SUN, 8:30AM ET
LIV2
SOU1
SUN, 11AM ET
NEW0
MCFC2
MON, 3PM ET
BUR1
CHE3
TUES, 2:45PM ET
BES0
ARS0
THU, 1PM ET
TRI
THFC
SAT, 7:45AM ET
AST
NEW

Fact Or Fiction: Video Replay Will Solve Refereeing Problems in the Premier League

fact or fiction Fact Or Fiction: Video Replay Will Solve Refereeing Problems in the Premier League

“Fact Or Fiction” is a series that will be run every Friday. In this series, an assertion will be made regarding an impacting topic in the Premier League. EPL Talk writers Matt Hackenmiller and Earl Reed each offer their views on whether the statement is “Fact or Fiction.” This week, The Gaffer is sitting in for Earl.

Fact or Fiction: The introduction of video replay would solve the refereeing problems in the Premier League.

MH: Fact. I have two thoughts about using video replay or any form of technology in sports.  First, if a bum like me sitting on my couch can watch several replays of a controversial play, why are the important decision makers like referees afforded the same luxury?  Secondly, I don’t know of any major sport that has initiated video replay and that sport became worse or lost integrity.  In most cases, the sport has gotten better.  With the amount of money that is involved in the Premier League now, the use of video replay is essential to ensure that all vital rulings are accurate. I realize that there is no sure fire cure all, but when the F.A. steps up and finally brings in video replay, they will not only be doing referees a favor, but football fans as well.

TG: Fiction. While incorporating video replays into the game of soccer would solve a lot of the issues we see in the game, it’s not going to be a cure-all. There will still be times when video replays, no matter how many different camera angles there are, are not going to definitively tell the person operating the video equipment whether an incident was a foul or not. Just imagine how much controversy there would be based on a crucial decision that couldn’t be decided by a video referee. The referee would then have to make the decision based on what? Based on his reading of what he saw from the videos, or what he thought he saw when it first happened?

What do you think? Is it fact or fiction that the introduction of video replay would solve the refereeing problems in the Premier League?

This entry was posted in Fact Or Fiction Friday, Leagues: EPL. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Fact Or Fiction: Video Replay Will Solve Refereeing Problems in the Premier League

  1. Fernando says:

    In the two minutes it takes for a team to celebrate a goal, we at home can see at least two angles of the goal that was just scored. How someone in the stadium can’t decide if it’s a goal or not in that time is astounding.

    Let me be clear, video review should be used for goals only. To use it for anything other than that would mean we’re opening up pandora’s box.

  2. Todd says:

    ^ I agree, use on goals only. Stopping the play every 2 minutes will ruin the free-flowing aspect we all love about the sport. I say instead of concentrating on video replay so much, how about rounding up more world-class officials. The pool from which to choose from currently is quite small. To solve the true problem, we need to see more high quality officials that get the calls right first, before even diving into video replay.

    • Fernando says:

      More officials doesn’t solve the issue. Do we really want two referees, four linesmen with 5 guys watching the goal? That’s insane.

      Two men upstairs watch the replays and confirm either way. It’s not perfect but it’s the most efficient way moving forward.

      • Todd says:

        I don’t mean more officials on the field, I meant in general just more quality officials to choose from, read carefully.

        • Fernando says:

          Well your point wasn’t clear in that regard. You could have the best of the best officiating games but they will miss things.

          It’s not practical to say a better official will catch something in a split second that a normal official can.
          Hockey uses two officials on the ice and they still miss things on a smaller playing surface.

  3. Harold says:

    I agree with having refs upstairs reviewing the replays. As noted in the article, everyone watching at home gets to see replays from different angles to see if a goal is legitimate as soon as it is scored. This is the basis against which the ref on the field is being assessed, at least by the fans, managers and the media. If he is up against that kind of scrutiny then at least give him the benefit of all the available technology

  4. IanCransonsKnees says:

    Would this have been brought up if the decisions had gone for Spurs and against Stoke?

  5. Harry says:

    It will not solve the problem completely but it will go a long way in cutting out major errors. The big problem with EPL officials is that on the whole they are very poor. Better training and more consistency amongst the officials should be a higher priority.

  6. George says:

    I agree that every goal should be reviewed, and you would only need one replay official to that. I would also suggest reviews of penalties in the box. Takes a few seconds to check and see if it was a dive or a real foul. I also think that officials should review tapes of the games and punish in some fashion those that dive. It’s the part of the game I hate most.

  7. Paul says:

    With goals – was it or wasn’t it over the line – they should introduce the Hawk-Eye system that’s used in tennis and cricket. The people behind the Hawk-Eye system reckon they can provide an accurate answer within 0.5 seconds. That wouldn’t affect play at all because by the time the ball has been picked up from the back of the net the ref would already have an answer.

    With penalty decisions I’m not to sure because football is all open play so I wouldn’t like to see players or the ref be able to use ‘reviews’ like they do in tennis for example. I would much prefer for the officials to be thoroughly put through their paces and step up their game because this season has show some seriously poor decisions. They’re only human though and of course sometimes they’ll miss things. If there was a choice of having reviews or keeping it as it is – I would choose to keep it as it is every time.

  8. Daniel says:

    Anything that can be objectively, and accurately seen — yes.
    I would see goals absolutely since you see the ball cross the line or note. Also, if a goal is prevented by foul — like a handball deflecting what would otherwise be a clear goal — yes.

    What if there was an official watching replays and only communicating to the ref if there is a clear-cut foul/goal/whatever? If there is a foul and you can’t ABSOLUTELY tell that it’s dive or not you don’t communicate that. Otherwise the actual ref calls the game as always.

    I’m mostly frustrated by the calls that CLEARLY negatively impact the game. If there isn’t a clear-cut goal/foul that wasn’t called it shouldn’t interrupt the game.
    There should be some mechanism in place, though, for the really obvious misses — Henry’s handball right before the last World Cup, Lampard’s goal that should have been against Germany, Spur’s/Stoke game comes to mind as well…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>