Many sports now use video replay to help regulate the game and insure fairness. Just the other day, I was watching a tennis match where they were able to determine whether or not the ball was out of bounds through video replay. There are so many close calls that would be impossible to make a fair judgment on without video replay. The same is true in the sport of soccer. So why is it that we haven’t instituted such technology in the world’s most popular sport?
“The case for using video replay in soccer is a strong one, because the sport's history is littered with thousands of contentious moments, moments that meant games could have turned out differently if the referee at the time had the benefit of video replay,” commented John Molinaro of CBC Sports, in an article written in 2007. In this article, he comments on the controversy of the Italian match up between Juventus and Napoli where the heavily favored Juventus lost 3-1 because of bogus calls made by the referee which awarded
With such controversial consequences that may be heard around the world, why would FIFA refuse to institute the obvious solution—obvious to everyone else in the world? Here are some of the arguments they make against video replay:
- Video replay will interrupt the flow of the game.
Yet, anyone who has ever watched a game on TV realizes that interruptions happen anyways whenever there is a hard foul, and injury, or even a streaker on the field.
- Keeping video replay out of soccer helps to preserve the integrity and respect the history of the sport.
Yet many changes have been made to the rules of the game just within in the last 20 years. With development of the sport, changes are inevitable.
- Video replay would undermine the referee’s position.
Many referees would agree that there are a number of calls they are uncomfortable to make during a game. No matter what the referee calls, someone is always going to be upset. Under such a huge load of pressure, video replay can only help their job and protect them.
All in all, a lot is invested in the sport of soccer and a lot can be, and often has been, lost on a single bad call. With the World Cup in
This is a very interesting topic, one that I haven't thought too much about until now. But it's a good point, why not have replay feedback in soccer? Of course, soccer is not as tight a game (as in players' closeness) as, say, football, where there is constant contact between players, which makes it a bit easier to make calls, but there is still the human perspective which, as a rule, is very limited.
ReplyDeleteYoshi! I'm so glad to see that someone else is getting involved in the soccer realm through the blog assignment! I've always felt that soccer referees had the least amount of influence in their sport. One of the nicest things about soccer is that it doesn't get interrupted by the constant "tickey tack" fouls that happen like in basketball. Rarely does a referee's decision on a particular play effect the overall outcome of the game.....i say that tongue in cheek. Because in those rare instances that a ref's decision does effect the outcome it usually could be corrected by some sort of video replay. For example, Ireland missing the world cup because of a missed call.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting topic and one that has been tossed about for years. At first it was brought up because of the numerous times that a ball had crossed the goal line and the AR was unable to see it because the offsides line was near midfield (ie the goalie being chipped). Now they are experimenting in some leagues about putting referees on the goal line.
ReplyDeleteVideo replay would be a great tool, except for the fact that it would slow the game down. While there are numerous interruptions, referees are only allowed to change their decisions before play is restarted or within about 3 seconds (advantage)of a "foul" occuring. Most of the controversial decisions happen in live action play (duh!), it would ruin the flow of the game to have to stop on every quesitonable call. The beauty of the game is how smooth it can flow.
At my re-cert clinic last Saturday (yes, I am a referee), we were talking about the BYU-NM game. Apparently none of the referees knew this was going on at the time. Which is hard to believe, but usually players complain to the ref when things like this happen - and no one did. Maybe reviewing the game at some point would have allowed that player the chance to be red carded (instead of suspended indefinately). The problem is how do they determine when it is appropriate to review a play? Or would it be just the controversial ones? In some ways this could be used to undermine the authority of the referee and take control out of their hands.
And one of my personal favorites, why put the entire game on the refs shoulders? What about the players diving? What happpened to the integrity of the sport? When did acting become a part? Let's put some responsibility on the players too.
Just to make a clarification - referees have more influence in games than most people think...the good ones just make it seem that they don't.
When it is all said and done, like I tell coaches, I am allowed to make as many mistakes as they and the players are (anyone who has played or coached understands). The thing about refereeing is that it is all about what you see.