It’s time to introduce the Video Eye to football

Let me say from the off that I am one of those individuals, a growing band I believe, who is extremely disappointed with the standard of refereeing and assistant refereeing that currently prevails in our leagues. It is one thing knowing the rules, and another one applying them and having the football understanding to put them to good effect.

I have always felt, as in other sports, that football officials need to have played at a high level to give them this understanding. It’s not going to happen in football because the players are so well rewarded. However, I digress, the whole point of this article is not based on de-crying refereeing, we all recognise that they do a very difficult job,

but my whole argument is based on an acknowledgement that it’s simply too difficult to call offsides correctly. It’s just too difficult to watch a players movement and watch the ball being passed and get the synchronisation right to make the correct offside decision 100% of the time. Right now I believe the percentage rate to be about 75% - 85%, and that’s being generous to referees. Now with all the money and support in the game, do you really believe that this is an acceptable level of achievement bearing in mind the huge importance some of these decisions could have on the result of some matches - farcical is word that springs to mind - you couldn’t make it up could you?

How many poor offside calls must there be before the F.A. says enough is enough. We just must bring in video technology. Very important games often hinge on these decisions, and it seems ridiculous that there is a reluctance, at present, even an acceptance, that wrong decisions will be made when in every other sport they are having to seek help from the electronic eye. Can this technology spoil the game? I don’t believe so. What would happen with the introduction of the electronic eye is that the assistant referee would still use his flag to indicate an offside decision in the normal way, but play would continue, which would add to the excitement of the game. If a goal is scored the assistant upstairs watching from the screen would indicate whether the goal was legitimate or not. If a goal did not result from the lineman’s offside ruling then the game would go on providing the defending side was in possession. If a corner or throw in is awarded to the offensive side as a result of an offside decision being delayed, the assistant video referee would point this out to the referee via the referee’s earpiece. A free kick or goal kick would be awarded to the defending side. For all goals scored regardless of how, video evidence would be used only for possible offside decisions or goal - line decisions (did the ball cross the line?) Now you think how this could add to the excitement bringing the goalkeeper more into the game, resulting in more goal scoring opportunities. This would also prevent the games being squeezed to the middle third of the pitch with defences reluctant to play too high a line, resulting in a more free flowing spacious game. This is not tinkering, this is a practical application of technology to advance decision making. Even those purists amongst you have to admit there’s too much controversy revolving around offsides and goal line incidences.

I always believe that one has to look at the worst case scenario when it comes down to decision making. Imagine the World Cup final being decided by a goal that was offside or conversely a goal disallowed in the last minute to win the match that was wrongly given offside. In 2009 how can we condone this practice when we have the technology to put it right? It’s time for this tomfoolery to end. It would have helped having this technology in 1966 to prove Geoff Hurst’s goal was a legitimate one. They didn’t have the equipment then, they do now!! The authorities must get a grip and for once make a decision that will help the beautiful game move on.