[SteveO 35]

That's another defence I don't get i.e. "how far down the pyramid do you apply the technology"

Who gives a bloody shit if the Blue Square Premier can't afford to enforce it?

I don't see the village cricket team playing with the Snickometer, Hot Spot and the run-out camera? Nor do I see the local tennis club using Hawkeye.

We are talking about supposedly the richest league in the world and it should be in place at the elite level as it is with other sports.

you can't just set your own parameter to suit your own club. it has to be across the board, ok the money isn't on the same level as the PL...but it's still the same for all clubs, you can't start making up your own rules

Its not just to suit my club its the way of life. So let me get this right - you would prefer not to progress the game at the very top level because it wouldn't be fair on Hayes & Yeading, if Chelsea had a goal disallowed for offside ?

When the cricket world cup is being played or a top level test match, the players refer key decisions to the umpire and the matter is resolved instantly.Does it really matter that a village cup final being played somewhere out there doesn't have the same technology available? When England played Wales at Twickenham, the technology was used to determine the outcome of the game effectively when a last minute 'try or no try' decision was referred.....do you think the RFU gave a shit if the same thing happened at Blackheath that day?

In any sport the best standard of play will have the most interest, and the most resource available to it. We are paying top level footballers millionaire wages, we are paying top level referees six figure salaries and people are paying £60 upwards to watch top level matches......all to have it ruined after 14 minutes like the Man U vs QPR game yesterday. I'm sorry but that just can't be right can it?

[JudoKilli]

Who applies it? The FA. Simple. They can afford it. They can afford to fit it to every team in the top 2 tiers at least.

As for the lower clubs, my local tennis club doesn't have hawk eye or all that crap. The cricket club down my road don't doesn't use the heat sensors, snick o meter or whatever. When I enter national judo comps I don't have the benefit of slow mo replays and sensor technology that they have a the olympics. We get on just fine.

Think of the technology as a perk for clubs that have reached that level rather than a disadvantage for those that haven't.

[Rosie_titters]

Who applies it? The FA. Simple. They can afford it. They can afford to fit it to every team in the top 2 tiers at least.

As for the lower clubs, my local tennis club doesn't have hawk eye or all that crap. The cricket club down my road don't doesn't use the heat sensors, snick o meter or whatever. When I enter national judo comps I don't have the benefit of slow mo replays and sensor technology that they have a the olympics. We get on just fine.

Think of the technology as a perk for clubs that have reached that level rather than a disadvantage for those that haven't.

won't happen, FA won't pay for this. And technology won't happen unless it' available to the championship, div 1 and div 2.

[StuartL]

I am firmly behind having technology in football to help the referee make the correct judgement - he can't be expected to see everything when players dive, cheat, play act, etc.

I would like the 4th official (who appears to do sweet fa apart from hold up the board with how much injury time there is) to watch the game on the tv monitors, and alert the ref if there has been an incident that he has not seen, or would benefit from a clearer view before making his mind up.

Off the top of my head some, Arsenal related instances from this season.
Balotteli challenge on Song, Bale dive, Barton hauling Gervinho up by the collor and then being "slapped".

The ref can then have a look, from a better angle, 2 or 3 times if he chooses before having to make a decision that, can be game changing and potentially title or relegation deciding.

Of couse decisions don't even themselves out over a season - how can they unless in the reverse fixture the ref awards a decision the opposite of the first match. ie penalty and sending off.

[Rosie_titters]

I am firmly behind having technology in football to help the referee make the correct judgement - he can't be expected to see everything when players dive, cheat, play act, etc.

I would like the 4th official (who appears to do sweet fa apart from hold up the board with how much injury time there is) to watch the game on the tv monitors, and alert the ref if there has been an incident that he has not seen, or would benefit from a clearer view before making his mind up.

Off the top of my head some, Arsenal related instances from this season.
Balotteli challenge on Song, Bale dive, Barton hauling Gervinho up by the collor and then being "slapped".

The ref can then have a look, from a better angle, 2 or 3 times if he chooses before having to make a decision that, can be game changing and potentially title or relegation deciding.

Of couse decisions don't even themselves out over a season - how can they unless in the reverse fixture the ref awards a decision the opposite of the first match. ie penalty and sending off.

but once again, you need tight guidelines on how many times the ref, can stop the game, or you would find a game go on for about 2 hours. this too me is going to cause more grief and a whole can of worms, the players and managers already surround the ref and give him abuse, there would be so many petty incidents with this - unless they use proper guidelines when technology can be used -

[RNTGOONER]

I have seen the ref walk over to the lino and discuss a call with him, only for the linesman to shrug his shoulders - that takes about 20/30 seconds what is difference, how will it take longer than that for an official to view a replay?

[Rosie_titters]

I have seen the ref walk over to the lino and discuss a call with him, only for the linesman to shrug his shoulders - that takes about 20/30 seconds what is difference, how will it take longer than that for an official to view a replay?

because everyone sees things differently, and the time will be, when the players are debating with the ref whether it was a goal or not
look at the Kuyt one at the weekend against Villa, you couldn't decided that within 20 seconds - some are so close to call - the ones at Chelsea and Man u were obvious, but not all of them

[RNTGOONER]

a 3 person quorum viewing a replay 3 times, then deliver what they think - 1 minute tops?

[StuartL]

a 3 person quorum viewing a replay 3 times, then deliver what they think - 1 minute tops?

No need, just let the ref have a good look as many times as he needs to - still his decision to make but with a much clearer perspective.

[olgitgooner]

leave it, as it is, take away all the Controversial decisions and the game will become sterile - we all get pissed off, when a decision goes against us

but there's nothing better, than having a good debate and banter with fellow fans over decisions -

Thats all well and good ROSIE but these wrong decisions being made by officials affect peoples livelihoods e.g say wigan get relegated by a point because of decisions like at the week end it wont be the players who will lose their jobs it will be backroom staff/admin staff/cleaning staff who will be let go because of loss of revenue.Now obviously you get relegated because of results over a season not down to 1 game but its the 21st century and there has to be technology brought into the game.

two questions for ya, who pays for this technology?, and how far do you go down, as far as conference level?

We already have fourth officials who do nothing except soak up abuse from angry managers, and hold up added time boards. Not necessary. But we may as well keep them, and add a few hundred quid for a fifth official. It's just a few quid extra.

Any match which is on the telly can afford it. Conference clubs can't. Tough.

[QuartzGooner]

All Premiership games are filmed, a few extra cameras are not too pricy in context.

Each team gets three calls per game to ask for a decision or incident to be reviewed by an umpire (plus an extra call if extra time is played).

This is currently being done anyway by the TV pundits, so it is not a bizarre new process that will take ages to understand or implement.
Goals, tackles, offsides; I would include them all.
Each incident would take 20 seconds to a minute to review, as Yankee says, less time than players spend arguing with a referee.

If it is only used in the Premier League, so be it. That is where the big money is. It is a separate organisation from the Football League, so it should be able to make it's own rules.

[RNTGOONER]

All Premiership games are filmed, a few extra cameras are not too pricy in context.

Each team gets three calls per game to ask for a decision or incident to be reviewed by an umpire (plus an extra call if extra time is played).

This is currently being done anyway by the TV pundits, so it is not a bizarre new process that will take ages to understand or implement.
Goals, tackles, offsides; I would include them all.
Each incident would take 20 seconds to a minute to review, as Yankee says, less time than players spend arguing with a referee.

If it is only used in the Premier League, so be it. That is where the big money is. It is a separate organisation from the Football League, so it should be able to make it's own rules.

just make all the players wear alice bands with wireless cameras

[Eboue-Why?]

It's a no brainer, just bring it in. I can fully understand how the ref missed Balotelli's tackle, he didn't see it. The offsides? A split second decision etc they're only human and guess what, humans make mistakes. I've reffed and run the line and they're bloody difficult jobs.
Technology? One TV monitor is not exactly rocket science is it? Have cricket and tennis gone backwards? Course not. If they really wanted to they could, they just don't want to.
Silly old fools

[Rosie_titters]

It's a no brainer, just bring it in. I can fully understand how the ref missed Balotelli's tackle, he didn't see it. The offsides? A split second decision etc they're only human and guess what, humans make mistakes. I've reffed and run the line and they're bloody difficult jobs.
Technology? One TV monitor is not exactly rocket science is it? Have cricket and tennis gone backwards? Course not. If they really wanted to they could, they just don't want to.
Silly old fools

difference is Tennis and Cricket are not set to an exact time scale - like football is, you have to take into account the transport network and Police

[QuartzGooner]

But surely the technology speeds up the game?

Umpire looks at a replay and decides in under a minute, rather than players surrounding the referee and arguing about a decision for longer?