Would the introduction of new technology ruin the tension in football? If so: why?

Question

Yahoo! UK & Ireland Answers team note: This is the real Patrick Vieira. Read the blog for further details: http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-qT1KKPQoRKdVT4lowpJCljbFokkuIzI8?p=2031

Answer 1

i don't think it would, when you have the amount of millions involved in football games these days, it is very unfair for a team to possibly lose millions plus there star players based on a ref's decision which turns out to be wrong.

this sort of thing can lose a team around 50million in revenue

Answer 2

This is a really good question. As coach and a referee, I have two answers to this. A ref should be honest enough to stand by his calls.. right or wrong, and technology interrupts this and adds more stress to the calling of the game. One must understand that the ref calls a game at an instant and doesn't have a replay and second guessing isn't fair at all to anyone. Refs are humans too and we all aren't perfect, but don't forget, that the ref has a tolly different angle and view than any camera has. The assistant refs should also come more into play when calls are being made. The ref is the boss and can override any calls from the sideline anyways. Technology just makes the ref accountable but does detract from the game somewhat as well. Just immagine you being questioned on everything you do yourself and put yourself in front of millions every game and see how you would deal with that.
As coach I welcomme this .. and as a fan even more so. Go back to the 1966 World Cup where a cruicial call cost Germany the World Cup. mmmm.. Think of the last World Cup of how Portugal and Germany both got robbed . I still to this day cannot understand how a call in tyhe BOX wasn't a penalty shot ?????? So yes, this technology should definitely be used. One just has to be careful of how it's implimented into the game.
At any given time, games are on camera, so it should be no problem of having various angles available for scruitany. You have THREE OFFICIALS controlling the game ... how many more should we add ???
Soccer is a game of attrician. The strongest will survive .... the fittest will survive. The penalty shoot out is great for the fans but unfair to the game. The penalty shots were introduced for a reason ????. The reason is way past due and since all major stadiums have lights now ... PLAY THE GAME UNTIL THERE IS A WINNER ... even if it takes three hours or more to play the game .... remember this is a variable chess game on a field for the fittest ... allow your three substitutions and then if anything happens you play short. Just let the game be won on the field and not some lucky incident be the cause.

Answer 3

There is no simple answer to the question. Yes it would make it better in the sense that a referee's job would be made a lot easier, it would eliminate diving and it would stop people being wrongfully cheated out of something they deserve and situations where clubs are relegated by a wrong decision (and the associated financial pitfalls that this brings with it). These are all positive aspects of what the new technology would bring. Most of the answers I have read seem to focus on these points. However, your question asks if it would ruin the tension in football. The answer to this is of course it would. What adds more tension to a game than a tight penalty shout, a misjudged offside or a sneaky handball that gets missed? Nothing. Fierce rivalries are built (as you well know from your time at Arsenal, against United!) on the back of firecracker games where a close call can mean the difference between a win or a loss. How long is it since Maradona's 'hand of God' goal went 'unnoticed' by the referree? People still go on about it today, and they couldnt have allowed it if they had seen a video replay at the time. And Garcia's 'ghost goal' as Mourinho all too often calls it, passed Liverpool through into one of the most spectacular European cup finals ever seen, would we have seen that classic night in Instanbul if that goal had not been allowed? Or would he have been moaning in the press this week about it if there was conclusive evidence it crossed the line? In cases like that, where even after looking at the replays there is an element of doubt, technology could cause more problems than it solves.

Answer 4

Hello Patrick, this is a very topical question at the moment, particularly with regards to the Premiership.

For me, the use of technology (presumably ball line technology) would ruin the tension and flow of the games. For sports like cricket and rugby, the technology is used in a natural break in the game, e.g. when the stumps have been broken or a man has dived over the try line. With football, there are not as many of those natural breaks.

I am a West Ham fan and my team has benefitted this season from a "goal" that wasn't (against Blackburn). However, I don't know how the game could have been stopped in order to review that incident. Yes, there are millions riding on incidents like that, but in the same ways that players make mistakes, so do officials. Whatever decision is made on the pitch with regards to the action on the pitch, should not be overruled at a later date.

Have a good end to the season Patrick!

Answer 5

Potentially, yes. If technology comes in the therms of goal-line cameras, etc, then the overall flow of the game could be interrupted while the officials review the tapes from all available angles. Look at American Football, coaches are given the opportunity to contest rulings a couple of times a game, and review of the tapes can take up to 20 minutes depending on how clear the angles show the event. Also, It would increase the amount of pressure the actual players can put on officials. If the player feels a call has been missed will they then hound the officials to review the tape?
Next, if they try goaline technology like they have with baseline bleeps in tennis could a player landing upon the sensor cause the same response as a ball landing on it.
I think that Ice Hockey is one sport that could be held as an example of whether technology works. In the recent past their were numerous times per game in which the tapes were reviewed, and numerous circumstances under which it could be requested to go to the tape. This seriously affected the flow of a fast moving sport. Now the opportunities to request reviews are limited, reviews are less frequent and the games move at the pace they should once more. Football is a fast paced, end to end, non-stop game that relies on officiating from bodies on the pitch. Keep it that way. Let the game flow as it always has. It's the most exciting game in the world to watch for precisely that reason. It is one of the few sports left in the world in which the game keeps moving regardless. Injuries now put a player off the pitch until they are able to return. If anything needs to be done why not add an official at each end of the pitch, along the goal-line. They would have a good view of the pitch, offering the ref another pair of eyes, and another angle of judgement. When the action gets going in the penalty area they can be right there by the goal, looking accross the line from right in the think of it. The only technology needed woud be the ability for the officials to verbally communicate rather than standing there flagging like idiots.

Answer 6

Yes. I believe the introduction of technology would ruin the game and should never be allowed. What makes football the beautiful game it is, is that it creates talking points between fans, players and managers. Obviously people love to talk about great goals, and wonderful pieces of skill. For example the goal Messi scored for Barca last week was absolute class and it was the first thing myself and my work colleagues discussed the next morning. However, we must remember the debate controversy creates is also a big part of the game. For example I'm a Chelsea fan and I will tell you until I'm blue in the face that the challange by O'Shea on Saturday was a blatent penalty whereas my Man Utd friends will strongly disagree. Mourinho thought it was a penaly, whereas Ferguson thought he touched the ball. No matter how much technology you introduce no one for certain could tell you if it was a penalty or not. Football for me is about opinions and it is the opinions of millions fans wordwide that makes the game the greatest game in the world and this is what creates the tension. What the introduction of technology does is take away that opinion from us all and that will ultimately take the passion out of the game. Finally, another reason why I would never introduce technology into the game, is that it there would be too many stoppages and would stop the game from flowing. Any real football fan will tell you that this is not what they want to see, and if that means we get a few dodgy decisions now and again then so be it. Anyway, these things always even out of the season dont they!

Answer 7

Ofcourse it would bad decision are the most talked about part of Football. Talk sports lines would be dead if Video replays was allowed in the game.

However the up side is times which titles are tightly contest as was united and arsenal a few years back when im sure you did as did i being and avid gooner looked back over the season in fustration thinking the right decision there and i could all have been different??? Would then be a thing of the past!

Is this a good thing tho is that not part of what makes football so emotional i think so.

For football to evolve i think technology has to be introduced but merely to indicate when the ball crosses the line and a goal is scored. So as to get the main fundamentals of the game correct.

But to suggest analysisng every decision even tho it can be done in seconds would be terrible and would ruining the flow of the game which is so important.

No one likes a bad decision go against there team wheather it be a penalty, Offside or foul but too take away them wrong desisions would ruin the atmosphre which we all love.

Besides everyone loves to hate a bady and the best bady in football has always been the referee, i mean shouting "the vidoe replays a *******" from the terraces would not be the same.

Answer 8

No.If technology were introduced then the fuel of the fire that is football debate is also gone.

Whats needed more than anything is for the players to respect the referee more. Fair enough he'll gt things wrong, but you compare the situaton in football - the sport I love - with that of rugby - which I can't stand - and I have to say those rugby boys got the right idea.

Now recently we've had John Terry whinging to the press that the ref told him his team need discipline - so what? He's the authroity! If a player can scream abuse at the ref, the ref can give an honest view in return. This causes a scene in football. When is the last time a rugny ref was hounded into retirement like Anders Frisk was? Technology will just take something away from the fans without addressing the key root of the problem which is a refusal to take the referees word as final, regardless. If he's wrong and makes that many mistakes, he'll be replaced.

Think of it this way Paddy, if technology existed you'd probably have got more red cards when you played for us at Highbury than you did, and we wouldn't have been able to enjoy quite as much of your talents on the field. That nitty gritty-ness that led to the age old debates such as "Do you back Patrick Vieira or Roy Keane?" would be gone. Only joking, thanks for everything you did for us gooners mate!

Answer 9

Dont ruin the game with technology. As a American and avid NFL fan, I can tell you Instant Replay has more drawbacks than benefits. The beauty of a bad call is the aftermath!! A bad call can spark a rivalry!! I mean, look at the Christiano Ronaldo V Wayne Rooney World Cup sending off. Can you IMAGINE the tension next time Portugal plays England? Bad calls can get the supporters in the match and gives you talking points at the pub later on. Bringing in technology deminishes the human element in Football. The human element MAKES football!!!! And how will the smaller league 1 and league 2 teams afford the technology??? It puts the higher league teams on an artificial pedestal. Not tomention the confusion when one squad has the technology and another one doesnt. Example, FA cup. Whats to happen when Scunthorpe plays Arsenal?? You cant use technology in some matches and not in others. Its just not fair. Let the officials do their job. Good or bad.

Answer 10

As an American I may have a different perspective on this matter because technology has been a part of my other favorite sport: American Football and my New England Patriots! When league/cup championships are on the line (playoffs for us) making the right call is critical and sometimes the human eye is just not fast enough. If you are not familiar, in American Football each head coach (manager) can make three challenges per game (penalties/fouls cannot be challenged). If the challenging team "wins" the call is overturned. If they "lose" then they lose a timeout (which is not extremely harsh). Obviously I don't think there is a "penalty" that a football team could pay because there are no timeouts, substitutes are limited to 3, etc. The challenge has a 2-minute time limit where the head referee reviews every camera angle of the play. There needs to be decisive evidence to overturn a play. At the end of halves there can be an official's review which comes from the officials on the sidelines if they believe the call on the field (pitch) was questionable. Maybe in football there could be one challenge per half. Video replay has been extremely successful across the pond and let me tell you even with video replay you can still have great fun with your friends (some may call them rivals) over questionable calls!

Answer 11

No - The implementation of new technologies have in some cases added to the tension of professional sports. Furthermore they help keep the game fair. Different technologies have been utilized effectively in other sports such as cricket, rugby, ice hockey, and American football. The only draw back is that it tends to make games longer, so there has to be a limit on what can be reviewed. Furthermore I believe it would be a bad idea to bring in a new technology at the highest levels of football first. Why not UEFA finance the implementantion of these tools in lower leagues, such as the A-league, MLS or lower levels in English, Spanish or French football. Atleast for the first year it could be a good test for the system, and any problems can be changed. In the end football is about the fans, if new technologies cause the game to be too long, or less exciting then they are unexceptable, but this must be balanced with fairness of the game, especially when trophies, promotions and tons of money are at stake.