better they'll forget they ever opposed it.

I don't think anyone was against goal line technology in the current form.

As for the trial in tonights match people are entitled to ask what it means for the game, without being accused of being Luddites.

To me it seems you can no longer play the flag at all, attackers should be told to play on regardless and assume they are on onside, and defenders have to continue to defend and tackle assuming that the flag is wrong. You can now only play the whistle whereas previously you could stop and then point out to the ref that the flag had gone up knowing that 99.9% of the time the ref would accept the flag. This is a tactical (albeit small) change in the game and merits discussion beyond 'video good, anyone against it is fool'.

Sabre0001

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

The linesmen get two massive calls wrong, the video corrects them both. It's 2-0 to Spain, it'd be 1-1 without the video ref. Why on earth has it taken this long for this to be at least trialled?

PP balance would have been a little happier without the video ref's involvement :P

Billy86

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I don't think anyone was against goal line technology in the current form.

As for the trial in tonights match people are entitled to ask what it means for the game, without being accused of being Luddites.

To me it seems you can no longer play the flag at all, attackers should be told to play on regardless and assume they are on onside, and defenders have to continue to defend and tackle assuming that the flag is wrong. You can now only play the whistle whereas previously you could stop and then point out to the ref that the flag had gone up knowing that 99.9% of the time the ref would accept the flag. This is a tactical (albeit small) change in the game and merits discussion beyond 'video good, anyone against it is fool'.

Many higher ups at FIFA itself had significant issue with goal line technology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goal-line_technology#Criticism
Sepp Blatter has been quoted as saying "Other sports regularly change the laws of the game to react to the new technology. ... We don't do it and this makes the fascination and the popularity of football"

From the article below:
Valcke said that the use of video technology was “definitely not on the table” saying it is impossible to have a “zero-fault” system.

“We can talk about refereeing decisions which, when you looked at them after the game, you could say were perhaps not good decisions. We didn't say you could have a zero fault system in the World Cup. Additional assistants [referees] could happen in 2014 to make sure these kind of things are not happening in refereeing.

“It doesn't mean the use of video, that is definitely not on the table today, but one thing we are discussing is two additional assistants to support referees to make decision-making easier and to have more eyes helping him to make such decisions.” In a prescient comment Valcke added: “We knew this is where criticism would come."

Our own FA even voted against it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/england/7857729/England-v-Germany-Fifa-want-better-refereeing-not-goal-line-technology.html
Fifa decided to rule out the use of technology at a meeting of the International Football Association Board in March. The IFAB board, made up of the four Home Nations and four Fifa officials including Blatter and Valcke, voted 6-2 to oppose its introduction, with the Irish and Welsh FA’s voting with Fifa.

Patrick Nelson, chief executive of the Irish FA, said: "We very much appreciate the human side of the game, the debate, the controversy, that's why the board has taken this decision," he said.

This is basically the exact same argument Ince is putting forward 'taking from the emotion/controversy/etc' of the game. And like I said, going by how quiet the issue is since it has been introduced, you'd forget they ever opposed it.




It is a small tactical change, and those happen in nearly all sports all the time as the rules, technology, etc do. I don't see any issue at all with that to be honest.

NIMAN

But just think about all those pundits who will have so much of the talking points taken away from them.

And the water cooler chat for a decade or more now is usually around bad and dodgy decisions. They will become a thing of the past too.

Football thrived on controversial decisions, it helped hype up the game.

ArmaniJeanss

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I don't think anyone was against goal line technology in the current form.

As for the trial in tonights match people are entitled to ask what it means for the game, without being accused of being Luddites.

To me it seems you can no longer play the flag at all, attackers should be told to play on regardless and assume they are on onside, and defenders have to continue to defend and tackle assuming that the flag is wrong. You can now only play the whistle whereas previously you could stop and then point out to the ref that the flag had gone up knowing that 99.9% of the time the ref would accept the flag. This is a tactical (albeit small) change in the game and merits discussion beyond 'video good, anyone against it is fool'.

You never play the flag, you play the whistle. There was a video doing the rounds from MLS where everyone thought a player was offside, flag went up, but the referee saw that the ball had been played by an opposition player and waved it on.

ArmaniJeanss

Billy86 wrote: »

Many higher ups at FIFA itself had significant issue with goal line technology:.....................

I kinda meant posters here and normal people but yeah point taken re the fifa heads.

Billy86 wrote: »

Our own FA even voted against it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/england/7857729/England-v-Germany-Fifa-want-better-refereeing-not-goal-line-technology.html

Fairly sure that's the Nordies that the Telegraph is referring to when it says 'the Irish', not the FAI. The IFA have a vote on the rules committee, we don't.

ArmaniJeanss

Deleted User wrote: »

You never play the flag, you play the whistle. There was a video doing the rounds from MLS where everyone thought a player was offside, flag went up, but the referee saw that the ball had been played by an opposition player and waved it on.

Everyone effectively plays the flag because the example you've given is such a rare occurrence (I agree that they shouldn't and should play the whistle).

Billy86

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I kinda meant posters here and normal people but yeah point taken re the fifa heads.


Fairly sure that's the Nordies that the Telegraph is referring to when it says 'the Irish', not the FAI. The IFA have a vote on the rules committee, we don't.

Ugh, you're right... multitasking and didn't think that through!

Boardsies tend to have a good deal of sense on this stuff mind, but I knew a few people who backed that argument. Not many, but it's just one of those things that you have to scratch your head over. I mean disagreements about how to implement it etc - ok sure, but just disagreeing with it solely on the basis that it means there will be less incorrect decisions is just...

Laois_Man

munchkin_utd wrote: »

simple, Sepp Blatter vetoed it because he believed the only progress in soccer needed was getting the women to wear short shorts.

No, the real reason Sepp Blatter vetoed it was because video technology would remove the ability of FIFA/UEFA to influence results through accidental bad decisions if necessary.

greendom

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Everyone effectively plays the flag because the example you've given is such a rare occurrence (I agree that they shouldn't and should play the whistle).

When the rule comes into effect, players will learn pretty quick to play to the whistle.

astrofool

They should always be playing the whistle, all the rest that goes on is just gamesmanship and attempts to influence the referee, it's mad the referee let the players "decide" these decisions at all, as if the referee would miss that his linesman has the flag up.

thelad95

I think pundits are just annoyed that they'll now have too actually discuss football instead of over analysing whether the handball should have been given or a player was offside.

Something that most are borderline incompetent at doing.

Andersonisgod

NIMAN wrote: »

But just think about all those pundits who will have so much of the talking points taken away from them.

And the water cooler chat for a decade or more now is usually around bad and dodgy decisions. They will become a thing of the past too.

Football thrived on controversial decisions, it helped hype up the game.

Hopefully a change in the rules then will actually lead to people talking about the actual footballers, you kno, the guys playing the game, instead of the incessant chat about the non playing guy with the whistle.

irishman86

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Hopefully a change in the rules then will actually lead to people talking about the actual footballers, you kno, the guys playing the game, instead of the incessant chat about the non playing guy with the whistle.

Its only going to be for goals, plenty of time for those guys to mess up in other parts of the pitch :pac:

Arghus

Andersonisgod wrote: »

Hopefully a change in the rules then will actually lead to people talking about the actual footballers, you kno, the guys playing the game, instead of the incessant chat about the non playing guy with the whistle.

What was that you were saying again about the refs in La Liga...

dfx-

Deleted User wrote: »

You never play the flag, you play the whistle. There was a video doing the rounds from MLS where everyone thought a player was offside, flag went up, but the referee saw that the ball had been played by an opposition player and waved it on.

You run onside onto a long ball, flag goes up incorrectly and the whistle goes, everyone stops, playing the whistle.

Can that decision be reviewed? How do you restart the game for the attacker who should've been let through on goal one-on-one.

alchemist33

rwbug wrote: »

Ince calls Jacqui Oatley “darling”. He doesn't want video refs as “getting decisions right takes the emotion out of the game". Hopefully the last we see of him as a pundit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/international/paul-ince-pundit-france-spain-darling-football-about-wrong-decisions-video-a7655031.html

From football365:

Poor Jacqui Oatley has been called “darlin'” too many times to be offended by ridiculous middle-aged men like Paul Ince so it’s worth focusing instead on his views on video technology, as espoused on ITV4…

“Getting decisions right takes the emotion out of the game…football is all about right and wrong decisions.”

Oddly, that’s not what he said back in 2013 when – while managing Blackpool badly – he received a five-match stadium ban for “violently shoving” a fourth official while repeatedly saying the words “I’ll knock you f**king out you c***”.
If only they’d had video technology, darlin’.

johnnyryan89

dfx- wrote: »

You run onside onto a long ball, flag goes up incorrectly and the whistle goes, everyone stops, playing the whistle.

Can that decision be reviewed? How do you restart the game for the attacker who should've been let through on goal one-on-one.

What might happen as in Rugby you give the attacking team the benefit of the doubt and not blow up play when the flag goes up. If he scores you can review it to make sure he was on side and award the goal.

ArmaniJeanss

johnnyryan89 wrote: »

What might happen as in Rugby you give the attacking team the benefit of the doubt and not blow up play when the flag goes up. If he scores you can review it to make sure he was on side and award the goal.

And if he doesn't score but instead wins a corner or a freekick do you review it?

johnnyryan89

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

And if he doesn't score but instead wins a corner or a freekick do you review it?

I'd love to know this too cause yesterday someone mentioned it would be used to review goals only or something like that but for a situation like you mentioned I'd say yes it would need to be reviewed. Wouldnt take them five seconds to review if the player was onside or not.

dfx-

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

And if he doesn't score but instead wins a corner or a freekick do you review it?

Does the linesman continue to chase the play or stand in position with his flag up?

What if his shot is parried or hits the post and the attack goes through another phase. There's no natural break in play. Do we have the stupid rugby way of letting play go on and on and on and finally bring it back at a stupid arbitrary point judged by the ref?

dfx-

dfx- wrote: »

You run onside onto a long ball, flag goes up incorrectly and the whistle goes, everyone stops, playing the whistle.

Can that decision be reviewed? How do you restart the game for the attacker who should've been let through on goal one-on-one.

In this case no. I would not use the VAR. Once the whistle has gone, play has stopped. Free out to the other side regardless. Video technology is needed, but limitations must apply to it all the same IMO.