http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/35260449

About time they started this ball rolling. It will help clean up the sport from diving divas and really dodgy decisions.

About time.

Don't know why they waited so long. All the controversy that goes on that can be resolved (or at least decided with as much accuracy as possible) all in a few moments.

Should have tried it years ago instead of goal line tech which I can't even remember the last time it was used.

 

In fact video calls will probably help with that too anyway.

Edited January 8, 201610 yr by Stim

Would have preferred it if they did the video reviewing in the stadium for all to see rather than a mysterious figure behind the scenes.

I'm ok with this setup, I wasn't keen on challenges or mandatory reviews. The less play is stopped the better. Offside decisions could be automated though if there are enough cameras present.

 

My only question is, will the video referee have access to all cameras to switch between them or will he be limited to the replays Sky chooses to show? Because if it's the latter then this makes no sense at all but the cynic in me isn't sure...

can not see how this is going to work with cards, can the camera ref over rule the pitch ref if it is a debatable booking? like who decides how much contact warrants a trip and not a dive?

Did you read the article?

yes i did   "Video would only be used when the referee asked for assistance or when the video assistant was allowed to flag up errors."

And how is that not clear? It's the ref on the pitch who decides unless he asks the video ref for input.

i must be reading this wrong then because i see that   "or when the video assistant was allowed to flag up errors."  as him thinking the ref has missed something or got it wrong

Yes, if the ref allows him to do that.

ah i see, but what's going to happen then when the ref gets it totally wrong but does not allow him to flag up? surely this will open up a whole new can of worms ?

Well then it's up to the governing body to educate that ref.

 

I would allow constant radio communication between them so the input from the video ref is not in the spotlight. That way they can always raise alarms if they deem it necessery and the ref can take it or leave it without the added pressure.

I caught some of this being discussed on TalkSport earlier, one guy argued against it because it would give pundits less to talk about........uh, why should pundits be considered in a decision that could improve the game ? The majortiy of football pundits talk sh*te, maybe this would actually give the good pundits time to talk about the actual football being played rather than the controversy all of the time.

I caught some of this being discussed on TalkSport earlier, one guy argued against it because it would give pundits less to talk about...

 

Looking at some of the pundits, the less they talk, the better it is for the viewers at home.

Another great cartoon by David Squires. The Allardyce bit is especially funny! 

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/picture/2016/jan/12/david-squires-on-footballs-proposed-trials-of-video-technology

About time. This will surely be amended several times before it works out well. But a start nonetheless, good for the game.

Needs to stay referee initiated only. The coaches in American football and baseball have 2 challenges a game as well and it's terrrrrible to watch. Don't get me wrong, bad decisions should be corrected but the only way to keep things flowing is leave it out of the managers' hands. Goal line technology has already lived up to expectations so hopefully this will be a step in the right direction as well. 

 

It will be interesting to see an official call or not call for a penalty, then go watch the video and change his mind. I can't imagine they will voluntarily ask to see the replay if they think they have a clear view of it. This seems to be more aimed at when the official is unsure or didn't get a good look at a possible foul.