SFA agrees to trial video

[Dujon]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/6926637.stm

I hope this subject hasn't been opened before - if it has I apologise.

This should be an intriguing trial and one that I will follow to the best of my ability.

[communistworkethic]

it's a good idea, refs miss things and diving is shite..... but and like batman, that's a big but, it has to work both ways, they have to be able to rescind decisions too.

[Batman]

[fatshaft]

still a big tosser I see

[blurred]

It'll have about as much teeth as a newborn baby. A few retrospective yellow cards will be handed out, but I doubt it'll have a great effect on anything. And indeed, it opens up a can of worms. Eg:

Scottish Cup Final, 2 minutes to go. Rangers player 'trips' over Celtic player in the box. Rangers score the pen and go on to win the Cup. It later turns out that he dived, and so he gets a yellow card. Justice? Methinks not.

Any video system like this needs to be used in real-time if it is to be used at all.

[fatshaft]

Blurred, one thing you can be sure of, there will be no retrospective action taken in any Old Firm game. There will also be no action taken against any OF player in any game, unless an equal number of the opposition also receive punishment.

You think I jest, wait and see.........


However I think this is a great idea in theory, and would work well anywhere that the bigot brothers are not involved.

[warthog]

The SFA have obviously been reading TW. From an article written two years ago.

While we are on the subject of disrespect, lets look at the most contemptible act in professional football. Diving. Simulation, to give it the official term. Cheating, to everyone else. Bolton have one player in El Hadji Diouf who is prone to go horizontal more than is necessary. Arsenal have a team full of them, led until recently by the gifted, but despicable Patrick Vieira. Manchester United have Ruud Van Nistleroy, the aforementioned chav master Rooney, and the dying swan that is Christiano Ronaldo. The list is endless and growing. Diving is seen as a legitimate tactic and players are so good at it that the referee doesn’t stand a chance.

One solution, at least in the Premiership, is to let the cameras deal with this. If a team feels that they have been disadvantaged by a player’s simulation, and this has not been addressed by the referee, then an appeal is lodged to the FA after the game. This appeal is treated as a priority, and if upheld, results in an immediate one match ban for the offending player. Subsequent offences receive heavier punishment. It isn’t perfect. If the act of simulation affected the result, this will still stand, but at least the offending player receives some retribution.

http://www.the-wanderer.co.uk/article.p ... cle_id=193

[boltonboris]

Imagine what would happen over here if it came in, Rooney hacks a player down and deserves a booking, starts screaming at the ref to protest his 'innocence' said ref will just think oh balls to it, I'm not booking him now and get a load of earache I'll just wait until tomorrow when he's not around - giving players scope to commit a possible sending off offence and only get a booking for it

[fatshaft]

Imagine what would happen over here if it came in, Rooney hacks a player down and deserves a booking, starts screaming at the ref to protest his 'innocence' said ref will just think oh balls to it, I'm not booking him now and get a load of earache I'll just wait until tomorrow when he's not around - giving players scope to commit a possible sending off offence and only get a booking for it

Obviously wouldn't be the case, because the ref will be marked down for continually missing or getting incidents wrong.

With greater scrutiny, there will be much less chance of cheats getting away with it in future.

As for the Rooney example you give, it has nothing to do with this trial initiative.

[Dujon]

Isn't there a structure in place right now in the FA where decisions can be rescinded via video evidence and review? So why not the other way? Admittedly, whichever way you look at it players and managers can abuse/manipulate the system. Surely it is the case at the moment where a player, fully cognisant of the result, commits a blatant 'professional foul'. The term 'professional foul' is a euphemism for 'cheating'. I detest cheats.

[fatshaft]

Dujon, I think you're spot on, and have always thought that way. The TV "experts" keep going on about diving and cheating, when surely the simple thing is to book anyone after the eevnt when found to be cheating via video evidence. It would have to be incontrevertible, but just look at that Spurs lad last year for example, that was as big a dive as you'll ever see. It seems a great idea in theory.

[blurred]

For ages something has needed to be done to rid football of this poisonous, provocative menace (calm down, Jose, we're not talking about you). Scotland - and here's a phrase you don't often hear - has taken the lead. But after Scottish FA chief Gordon Smith yesterday unveiled a pilot ploy for using retrospective video analyses to identify and ban divers, Fifa's ever-vigilant Anti-Common Sense Department today sprung into spoilsport action.

"Fifa takes very seriously the matter of simulation and of any form of cheating in football," warbled a blazer unhelpfully before throwing a 1,756,482-page book at the SFA. "Nevertheless, regarding this specific initiative, according to the Fifa disciplinary code, article 79, the disciplinary decisions taken by the referee on the field of play during a match are final.

"Only in certain circumstances, according to article 84, can a disciplinary committee apply certain measures," chuntered on Fifa. "This refers specifically to incidents which have escaped the match officials' attention. Taking this into account, if a referee has seen an incident during a match but determined that it was not a case of simulation, this decision taken by the referee should be considered final."

When the Scots finally regain consciousness after that knockout lecture, they may choose to formally propose a rule change to the International FA Board. But since that flabby body's next meeting isn't until March, it looks like the SFA's commendable pilot project won't be getting off the ground any time soon.

[fatshaft]

pathetic.

[Dujon]

[blurred] That gave me a chuckle, thanks for posting it.

Some sports (e.g. Rugby League and cricket) do use a 'fourth' official to rule on decisions (where requested by the referee/umpire) in certain and limited situations. In some sports - particularly Rugby League - a post game objection can be lodged by a player or team regarding the behaviour of the opposition or an opposition player. A referee can also place a player 'on report'. These are taken quite seriously by the controlling bodies and usually the reviews take place within a couple of days of the game to which the problem refers.

Penalties for foul play - whether the referee missed something or made a poor decision - can be quite severe. Whilst it doesn't stop players committing the offences I'm quite sure that the players, knowing the consequences of rash actions, has reduced the incidences of them. I might add that the referees also can become a casualty because of poor decision making.

No, it doesn't affect the result of the game. There's a saying that goes like: What happens on the field stays on the field. That's fine for a little argy bargy or the out of play scuffle but it's not all right if someone tries to cripple an opponent with a studs up tackle or knock off his head with an elbow or arm.

Bring it on!