For those of you that don’t know, I’m a nerd.
But don’t chastise me too much. After all, this very site wouldn’t exist if this wasn’t the case.
Anyway, as an applied science enthusiast, I like nothing more than seeing problems solved with the aid of technology.
And to me refereeing is a problem that can be fixed with a few painfully basic tools.
Before you say it, no, this isn’t reactionary just because Wolves have been on the end of some naff decisions of late. It’s a widely accepted fact throughout football that the men in the middle need help.
Quite simply, something has to change.
I don’t see how anyone can dispute this.
Of course there are some who still bang the drum that the addition of technology will slow the game down and ruin the sport, but I don’t think this has to be the case.
These are the three innovations I would like to see and how I would envisage them working:
Video replays and the 5th official
This is perhaps the biggest call, but the one I think would help the most.
There should be a 5th official with access to video replays, who the referee can get assistance from by making a simple hand signal.
This could only be used for certain situations though when the play has already stopped, such as:
- When the referee awards a foul and needs a second opinion on whether the offence warrants further action i.e. yellow or red card. This wouldn’t slow the game down as play has already been stopped because the referee has awarded a foul. This would see more tackles punished as they should be and would also help referees in other situations such as when deciding if a defender who fouls an attacker denied him a clear goalscoring opportunity.
- When the referee awards a foul and needs a second opinion on whether the offence was inside or outside the penalty area. Again, this wouldn’t slow the game down and would immediately eradicate penalties given for fouls outside the box and free-kicks given for fouls inside.
- When the referee stops the play to address an off the ball incident and requires further information on what has taken place. This wouldn’t slow the play down because the game always eventually stops when a player collapses to the floor in a heap. This immediately prevents silly dismissals and equally means players can’t get away with petulant actions.
It’s important the 5th official is stationed away from the dugout so home crowds, managers and players aren’t breathing down their neck.
This would undeniably relieve some of the pressure on the man in the middle too.
Microphones
Another big call but I think the referee should wear a microphone so all conversations with players are recorded. This feed should also be piped through to television coverage, as it is in rugby.
Players need to be held accountable for their reactions towards referees. Whether it’s foul and abusive language or attempting to sway their decisions, they do it because they know they can get away with it.
Goal line technology
Probably the one that’s closest to coming to fruition.
If they can get the mechanics of it right, there’s no disputing it would enhance the game.
I don’t really mind if it can’t measure down to the millimeter either. What we must stamp out is goals not being awarded when the ball is about two foot over the goal line such as Frank Lampard’s goal in the World Cup.
Refereeing needs to evolve to cope with the modern game and surely implementing these ideas are no more radical than when the offside rule was introduced or the backpass abolished.
Does anyone disagree?
The time wasting argument is nonsense.
Watch next time a penalty’s given and see how long it takes for it to be taken as the ref has to deal with being confronted by umpteen players. Also the grass roots argument (that it has to be the same for Penn Colts U-11s as it does for the Wolves) is also rubbish. What about ball boys, multiball, semi-synthetic pitches, undersoil heating etc.
The game is quite rightly different at Pro Level and technology is definitely needed. Even it it does slow it down a bit, so what? We all leave at 5pm instead of 4.50pm. 10mins extra value for money, oh hang on the Weasel might charge us more!
As a referee myself I will hold my hands up and say that I don’t always get it right, I mean we are after all, only human. The use of technology to aid the referee seems a simple enough idea, in theory. In reality however, I don’t see it happening.
Each of the above are a strong enough case, and would probably solve 99% of the inaccurate decisions given against teams/players. But it would obliterate the post pub chat “was it a penalty?”, “did the ball really cross the line?” These are fundamental conversations of the fanatical fan, remove these and what do you have to speak about after the game, not much.
Granted it’s a weak argument when on the other side technology would make the game a lot fairer and as you say hold players accountable for their actions. I still feel that the addition of technology would slow the game down, pausing for the all important decision to filter to the man in the middle before being brandished on a huge screen ‘GOAL’ or ‘RED CARD’ etc. If a team is on top of another and then a break in play comes it would give the opposition a chance to rest and regroup, buy which time the ascendency might be lost. It’s a psychological point!
The addition of a ref at each end situated in along the goal line has been tested and is an alternative solution. Referee’s are already wired up to each other anyway so they have that link of communication. The other thing to take into account is the cost, and I wouldn’t see any world governing body putting their hands in their pockets to fund that.
At the end of the day the referee’s do a pretty decent job given the amount of abuse they always seem to get, so we must stick with them for now, like it or not!
I agree that none of the above, apart from goal line tech, are likely to happen anytime soon.
I don’t think the post-game chat would be in jeopardy though, as even with video replays decisions could still be viewed differently and there are plenty of other issues to discuss e.g. tactics, individual performances, etc.
I don’t think it would take as long as you think either or be as costly. Refs already wear an earpiece so how hard would it be for him to just make a signal to ask someone in front of a tv and get a verdict back in his ear with some feedback. Probably a 30 second job in most cases.
I definitely wouldn’t go down the route of having decisions flash up on a scoreboard as they do in cricket. That would be a step too far.
I agree with the microphones and goal like tech, I’m not so sure about video replays. I think that would slow the game down, not by much, but enough to make people complain about it. Also most ref decisions would then just be deferred to the 5th official. Goal line tech is so close to being implemented. Apparently they have response time from the ball crossing the line down to two seconds. I’ve seen linesman flag for offside anything up to 5 seconds after the ball was played. As long as this is the case then let’s have it.
I think rather than video replays retrospective action needs to be better / tougher and that the FA needs to happily admit when the ref gets it wrong. Everyone understands that the pace of the game, bad weather, obstructed views mean that refs make mistakes but its part of the game, however the FA should have the power to go back and change the cards given. I think this would be the fairest way to enforce the rules and wouldn’t change the flow of the game. This would mean that they could book players for foul language by listening to the microphone recordings after the match.
The argument of ‘time wasting’ and ‘interruption to the flow of the game’ with a quick look at video, like in cricket, or even the ref consulting via microphone with a 4th official is not a plausible one.
Any stop, as the ref consults what ever he does, will never be as long as a whole Arsenal team pleading for the dismissal of Milijas.
Or Chelsea, Utd, Citeh, all their players pleading their case to one man.
One short ‘ask’ for the 4th official’s view will resolve it and time will actually be saved not wasted!
Agree with all points. Football is crying out for technology. Our officials are essentially blind compared to most other sports.
And they’re laughing at us.
The only other addition i’d like is for video replays of offsides. Offsides given when a goal is clearly onside (ie. Adebayor the other week can’t remember who against) and no offsides given for a clear offside (the lad who scored Sunderland’s winner against man city) are the kind of decisions that change games (those two being good examples).The restart after a supposed goal takes long enough for the official to just radio his 5th official for confirmation on whether to give the goal or a free kick.
In the name of fairness these have to happen. There’s too much money wrapped up in football for results to keep being decided by one man in a black shirt.
Problem with this is they can’t only do it for the goals. They would have to do it for every off side, pretty much making the linesman redundant. Which means 1/3rd of a less chance of a massive cheer when an official falls over.
I don’t see how a replay system for offsides could work because the play isn’t always guaranteed to stop immediately after the incident.
That could get very complicated and very messy fast.
Whereas, if the ref is simply asking for some help with a decision he’s already pulled up for a foul, there’s nothing to lose and everything to gain.
I think this is why it’s such a tricky and controversial subject. (Nearly) everyone agrees that technology should be brought in. Just how to implement it into the existing game is the big problem.
Great topic for discussion though!
Ok rather than ‘time wasting’ then I think the question is, would the video replay take over from the job of the ref?
95% of the time refs get the decision right and I’m sure JT can assure us that refs never go out with the intention of getting things wrong but human error is part of the game. I think with video replays refs wouldn’t trust their initial decision.
It is frustrating but I understand when refs accidently give a free kick the wrong way or gives a player a yellow instead of a red card. And although annoying, we all enjoy shouting at the ref and bemoaning our luck, but if a retrospective system *that worked* could admit that in hindsight the ref got it wrong but hey, it happens and we’ve made amends, we’d all be much happier!
I don’t think anyone wants to directly attack or remove the refs entirely. I think thomas is right in the original article in saying we should only use it for big decisions where the play is already stopped.
I’d agree. It needs to be used for the game changing decisions. Little decisions are fine to just go down to the ref’s own intuition. But the big things, offsides, penalties, red cards. These all change games in huge ways. THOSE are the decisions that need the technologies.
I agree with all three. All are used in other contact and relatively fast paced sports, TV replays – Rugby Union, Ref Microphones – Rugby Union and Goal line technology – Ice Hockey.
As for the arguments about whether people will stop talking about the game if there is less controversy, its tosh. Maybe we could get on with talking about the game rather than the man in the middle for once.
I would also like to see the post match retrospective action upped to include other acts of cheating, feigning injury when there is no or minimal contact, red card challenges that are missed during the game, allowing the increase to bans of red card offences that were punished only by yellows (I’m bitter about fat frank I know!) etc.
If the technology was introduced then I think you could up the respect the ref campaign banning players or managers who deliberately intimidate them.
The TV replay would also allow for a review system where a manger could be given one review of a stop play decision per game, if he’s right the review is replenished and the decision over ruled. Keeping it at one would mean that the stoppages would be minimal and it would offer managers some sort of rebuke to a rubbish decision. If a ref is found to be failing a lot of reviews they could then be demoted.
Surely this all overlooks the point that Ned’s sending off was scrutinised by the FA via video etc and was still upheld!
If officials are minded, advised, instructed or whatever to decide in favour of the big sides (which they clearly do as the stats speak for themselves) it doesn’t matter if it is the ref or 500th offical it still requires a human decision and if that is poor then no amount of technology will change that.
Granted technical assistance on “did the ball cross the line type decisions” are required and I like the idea of the ref having a mic. It may also help with intimidation if when play is stopped all players have to keep 5 metres form the ref unless called until play resumes.
In reality the poor decisions of late are often more to do with intimidation and pressure than just poor judgement and I think while the FA uphold a clearly wrong decision they give carte blanche for this to continue.
Lets hope it does balance out as we are due some cracking penalty decisions etc second half of the season!
I agree, if the current retrospective system doesn’t work where they have all the time in the world to look at the footage then surely that needs to be fixed before anything else is put into the game
That’s just it though chippy, technology would actually fix the current system, which is fundamentally broken.
In the case of Milijas, even though it wasn’t a sending off in the first place, the law states that Wolves had to prove in their appeal the referee had made a ‘gross error in judgment’, not simply that the decision could be interpreted as wrong.
And because the tackle was hard (albeit fair) the FA basically said they could see why the ref sent the player off even if they didn’t necessarily agree with it, hence why the decision wasn’t overturned.
Now, if we had the video replay, the ref could have immediately signaled for a foul, gone upstairs to a 5th official and received feedback that it wasn’t a red card offence. And because he’d deferred it, the players would see there’s no point in crowding the referee. So the foul would stand, but no further action would be taken.
I see where you are coming from but the case in point wouldn’t have gone to the 5th official as the referee saw it close up and made the call. Him watching it again on a replay wouldn’t change anything. You are not suggesting that the 5th Official could over rule the ref are you? I don’t think there is a Cat in Hells chance of the FA putting the final decision on these things with an official other than the ref. The only time I could see the ref asking for clarification is if his view was blocked or he was too far away which in this case he was niether. I guess this is all a debating club as the FA are hardly about to listen to the great unwashed masses when there is so much money at stake with the top 6 clubs who will always wield the most influence.
I think why im not considering video replays an alternative is because I doubt we will ever see it in the near future. I think the FA and FIFA had to be dragged into accepting goal line tech let alone having replays involved. Also once they implement goal line tech they will say that technology is already in the game to a large enough degree and they can refuse to even debate video replays for as long as they choose!
I agree with it all but it will do Wolves no good. For starters, get ready for Berra wrestling penalties in every match (or at least every match where he’s not serving a suspension).
Hahaha too true.
Apart from this, if the rule was that no player but the captain could approach the referee it would stop players from influencing decisions and we would see more refs get it right without needing to go to technology. Any player going up to the ref should immediately be booked, whether booked already or not. Don’t go away? It’s red, sorry.
The other thing is retrospective technology. If a player dives, give them a booking retrospectively, if that means they would have had a red, ban them. Serious foul play then give them a red, ban them, etc. etc.
It works for AFL in Australia.
I meant to say that if a player knows that he will be held accountable whether during or after a game they are less likely to cheat/foul play, etc. and that part of the game that is now ruining it will eventually disappear.
Totally agree. Is swift and draconian action is taken against any player stepping out of line where hassling the referee is concerned then we would soon see it stop overnight.
The problem with retro rescinding, or awarding, red cards is that it does not affect the outcome of that particular match, they never change the result.
A bad decision means one team is unfairly penalized, and that decision can have instant repercussions, ie Lampard still being on the pitch, and able to score the winner against us.
The fact that our slow defence was unable to stop a 33 year old has been from racing into a scoring position is a debate for another time.
I can only recall a couple of instances where results were changed, Arsenal v Sheff Utd cup tie, I think, when Arsenal scored while a player from Utd was injured, or something, and I believe a match was awarded 3 – 0 to someone after their opposition was reduced to 7 men ,after sending offs, injuuries etc has reduced their numbers below the stipulated minimum.
Anyway, Sheffield, if you check back a few days, I suggested in a previous blog the idea of managerial challenges to a decision, one per match.
Thank you for endorsing MY suggestion!!
The problem with trying to stop the mass surrounding of the ref, trying to get a sending off etc, is twofold.
1. Heat of the moment mass hysteria is very difficult to self control.
2. It pre supposes that the players have some intelligence, which as we all know, most do not.
FOMM
Ah! I’ve been on holiday for Christmas and lost track of the blog comments. Still shows that great minds think alike sometimes!!
With regard to the post match action, yes it doesn’t alter the result up front but it does add some sort of punishment, at the moment players know they can get away with things without any recourse at all. Rooney’s flying elbow on James McCarthy last season was the most baltant one I can remember recently.
I’d argue with you on the heat of the moment mass surrounding of the ref Wolves rarely do it and its costing us at the moment! Some quick flashing of cards and a few sending,s off would really sort it out and would stop the likes of Terry and Ferdinand influencing the ref through private conferences whilst all the other players have been sent away! On number 2. Id agree with you but rugby players manage to avoid intimidating the ref, even though a fair few of them would hardly trouble an IQ test!!
I sort of agree with the managerial challenge, but how would it work practically and what sort of things could they challenge? For example, if there was tackle in the penalty area in the last minute, the ref didn’t give it and the opposition broke with the ball and look like scoring. What’s to stop the manager using his challenge tactically to stop the game while the decision was reviewed..
It would be managed by the 4th official wouldn’t it? They are miked up to the ref and are next to the dugouts so they could actually earn their corn and control the manager review request?
I like this idea!
I can see it working in a couple of ways. In both cases in order to stop it being abused it should be limited to one challenge per game, with the allowance restored in cases where the manager is proved to be right.
1st and simplest only allow the manager to intervene in decisions where the ball is already dead, i.e: ref already blown for freekick or penalty. Would allow managers to argue the case against sending offs but wouldn’t lead to it being used as a time wasting tactic as the balls already dead. Would mean that controversial play on decisions would still stand without the managers being able to appeal.
Second and would involve more complicated rule changes is too allow the manager to use their challenge at any point in the game, even when the balls not dead. The only way I can see this working is if a time limit is put on the challenge i.e 30 seconds after the incident. that 30 seconds can be used similarly to the ref playing on if it is found to be right play brought back, if not play goes on.
In both cases the challenge would have to be on a firm basis i.e: he was offside, that was over the line or that wasn’t a foul. I doubt as others do that it could be used on judgement calls i.e close red or yellow cards. Also in order for the system to work properly the ref and fourth or fifth official would have to be mic’ed up so the fans (at least on TV or radio) could understand the reasoning behind the decisions.
But that said its unlikely to ever happen because despite its apparent forward thinking attitude elsewhere (lets take the game to the world!) the ruling bodies at FIFA, UEFA, and the FA think that a multi billion pound business should rest on whether a three or five men can be arsed to keep up with play!
It would help as well if footballers weren’t such cheating wankers.
They really are complete twats aren’t they? Most managers aren’t much better either. Look at Warnock and Barton as prime examples or Dalglish and Suarez. I’m no fan of Mick McCarthy, but at least he doesn’t conduct himself like Neil Warnock does
5th official idea works for me, although only in the case of goal line debates, penalties and sending off decisions. For example
Lampards yellow v Wolves – referee on microphone goes upstairs and says “I think it’s red card as studs up and over the ball” – the 5th official could then confirm or disagree. In this case it’s important that the referee actually asks specific questions. Some rules in football are quite subjective so it’s important the technology is used to aid the ref’s not replace them
I’d also like to see straight red cards for simulation, surrounding the referee and requesting other players be sent off
Finally, I’d like Liverpool F.C. relegated to the 2nd Division for being the most repulsive organisation. Ever.
I’d second all of those bar the final one, booted out of the FA system completely and dissolved as a football club should be the punishment for Liverpool.
Don’t know what all the fuss is about.
Patrick Evra is a negro, just like hundreds of other footballers, cricketers, athletes etc.
Nothing racist in that, just like nothing racist in Rooney being caucasian, or Hernandez being hispanic.
More racist in my eyes is our beloved manager only signing Irish bit players!!!
FOMM
Tread very carefully Clive.
I’m guessing you haven’t read the report in full as to what Suarez is alleged to have said?
Suffice to say it goes beyond simply using the ‘N’ word.
No, I haven’t, just making a point that stating someone’s ethnicity is a fact, not a racist comment.
Over here, being PC can be walking a very tight line, so I know all about being careful.
Reading some comments on other blog sites, it appears there are very gray areas in this can of worms, a lot of he said/he didnt say, and a lot of contradictions.
My take, as a Wolves fan, anything that upsets Liverpool FC is OK by me, hope they are still in the headlines for all the wrong reasons when they come to the Mol!!
In the United States the term Caucasoid is commonly associated with notions of racial typology and modern usage is generally associated with racial notions and therefore discouraged, as it is potentially offensive.
well Suarez will still be serving his ban when we play them jan 31st so its thats one bonus!
My fault I realise – but let’s not let the Suarez thing take over this blog like it has done most others!! Like Sam 2.0 says, he’s not eligible to play against us, which is a good thing
I have to agree with Brisnick . The sight of half the Arsenal team stomping toward the Referee was sickening for the game as a whole. Captains only please.
Refs need help, TV technology exposes every mistake. In addition for some reason they have become very inconsistent, maybe to many people looking over their shoulders.
Having a 5th official watching the game need not delay much if any, we see it immediately from the wonderful camera angles we have and replays are virtually instant.
I have two really strong beliefs:
1) Stamp out gamesmanship and blatant cheating, diving falling over and constant appeals to Ref. is cheating plain and simple. If the Ref doesnt see it then retrospective severe action for bringing game into disrepute should be imposed. I see players appealing even small things like running ball out of play out of all proportion. They know they are cheating.
2) Left UK in 1980 so only see on TV, but has the rule regarding obstruction and idirect free kick been deleted from the rule book. So much of what goes on is out and out obstruction but never called anymore. Classi in Wolves Chelsea, Chhelses defender blatlantly obstructed to let ball run out of play but was about 10 ft from the ball.
I agree Berra needs to stop wrestling
Being from the US, where all our sports have it, the only places i can see video review working is for goals and whether a foul was in or out of the box for a penalty. Our sports use it for a lot more but we are far more used to breaks in the action. Every review takes 2-3 minutes, which would then have to be added on. It’s possible to use it in a red card situation like with Barton where they could try to see where he headbutted someone, but with Milijas and Lampard’s tackles reviews wouldn’t work because they are judgement calls on the refs parts and different refs have different views, the same way fouls aren’t review in basketball, penalties aren’t reviewed hockey and the NFL and balls and strike aren’t reviewed in baseball. Judgement calls tend to be left alone. One thing I would change is the option for the FA after the fact to be able to upgrade a yellow to a red, they can reverse it so why not the other way around. All our sports here do similar things so maybe I’m just used to it.
Off topic but interesting article discussing MM’s plight
Is McCarthy still capable of delivering progress at Wolves? http://shar.es/WCkyF
Just read it. Bravo Adam!
Another interesting but off topic piece on frimpong http://www.footballfancast.com/2012/01/football-blogs/arsenal-starlet-could-prove-the-most-important-signing
I’ve said for years that there should be a review panel of current and former players, managers and refs who review every match from the PL and retrospectively award punishment for diving, violent conduct and other forms of cheating.
This would immediately solve the problem of simulation and violence, and would also help undo the bias the refs have towards top clubs.
This would mean that Song, Cole and Lampard would all now be facing a 3 match ban, while Milijas would have scored the winner against notlob….
I agree with you, but I can’t get the vision of a Gary Neville or Jamie Redknapp being on the panel and saying that everything that Man United or Liverpool do is fine!
Would have to be a fairly tough, robust and above all open selection policy for the review panel. Last thing we need is another jobs for the boys council like the board of the premier league or FA.
Hadn’t thought of that! Yeah you would have to have a good set of checks and balances to prevent favouritism.
Good calls Thomas, though I’m kind of of the opinion that the game has survived 150 years without it, and dodgy decisions add to the talking points (except when it’s against us).
But I would draw the line at those you have mentioned. I saw Michael Owen say that offsides and penalties should be determined by technology too, which is too far for me. The game would be forever stopping and all the talking points gone.
Nice one Thomas. It’s a strange and one I wad thinking about the other day, specifically about goal line technology. Again, like you, it had nothing to do with Wolves it was the Celtic v Rangers game. Another non goal albeit by the millimetres that you’re not bothered about!!
My question is both techno/football related though…
Should I have a passive or active 3D TV? Come on. Let the geek loose.
You watching sport or babestation???
Sorry mate, completely forgot to reply to this.
The consensus seems to be that there’s nowt to choose between passive and active 3D.
What you basically want either way is a screen with the highest Hz rate possible. The higher the Hz, the quicker the picture refreshes and the less it hurts your brain.
That would be my only input.
I would love, love, love a 3D TV. Going to attempt to sneak the investment passed the wife in a few months.
Don’t think Technology is going to help us after Bolton have beat the toffies tonight.i think we lit their fire and its coming back to bite us,the other teams around us are starting to find some form.God help us.FOMM. Do that and we won’t need technology.
Its looking pretty grim. What price the early birds in about 6 wks time?
Free i hope in the northbank ,Especially with no roof on 3 months late thats if they ever finish it.