[Closed] why no TMO/Video Ref in football?

Imagine having to consult the TMO every time there was a foul. Nothing would get done.

I think there should be a video ref constantly reviewing footage of fouls - if he sees a dive there should be a *retrospective* yellow card.

and stop play when one of them is rolling around clutching their face after someone hit their elbow. the amount of time that is wasted is ridiculous and the time added on is never an appropriate amount of time.

don't watch football other than the occasional big tournament game, hence my ramblings....

Another argument against is that it's expensive, which would discriminate against poorer countries (not to mention you would have a different rule book for the top flight).

It also means the ref loses part of his on-field authority, imagine what would happen if early on in a game he gets a couple of his decisions revoked.

In my opinion a tmo should be used. Immediate yellow or red cards for play acting/diving would soon put a stop to that. I don't know of any other sport where cheating is so readily and obviously accepted.

Another argument against is that it's expensive, which would discriminate against poorer countries

Not really - if the facilities are there, use them - if not, as you were.

I would ONLY use it for diving. Game carries on, but yellow card issued.

I don't agree with that mogrim it would give a referee more authority on the pitch. You don't see many rugby players arguing with the referee.

molgrips - Member

Imagine having to consult the TMO every time there was a foul. Nothing would get done.

That's more or less what they said about it for rugby. It all depends, I think, on how comfortable you are with the fact that cheating has become an important football skill.

But the tmo is only asked specific questions ie was that a try?

But the tmo is only asked specific questions ie was that a try?

This season, the TMO has been brought in more for foul play and for incidents leading up to the try, whereas previously, he could only comment on a questionable try once the ball had crossed the line. Also, rugby is a start-stop game so there is more chances for the ref to consult - and time is stopped for injuries, TMO consults, etc.

I would like to see a couple of things happen in football. Allow the ref to blow for a penalty and if there is a question, allow a TMO with all the camera angles to confirm or advise the ref that it's not a penalty. Also, allow the ref to stop the clock for injuries if he feels the player is making the most of it. Perhaps allow a TMO for incidents inside the 18 yard box only? But citing for off the ball incidents, and other odds and ends.

I'm with DD.

It's been managed in hockey, which is a faster game than football and already uses two umpires.... And there's no real loss of flow.

IMO it's gone too far in rugby union, and is headed that way in league (if not already there). But both games have a stop start that football doesn't.

I'm not that bothered by cheating in football - it's part of the game in my eyes: win at all costs. Which gives it a wonderful, camp theatrical quality at times.

I also think (and hey, I love rugby) that "cheating" in rugby is almost openly applauded by fans, commentators and pundits alike. Apart from deliberate foul play or professional fouls which to be fair are heavily punished both during the game and after by citing commissions. Whereas in football, tricking the ref by diving, holding in the penalty area, impeding goal keepers is derided as cheating by fans...unless it's a player from your own side.

OMITN has it when he says that the theatrical quality of football, the outrage of those on the receiving end of a bad decision, or a missed dive is all part of the game. I'm not sure it was ever supposed to go that way, but it's there now whether we like it or not.

You don't see many rugby players arguing with the referee.

That has nothing to do with TV reviews, it has to do with players having some respect and refs taking no nonsense or backchat. In line with the laws of Association Football, if any ref had the bottle to enforce them.

Tmo works for rugby because it's not only stop start, but also because the ball typically doesn't move as far or fast and hence the ref is usually close to incidents, hence less need for each incident to be reviewed. There's far more opportunity for things to be missed in football where the ref can be perfectly positioned one moment, then someone plays a 50 yards crossfield ball, and he's 46 yards behind play.

Pierluigi Collina did a program on sky sports recently discussing the use of video replay vs the 5 official system they've been trialling in euro games. Was a very very good explanation. After watching it, I'd be all in favour of it coming in for as much of the top leagues and tournaments as possible.

Having 2 or 3 pairs of eyes on every incident, plus a bloke whose job is solely to watch out for incidents in and around the penalty area and who is positioned right there, was a real eye opener, particularly the level of cooperation between the officials on their throat mikes as play was happening, ie without need to delay play. (Post edit) he also said that the goal officials had been instructed to use voice communication and NOT the recognised signals, because ultimately they are there to assist, not actually decide, and if they start giving signals that would lead to more issues if the crowd reads them and either misinterpret, or the ref overrules...hence all verbal. Which is why a lot of commentators were complaining that they stood there and did nothing - not true, they were in constant communication.

The downside is that it takes 3 'top' officials for each game (plus two linos, but the argument is that linesman becomes a specialist position again instead of the asst ref that they now are). The counter was very good, that the two men watching behind the goals can now be promising up and coming young refs, who know enough about fouls and foul play to know what a dive or a shirt pull looks like, but lack the experience to be the main man. Being a top ref isn't all about decisions, it's about managing the players as tempers and emotions run high, so to have the chance to learn by watching the very best close up is a very valuable development experience too.

I think the extra refs is a good option and surprised they didn't have it in this World Cup.
It would be good if the ref could consult a video official for incidents where a goal has been scored, but the linesman did/didn't flag for offside etc, as probably 9 times out of 10 it's incidents that result in a dis/allowed goal that cause the issues so I don't see any harm in checking with a video official that can quickly review it, as one side will spend a good couple of minutes berating the ref or lino anyway.

You don't see many rugby players arguing with the referee.

Hmmmm - not sure that is entirely accurate. I've seen plenty players at high levels get torn into the referee. And as for the coaches they give referees hell. There is as much cheating in rugby as there is in football.

The fact is that the powers that be in football are backward and stuck-in-their-ways. It would be very easy to incorporate TMOs into football, if the will was there.

I also do think that they like the controversy: It keeps people in pubs, talking about the game and watching Sky Sports News.

I think at the very least, they should take the task of time-keeping out of the refs hands, like they do in rugby.

Other than time-keeping, there are actually lots of opportunities where the ref could do to the TMO without distrupting the flow of the game too much i.e. bad fouls, off-side for goals, handballs leading to goals, fouls leading to goals: All situations where the game has stopped any way.

The point is that in the 5 official system, you would very rarely need to go to a tmo anyway, and their assistance in stuff that the tmo couldnt help with would be far greater.

the same reason why goal line technology was only recently introduce in the world cup ( corrupt seb bladder the dinosaur)

I propose you do away with human eye for the offsides and concentrate on the activity areas so the lines men dont run up and down but focus on what is happening. After all the computerised analysis of off side looks remarkably like hawkeye in tennis.

Maybe the refs can carry a screen like the size of the mobile phone on his arm to check replays or video sent by the tmo. Heck why not use thermal imaging to show hotspots when contact is made so divers cant just kick the ground?

People talk about the flow of football but each time a foul occurs it pretty much stops the play for enough time to get a replay. I mean so far there been so much diving and playacting you could fill an episode of Eastenders and cast Robben as Phil mitchell? 🙂