Video Evidence Used To Award Penalty

[Coolio]

This is without doubt the way ahead.

 

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/38318258

 

Japan's Kashima Antlers became the first side to benefit from a video replay in a Fifa competition as they scored a penalty on their way to reaching the Club World Cup final.

Referee Viktor Kassai stopped the game after being alerted to an incident by his assistant and gave a penalty after viewing footage on a pitchside monitor.

Shoma Doi scored the spot-kick, which was awarded for an off-the-ball trip.

Kashima beat Atletico Nacional 3-0 to be the first Asians to reach the final.

Yasushi Endo backheeled in the second, while Yuma Suzuki added a late third for the Antlers who will play either Real Madrid or Club America in Sunday's final.

The Club World Cup features champion club sides from each of Fifa's six continental confederations.

Video assistant referees have been able to assist officials during two international friendlies this year but the Club World Cup represents their first use in Fifa competition.

Previous usage has been in what Fifa call a "semi-live" scenario, where the referee was not able to review decisions on a pitchside monitor.

 

[graygo]

All very well but what if he stopped the game while the other team were attacking and after looking at the footage he decided there was no infringement?

 

It would work some of the time but all hell would break lose when it didn't.

[The Treasurer]

All very well but what if he stopped the game while the other team were attacking and after looking at the footage he decided there was no infringement?

 

It would work some of the time but all hell would break lose when it didn't.

 

Cowie's goal on Saturday is a perfect example of when it could be used without disrupting the play

[graygo]

Cowie's goal on Saturday is a perfect example of when it could be used without disrupting the play

 

Agreed.

[Bring Back Paulo Sergio]

Cowie's goal on Saturday is a perfect example of when it could be used without disrupting the play

[Cruyff Turn]

In that instance I think it works as the game was stopped before the decision was given.

 

If they game is in-play though I don't think video evidence should be allowed.

[Diadora Van Basten]

I think a challenge system as used in Tennis and American Football would provide the balance between delaying the game and getting the decision correct.

 

I also think the game clock should not be controlled by the referee.

[Cruyff Turn]

I think a challenge system as used in Tennis and American Football would provide the balance between delaying the game and getting the decision correct.

 

I also think the game clock should not be controlled by the referee.

On your point about the game clock.

 

Agree 110% a very good point. The clock should stop if the game is stopped or the ball goes out of play.

[Amoruso_lets_it_run]

Funny thing that this incident certainly isn't cut and dry and some folk could watch that replay and not give a pen

[D4nny_]

If a player feels they were fouled in the box they should be able to contest it, maximum amount of times in a game.

 

Sure rugby do something similar but can't see it working to be fair

[Saint Jambo]

It looks to like the fouled forward is offside when the ball is played. He is inside the box with the last defender(s) along the line. The defender then retreats back towards goal, barging into the forward bringing him down (rather than a trip as described). The ball then comes close to where the forward would have been. Unless the argument is that the forward is inactive (which would seem bonkers to me) then I think the correct decision would have been to award the foul to the defending team for offside as this came first.

 

Given the power to review decisions is with officials (unlike tennis) and is being used for decisions which are subjective, it seems likely that it will lead to far more claims of bias.

[davieholt]

On your point about the game clock.

 

Agree 110% a very good point. The clock should stop if the game is stopped or the ball goes out of play.

 

Not if the ball goes out of play surely? Every game would take 3 hours!

[Cruyff Turn]

Not if the ball goes out of play surely? Every game would take 3 hours!

Not for throw in's or corners etc then.

 

It's meant to be 30 seconds a sub etc so for stuff like that, celebrations after a goal, injuries etc

[Diadora Van Basten]

Not if the ball goes out of play surely? Every game would take 3 hours!

you could have a maximum amount of time say 15 seconds before the clock stops. Thus we wouldn't have to put up with time wasting that currently takes place at goal kicks, subs etc.

[highlandjambo3]

In time we WILL have a video official like they do in rugby......................there is no stopping this

[Lincon Premier]

If the game clock was controlled by the fourth official and was stopped when a sub was made and restarted when the new player took the park, it would end all the unnecessary time wasting. While this would work for us in some games i can also see it would work against us when we want to run down the clock. 

[Diadora Van Basten]

In time we WILL have a video official like they do in rugby......................there is no stopping this

There seems to be a reluctance to bring in rules at the top level were there are resources available to carry them out that wouldn't be feasible at lower levels.

[IveSeenTheLight]

It looks to like the fouled forward is offside when the ball is played. He is inside the box with the last defender(s) along the line. The defender then retreats back towards goal, barging into the forward bringing him down (rather than a trip as described). The ball then comes close to where the forward would have been. Unless the argument is that the forward is inactive (which would seem bonkers to me) then I think the correct decision would have been to award the foul to the defending team for offside as this came first.

 

Given the power to review decisions is with officials (unlike tennis) and is being used for decisions which are subjective, it seems likely that it will lead to far more claims of bias.

 

I would agree. Offside before the foul occured

[meister]

I'd like to see video refs come in to be honest and be for the ref and linesmen to use predominantly.

 

I'd like to see teams offered one challenge per game as well for goal mouth incidents such as penalties, offsides or off the ball incidents in the box.

 

If you've taken a dive in the box, and you don't get a penalty then you're not going to challenge it and waste it, but if you do get the decision then the other team can challenge and whoever has dived is found out. I think it could really cut down on something which, while it provides loads of discussion, everyone pretty much can't stand.

 

Might also encourage some of our "less talented" referees to ask for help in certain situations.

 

As above I think it's inevitable and I quite like forward to it, it hasn't ruined rugby for me.

[Diadora Van Basten]

As above I think it's inevitable and I quite like forward to it, it hasn't ruined rugby for me.

Unlike the amount of games including Saturdays that were ruined by bad refereeing decisions.

[Cade]

Checking a video replay stops the game for less time than the ref being surrounded by players from both teams trying to argue their case.

 

That's all that needs to be said.

[kwizbet]

Surely the fourth official should have a monitor covering the game and could buzz the ref if it was a definite pen or dive.

[meister]

Unlike the amount of games including Saturdays that were ruined by bad refereeing decisions.

Indeed !!

[kila]

All very well but what if he stopped the game while the other team were attacking and after looking at the footage he decided there was no infringement?

 

It would work some of the time but all hell would break lose when it didn't.

 

I think if there's video evidence to be considered, play should continue until there is a suitable time to interrupt (e.g. ball out of play, or one team in possession deep inside their own half). At that point, the video footage could be reviewed, and a decision made to either flag an infringement or resume play.

 

Given it'd only ever be used for major incidents (penalties, red cards, mistaken identity) I don't think it'll be a problem for flow of the game

[meister]

I think if there's video evidence to be considered, play should continue until there is a suitable time to interrupt (e.g. ball out of play, or one team in possession deep inside their own half). At that point, the video footage could be reviewed, and a decision made to either flag an infringement or resume play.

 

Given it'd only ever be used for major incidents (penalties, red cards, mistaken identity) I don't think it'll be a problem for flow of the game

This.

 

Let the game continue and if the other team score, then review footage at that point. That way the correct outcome should materialise.

 

 

Should.....

[gowestjambo]

Only a matter of time before it is introduced into football. Who would suffer most? the teams that get the advantage from dodgy Refereeing decisions!

 

This would then highlight incompetent Referees who continually favour rangers and celtic. (the joy of watching celtic being fairly referred in Europe is fantastic.)

 

Currently used in Rugby Union, Rugby League, Tennis, American Football and no doubt others. Why should the leading Sport throughout the world be left behind?

[And Sow makes it 10]

I am all for video evidence for penalty decisions, bookings for simulation, goal line decisions, last man tackles/red cards etc as long as it doesn't interrupt the flow of the game. Sadly can't see it happening though as the GFA would then find it near impossible for referees to influence games when the OF are struggling in a match

[mulleted_jambo]

A good argument against it is the end of the Everton arsenal game last night. It went end to end about 3/4 times with cech coming up for a corner, arsenal had a penalty shout and a couple of chances then Everton had a decent run at an empty goal, then it came back down to the Everton endand another chance for arsenal. All without the ball going out of play. I don't really see what you can do in that situation without ruining what was a great end to the game. As the ball hasn't gone out of play when do you stop it??

 

Also refs will be so scared of making a mistake they'll end up checking every slightly contention big decision like they do in rugby and it could be really stop start. I guess the challenge system like tennis would avoid that to an extent but still dead against it.

[Stephane Grappelli]

This is without doubt the way ahead.

 

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/38318258

 

Japan's Kashima Antlers became the first side to benefit from a video replay in a Fifa competition as they scored a penalty on their way to reaching the Club World Cup final.

Referee Viktor Kassai stopped the game after being alerted to an incident by his assistant and gave a penalty after viewing footage on a pitchside monitor.

Shoma Doi scored the spot-kick, which was awarded for an off-the-ball trip.

Kashima beat Atletico Nacional 3-0 to be the first Asians to reach the final.

Yasushi Endo backheeled in the second, while Yuma Suzuki added a late third for the Antlers who will play either Real Madrid or Club America in Sunday's final.

The Club World Cup features champion club sides from each of Fifa's six continental confederations.

Video assistant referees have been able to assist officials during two international friendlies this year but the Club World Cup represents their first use in Fifa competition.

Previous usage has been in what Fifa call a "semi-live" scenario, where the referee was not able to review decisions on a pitchside monitor.

 

I saw a load of Atletico Nacional fans at Barajas Airport on Monday, obviously they were heading to Japan for the game.  They were all decked out in green and white so I'm sitting there thinking "I hope your team gets pumped rotten."

[japanjambo]

[Diadora Van Basten]

A good argument against it is the end of the Everton arsenal game last night. It went end to end about 3/4 times with cech coming up for a corner, arsenal had a penalty shout and a couple of chances then Everton had a decent run at an empty goal, then it came back down to the Everton endand another chance for arsenal. All without the ball going out of play. I don't really see what you can do in that situation without ruining what was a great end to the game. As the ball hasn't gone out of play when do you stop it??

 

Also refs will be so scared of making a mistake they'll end up checking every slightly contention big decision like they do in rugby and it could be really stop start. I guess the challenge system like tennis would avoid that to an extent but still dead against it.

You wouldn't stop the game whilst the ball was in play.

[Gambo]

It took over a minute for the 4th office I also to call over referee, a lot can happen in a minute of football.

 

No thanks.

[Jeff]

This.

 

Let the game continue and if the other team score, then review footage at that point. That way the correct outcome should materialise.

 

 

Should.....

Wouldn't work.

 

If you let play go on and the attacking team score and then go back and review the footage and decide there should have been a penalty then surely the side who have been given a pen now feel peeved off because the opposition shouldn't have had the chance to score.

[meister]

Wouldn't work.

 

If you let play go on and the attacking team score and then go back and review the footage and decide there should have been a penalty then surely the side who have been given a pen now feel peeved off because the opposition shouldn't have had the chance to score.

See what you mean but what I meant was that if the other team go up and score and it is then determined that a penalty should have been given at the other end then the goal does not count and play is brought back for the pen.

[kila]

Wouldn't work.

 

If you let play go on and the attacking team score and then go back and review the footage and decide there should have been a penalty then surely the side who have been given a pen now feel peeved off because the opposition shouldn't have had the chance to score.

 

You could say the same about very late offside calls.

 

I think the team that got denied the penalty would be the most peeved if the other team broke and scored...  

[Gambo]

See what you mean but what I meant was that if the other team go up and score and it is then determined that a penalty should have been given at the other end then the goal does not count and play is brought back for the pen.

Good luck with that one in last minute of a cup final.

 

A penalty call is an opinion more often than not, even referees have different opinions.

 

Leave it up to the ref and his linesmen.

[mulleted_jambo]

You wouldn't stop the game whilst the ball was in play.

Yeah that was kind of my point.  That 2/3 min passage of play was one of the most exciting bits of football I've seen all season.  Proper end to end either team could have scored so it would stop exciting football like that.  Also as the debatable tackle was made it started a 3 on 2 counter attack for Everton with Cech still in the Everton box so it would be a bit unfair on Everton stopping it there.

 

We all want to see the right decisions and especially want to see an even playing field when up against the old firm but I just feel it would ruin a lot of the excitement.  It works in rugby because it is very stop start anyway, football isn't.  

 

The only way I can maybe see it working without ruining some of the excitement is any penalty/offside/red card decision is reviewed in the background, play continues with the decision the ref has made and if the TV ref decides the ref was wrong they stop and pull it back to whatever point is should have been. The ref could also stop and check with the TV ref in certain situation where play will be stopped anyway like a free kick on the edge of the box, red card, penalty etc.   The Jamie Walker one I would say play on though as Rangers might have wanted to take a quick free kick but one quick replay and the ref gets the nod in his ear and pulls it back.

[Rudy T]

It could only have a chance of working on a challenge basis, 1 in each half per team. Even then the players managers and fans would dispute decisions. Tennis and cricket are pretty black and white on decisions and rugby is far more start stop to allow these decisions plus they have far more respect for officials. Football is different and many decisions take a fair amount of debating and usually not everyone agrees. It should used for retrospective action whether a ref books a player or not the two tackles by that Rojo being case and point.

[Gambo]

It could only have a chance of working on a challenge basis, 1 in each half per team. Even then the players managers and fans would dispute decisions. Tennis and cricket are pretty black and white on decisions and rugby is far more start stop to allow these decisions plus they have far more respect for officials. Football is different and many decisions take a fair amount of debating and usually not everyone agrees. It should used for retrospective action whether a ref books a player or not the two tackles by that Rojo being case and point.

Challenges are stupid imo, won't stop a ref making an error in last minute after you have used your allocated challenges. Challenges change nothing.

 

Leave football alone, leave it up to the ref and his linesman.

[Maroon Man]

I think it should only be usable by the referee and not by the managers. If a referee thinks "you know what, I'm not sure about that one" and wants to refer it upstairs then fair enough. Wouldn't want managers to have the power to stop the game and demand a check, would become way too bitty. Would also end up with every team having someone watching a live feed of the game so that they could inform the manager to make a claim every time a decision went against them.

[mulleted_jambo]

I think it should only be usable by the referee and not by the managers. If a referee thinks "you know what, I'm not sure about that one" and wants to refer it upstairs then fair enough. Wouldn't want managers to have the power to stop the game and demand a check, would become way too bitty. Would also end up with every team having someone watching a live feed of the game so that they could inform the manager to make a claim every time a decision went against them.

The only problem with it being up to the ref is that they will end up checking for every big decision because they are so scared of making a mistake and not checking.   Imagine the abuse a ref would get if he got a penalty decision wrong against rangers or celtic and he didn't check the TV.  They would end up checking everything and the game would be far too stop start.

[jambosdad]

In time we WILL have a video official like they do in rugby......................there is no stopping this

The 4th Official surely could look at a monitor. They do Pretty much nothing else unless Mikey Stewart is playing.

[Maroon Man]

The only problem with it being up to the ref is that they will end up checking for every big decision because they are so scared of making a mistake and not checking. Imagine the abuse a ref would get if he got a penalty decision wrong against rangers or celtic and he didn't check the TV. They would end up checking everything and the game would be far too stop start.

I think that would lead to a higher standard of refereeing though and would stop them guessing or favouring the bigger teams.