Posts
Association
football has been a way of life since it took a formal bow in a London tavern
in 1863. The debates, discussions and arguments still rumble on to this day
and, as part of the modern game, the topic that gets all football fans talking
is video technology.
Dodgy
offside decisions, ridiculous handball judgements and inconsistent stances on
tackling are all common problems in
the game today. Fans never shy away from giving their opinion on referees,
wading in with so-called solutions to the before-mentioned issues.
Callers
to football phone-ins frequently complain about refereeing decisions that they
have seen during that day. The call for video technology has come from many
different corners of the game, with fans, ex-referees, and even former players
giving their view. What they don’t seem to realise, though, is that there are a
lot of problems with implementing video technology into football.
FIFA
have long been chastised for their reluctance to introduce video-aid for match
officials, although they are now looking at a system which will tell the
referee whether the ball has crossed the line “within a second”.
FIFA
are correct in their attitude, on this occasion. They are right to display
caution when the topic of video technology is brought up. The governing body
have said that video replays that would help the referees would be
time-consuming. However, a team celebrating a dubious goal or a group of
players surrounding and abusing the referee after a contentious decision takes
a lot longer than the time it would take for a technologically-aided decision
to be fed through to the match official.
The
real problem with video technology is the cost. It is estimated that to cover a
match sufficiently, i.e. for enough evidence to analyse a decision, the
coverage provider requires twenty cameras and video gear. On top of that, those
twenty cameras require twenty cameramen to work the apparatus. The equipment
itself is extremely expensive and so, with camera technicians and spare cameras
also added into the equation just in case, as well as the viewing station where
all the feeds are sent, the price of covering one match would be pretty steep.
In
light of that, to cover all ten Premier League games for the whole season would
be a problem. However, if you’re going to bring the video technology rule into
football it needs to, at least, be implemented into the top four divisions
(i.e. down to League Two). Every country who plays under FIFA would also
require this rule for their leagues, providing more cost. This would, of
course, anger some fans of clubs in the lower divisions, and rightly so.
But
that is why extensive use of video technology is not going to work in football.
The price of providing adequate coverage for all the ninety-two clubs currently
in the Football League would be staggering, never mind those below that.
Many
have suggested a post-weekend review panel as an alternative, which would
reassess any contentious decisions that clubs decide to contest. The panel
could consist of three people (much like the yellow/red card appeal system
which is already in place) who sit down on a weekday and make the final
decisions. Clearly there would have to be a different panel for each league as,
otherwise, there would be too much of a burden on those three chosen people,
who could be an ex-player, a former referee and a past manager; three
individuals who have actually had some involvement in the game, unlike most
FIFA officials who control the laws of the game.
Clearly,
video technology would be of big help to referees and, while the idea of the
aid undermining referees may be somewhat true, the modern game of football, in
the contemporary world that we live in, cannot be kept behind other sports in
technological advancement.
In
a sport where mere relegation can see teams go bankrupt and a dodgy penalty
decision can mean the loss of a cup final, some form of video technology is
needed. Whether it’s in-game or not, football is crying out for clarity and
consistency in decisions. While this is all theoretically good, in practise the
money that would be needed would be astronomical.
This article was originally
found on Football Speak but is now unavailable due to a site update.
