• Arsenal Message Board

  • Mc Mc Oct 3, 2006 03:22 Flag

    Video Replays - False Penalty Claims

    After watching the Spurs - Portsmouth game I wondered if anyone thinks that the F.A should include or introduce Video replays due to the rise in a number of false penalty decisions/appeals.

    I think maybe there should be a quick re-view as it wouldn't take to much time and maybe add an extra minute to the game.

    If the diving player is judged to be diving I believe he should be given a yellow or red card due to sportmanship...What do you guys think ?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Very nice of you Mr Pijin.

      I see part of your point, re: offside - I was only thinking about it from a POV of an offside leading to a goal not from an attacker being denied because a linesman puts his flag up. Good point!

      At least everyone should be able to agree on Video evidence for balls crossing the goal line? I suppose this also has its flaw but with a camera on the cross bar a la cricket ina stump, that should be easily solved. I guess it is an expensive option for something that occurs very infrequently...

      I am now confused - I better go and lie down.

    • All very true. The only reason I would want to use video reviews during a game is for blatant dives where the player has clearly not been touched, blatant red card offences and maybe ball across the line decisions. It would have to be so carefully thought out so that it wouldn't in any way affect the flow of the game. I'd personally keep it very minimal. Like say a player gets hacked down and the ref is on his way over thinking of red carding the player, the "external viewing assistant" ( I like that name:-D) could see on the replay that the intent wasn't there after one review, he could just advise the ref (in his earpiece) he didn't think it warranted a red card as it wasn't as malicious as it first looked. I'd have to give the ref the ultimate choice in what he did with the information though. I'd basically have that little voice in his ear to give him a bit of quick extra info to make his decision. But hey I don't know, there are so many different ways to interpret a dive or a foul it would be very hard to run properly. I think the FA would have to be very careful if they ever decided to use replays to help refs.

      The last part of your post about the ref immediately dishing out a card, sometimes the refs consult the linesmen before making a decision this wouldn't be much different than that. Keep his cards in his pocket summon the two players (we all know how long that can take in itself) get a whisper from the "external viewing assistant" then make his decision.

    • I actually think the most important use of the technology should be in offside situations and ball crossing the line; and blatant unsportsmanlike behaviour or fouls - usually the off the ball type. For example the Ben Thatcher one - it was only blatant when watched in slow motion or from the right angle.

      We have seen how it is possible to draw a straight line to see whether players are level or not and ther has been situations where the ball has actually been touched by a member of the defending team resulting in no offside at all.

      I am less concerned about the diving because it is just too hard to judge - I am usually on the side of the attacker because I want them protected and want to see more goals.

      The only time that I think a referee should give a yellow card when he thinks player has dived and the said player is clearly asking for a penalty or card to be given to the opposition.

    • Well if it was obvious during the game the 4/5th official with a replay screen could advise the Ref straight away. Or even review it a few times while the game goes on and then advise the Ref to card the player if required during a stop in play. I think you've got to be really careful in working out how to do this because you don't want to take it too far. It can't be used for everything, as two different pundits (one ex-defender one ex-striker) see things differently even on slowed down replays. I think unless its absolute the 4/5th replay official should leave it alone.

    • Nah its the right pijin, you might notice a few double posts from me as I keep forgetting to change the profile name I use to post. I hit "stop" and think I've got there in time to change it. Apologies for this, at least its football stuff though. Thanks by the way Marintii.

    • oops wrong pijin

    • pijin happy to see you on the board!

    • Agreed. I also think, as a deterent for players to even try, that there could be a solution which involved getting carded after the game if a video pannel determined a player
      to have provocated the ref into giving a yellow to an opposing player based on a fake.

    • That was sposed to be from me, not him.

    • I am a big fan of video replay. I think given the fact that a penalty, given as a result of a player diving, can change the outcome of a game in a very identifiable way
      (which is different then provocing a yellow or red card for
      an oposing player) the player should get an automatic red card if he is found to be diving.

      • 1 Reply to Govinda
      • Quite right
        diving to change a game is very bad and should be greeted with a red card
        but players when fouled who wave imaginary cards to the ref should be booked as this is unsportsman like behaviour
        most of the time when they have time between rolls to wave the imaginary card they can't have been that hurt in my veiw
        as far as the use of vidio evidence disrupting the game the rerun of the incedent at white hart lane was up on thier big screen before the pen was taken so the ref could see what a pillock he had been made to look
        Which is why i wonder did he not resined the decision and red card the player( I will admit i dont know all the rules and if he would have been able to take that action)

    • View More Messages