Being a sports fan in the United States, it is quite common for me to see instant video replays in the sports that I watch. In the NFL, every touchdown is reviewed and the coaches of a respective team have the right to challenge a limited amount of calls made by referees. In Hockey, video replay is widely used (accounting to how fast the game is). A player can challenge up to 3 calls per set in Tennis and MLB (baseball) just extended its use of video replay starting in 2014. And even British sports like Cricket and Rugby use a wide array of rules to challenge calls made by referees using the assistance of video replay. So why does Soccer still resist this aid that can make the lives of referees so much easier and make the game more fair in general?
The reason for bringing this topic up is because last week in the Premier League, there was a game between Chelsea and West Brom Albion (WBA). WBA were leading the game 2-1 till the last minutes of the game. Then, a Chelsea player by the name of Ramires gets the slightest of contacts from a WBA defender and blatantly falls to the ground in the penalty box. Andre Mariner, the referee, promptly awards a penalty. Chelsea score. The game ends in a 2-2 draw with WBA being robbed of a huge upset and all 3 points. After the game, Mariner received a huge amount of stick from pundits, commentators, fans and people who cover the sport in general. I used to do this quite a lot when I was new to the sport and used to just fall into the group who think that these referees conspire against the smaller teams or that they are biased. Let me say first of all that I think making those suggestions are completely absurd and at best, a knee jerk reaction with no rational though. I was listening to the show "606 Football Phone in" which is a popular radio soccer talk show in the United Kingdom that night. And while I was agreeing with the pundits that referees should not recive so much stick and should be held more accountable, I did not think they were actually getting to the crux of the debate that was at play here. While they were saying that we should make the referees justify their calls and talk after every game to tell the fans why they made the decisions at that given time, I do not think that still solves the problem. You see, I don't think the issue is with the referee. I don't think the issue is with a player who simulates diving or falling to the ground with the slightest contact either. No, I think the problem is with the way the Premier league and soccer in general just refuses to use video replay to review and reverse some major calls in pivotal moments during a match.
But of course, when you make suggestions like you could implement NFL rules where a manager can challenge a limited amount of plays in a game, heads roll over. The pundits, journalists, a lot of managers and even fans go, "Oh, no that will slow the game down", or "that is ridiculous". But what I don't understand is this. Would you rather waste up to 4 minutes with players arguing about a call with a lot of commotion and confusion on the pitch or would you rather use that time to look at a replay and reverse a call? I don't know, maybe I'm the crazy one since I just want to see the game being played fair and also reduce the amount of pressure that the referee has on his shoulders. After all a referee is human and the split second decisions he makes is not easy at all. Robbie Savage can sit in the 606 studio and spout things like "I don't see why I cant referee a game" to his fellow journalist Darren Fletcher but that is just as equivalent and disrespectful as me saying "Oh I can easily play in the Premier League for a team, I don't see whats so hard about it."
The only reason why people might argue against using video technology and video replays for a match are usually that 1) The referee needs to do a better job or 2) That's absurd, it will slow down the game. And both those arguments just don't hold up for me. The reason for so many journalists not wanting video review in my opinion is simply because then they would not have any controversial calls to talk about after the game. I don't see any other reason as to why else a sport like Soccer which is famous all over the world still refuses to adhere video replay and technology in the 21st century where all other sports have seemed to do so.
 |
| Chelsea's Ramires dives into the box for a Penalty |
 |
| Apparently this is not time wasting but Reviewing a Play is |
The only reason why people might argue against using video technology and video replays for a match are usually that 1) The referee needs to do a better job or 2) That's absurd, it will slow down the game. And both those arguments just don't hold up for me. The reason for so many journalists not wanting video review in my opinion is simply because then they would not have any controversial calls to talk about after the game. I don't see any other reason as to why else a sport like Soccer which is famous all over the world still refuses to adhere video replay and technology in the 21st century where all other sports have seemed to do so.
0 comments:
Post a Comment