so stopping the game to watch the replay will not slow the game down? You do know how long it takes to watch a replay right? It takes longer than any restart would.
yeah i watch rugby league every single week and it takes about a minute longer on average. sometimes it takes like 3 minutes for super contentious ones but man i am happy to wait 60 whole seconds to ensure we get the correct result. football has loads of stoppages and you are kidding yourself if you think it doesn't, theres stoppages of over 10 seconds all the time: substitutions, men going down, setting up free-kicks, some throw-ins, corners, goal-kicks. just because the clock keeps running doesn't mean it isn't a stoppage. this extra minute after the goal is scored would be literally nothing and would only happen if the ref wasn't sure about the goal and thought there might be something wrong - it would not happen every time!
manodelrey said:
And I assume you are referring to the counter attack goal and then going to video. You think anyone in their right mind would allow the referee to overturn a scored goal on a counter for a video replay? That is just asking for even more controversy with even more problems to enjoy.
yes they would allow the referee to overturn the goal if the replays showed the goal was unlawful because that is the correct decision! if anything this reduces controversy because it gives officials extra technology to do their job
manodelrey said:
And aside from the obvious waiting for 5 minutes after a goal is scored to check, how far back to you check to see if something is correct? 5 minutes could have passed since the call in question, the game has developed completely different and you want to negate the entire 5 minutes through replay.
the ref would ask the referee to go back to the incident leading up to the goal that could be contentious. this is not the referee going to a video ref for every goal just saying 'check if anything is wrong'.
manodelrey said:
Plus the consideration of bribery and match fixing is all too real, how often will video replay be used as a cover to fix games? Giving more power to the referee isn't a good idea and isn't what the match is about. The only use of technology that makes sense is goal line technology and when the go pro style camera's get small enough to the point that every official can wear them during matches. That way you can properly review what has been seen and heard by officials to further judge their actions. Players get fined for diving with constant reviews, why wouldn't you hold ref's accountable in that regard with proper technology?
we have to trust our referees to ref the game properly. refs could already realistically be bribed on any decision they make, so shall we say that refs can no longer give throw-ins anymore because its a potential bribery avenue? of course not. the referees currently have all the power regarding decision making and officiating in the game, that is the point of referees! saying giving the refs power is 'not what the game is about is a mental statement. refs should not be help accountable with fines for poor decisions because we do not want referees being scared to make decisions for fear of being fined. we do want players who dive to get fined because we do not want players to dive.
manodelrey said:
Oh and that was reviewed too, they still made a bad call despite everyone knowing the correct call.
lol so because sometimes a video ref gets it wrong too means we should not get it at all? video refereeing leads to more correct decisions happening in sports where it is utilised. of course sometimes people get it wrong because that is human error, but video refs get it wrong a lot less than on-field refs due to the technology.
