h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

In recent years the growth of television replays has made it all too easy to find the linesman / referee wrong long after the fact.

Why not use a tv replay when a goal has been scored to decide whether anyone was offside? Otherwise let play continue. That way you:
- avoid players being ruled offside when they were legitimately onside (and so stopping play)
- you avoid players in offside positions who are interfering with play being missed and so a goal being awarded when it shouldn't.

You only need to do it for the big tournaments or leagues where tv cameras are present. Put one behind the goal to record when the ball is kicked (for long passes at least), link it to a camera looking along the edge of the penalty box. Perhaps mix in a bit of "hawkeye" technology to draw a line across the screen to decide if player is on or offside. 4th or 5th official watch the replay, makes the call. He could even watch a bit of "Eastenders" on the monitor during the boring bits of play when the ball is in the middle of the pitch.

You don't have to worry about the replay decision interfering with momentum of play because it will have been stopped for the goal anyway.

Ultimately you'll always end up with the correct decision which is what TV viewers are looking for. Or does it stop them from having a good argument down the pub, which might actually be waht they're looking for.

bbs

No, let's not use a TV replay to decide if the off-side rule (or any other rule) has been breached. TV replays are only there for TV viewers. People who watch live football don't get TV replays. Even if such a scheme were to be introduced it could only be used by those clubs with enough money to pay for the equipment. Where would that leave the real game such as school football or minor league football.
I say we should leave football low-tech and let the referess make their own mistakes! In my opinion, holding up the game to watch a TV replay would just slow everything down and make the game clinical & boring.

OFFSIDE!!!

Such a bad idea this TV thing.....has anyone seen how long American Football takes?

The most basic reason I'm against it is the fact that football is the simplest sport in the world - anyone can play anywhere, with any number of people - the only piece of equipment you need is a vaguely spherical object that isn't made of metal or stone. Park football, school football, a kickabout in the gutters of Sao Paulo - it's the same everywhere and that's why it is such a global sport. And the ref's word must be sacrosanct at every level - the presence of cameras should not overrule that.

The other reason is slightly more controversial I feel - while I can see the sense in using cameras for goal-line decisions I still disagree - it only takes one wrong decision to be made with cameras (how many 50-50 arguments have we seen on Match of the Day, after seeing a disputed goal from 18 different angles) and the problem actually becomes worse. And more importantly, wrong decisions are what makes football great.

What do people talk about for weeks? Great goals and terrible acts of injustice or incompetence. Even when the soap opera of results, sackings and signings falls a little flat there's always an absurd decision that turns a game to rant about. Yes, I know that people's careers can turn on a dodgy penalty - a cup going to the wrong side, a club suffering the financial disaster of relegation - but no club went down on one refereeing decision, and there's always another cup to fight for. It's the bitter disappointment that makes the glories so sweet.

TV is a gift that helps satiate our hunger for the sport - it shouldn't be allowed to change the rules of a game that is truly beautiful.

All very good comments however ...

Kbytesec - you miss my point entirely. TV replays ARE there for viewers only, however the World Cup wouldn't be much of a tournament if it only got seen by 100,000 people. What makes it such an exciting tournament is that it is televised. As the vast majority see it on TV, the vast majority will see the wrong calls being made, the wrong teams going through. That is why we need solid calls to be made. Assuming you are English (apologies if you're not) would you have preferred it if Argentina had still gone through in 1986 with Maradona's Hand of God, even if a replay official could have overturned the call? I certainly wouldn't.

Secondly of course park football couldn't use replays. Leave that the same. I was only suggesting to introduce TV replays where tv cameras would normally be present. It's not unknown for sports (including football) to have 'local' rules. Does every Sunday morning game have 11 players vs 11, or do teams occasionally have to start with 9 or 10?

Finally you wouldn't be slowing the game down with replays because the game has already stopped. You'd only be reviewing it when a goal has been scored. To think football doesn't have a start / stop nature is blind, the ball is only in play for about 30 mins per half. That's 15 minutes stopped. If you watched the Euro champs a couple of years back, try remembering how long it was before France took their penalty against Portugal (in the semi) after Abel Xavier handballed.

Zebedee - your comments were also interesting. However this will be the long post in the world if I answer them all. Suffice it to say football is no longer the simplest sport in the world. It might be down your local park (jumpers for goalposts), but in the big leagues you can hardly call the offside rule (where we started), the backpass law, the tackle from behind making the game simple.
And on your 2nd point, why is it ok for a referee to be wrong x% of the time, but a 2nd opinion has to be perfect 100%? A somewhat unfair comparison I feel.

bbs

Greetings BBS,
Actually, I did not miss your point. I am aware that BIG-TIME-SOCCER could afford to have TV equipment on hand to assist referees in making calls but my plea was to keep thye game simple. I know that the camp is stopped anyway when the referee blows off-side but it is not stopped when one team claims that the other team is offside but the referee does not allow it. In that case, assuming a goal was not scored as a dire t result of the attacking action, the game would carry on. Would you then want to stop the game and check the replay? Not me!
Football is a great game! I say again-lets keep it low-tech and simple!

Half-Time (?)

Maybe I wasn't as clear as I meant to be ... I was proposing ONLY to ever look for an offside call when a goal has been scored, and do that by TV replay. If no goal is scored then it doesn't matter if anyone was offside, there becomes no need to stop play. That results in fewer stoppages and is simpler to follow as the game keeps flowing.

In Saturday's FA cup final when Gudjohnsen was clear through we would have found out whether he would have scored. Instead the ref blew for offside - but he wasn't.

As my local Chelsea fan moaned to me earlier this morning, we'll never know whether he would have scored, but he was clean through and if he had scored, it would have been just before half-time, Chelsea could have taken JF Hassle for 2nd half and sat back to defend.

The only flaw to my plan is that defenders would have to learn to stop appealing for offside, and just play to the whistle. Perhaps a difficult mindset to change for them ...

bbs

Dear BBS,
As with many things in matters football we could this keep going foryears but let's not.

I just want to make the point that it does matter if someone is offside and the referee does not call it, even if no goal is scored as a direct result. It matters because the offside team looses posesion of the ball when the referee stops the game for offside. If I was in the other team I would call that important. Don't you agree?

Sorry, I live away from the Olde Countrey and cannot, therefore, comment on what is happening in the FA and its glorious cup final.

Best kickin wishes

Kbyte

Dear BBS,
As with many things in matters football we could this keep going foryears but let's not.

I just want to make the point that it does matter if someone is offside and the referee does not call it, even if no goal is scored as a direct result. It matters because the offside team looses posesion of the ball when the referee stops the game for offside. If I was in the other team I would call that important. Don't you agree?

Sorry, I live away from the Olde Countrey and cannot, therefore, comment on what is happening in the FA and its glorious cup final.

Best kickin wishes

Kbyte