FFA to trial the use of video evidence during A-League games

Tom Smithies
23 December 2015


AUSTRALIA will volunteer to trial the use of video evidence during A-League games if football’s lawmakers finally give the go-ahead for a competitive test next month.

FIFA’s body that considers changes to the rules of the game is poised to abandon its deep hostility to in-game video evidence for referees, after being told by its two advisory panels that “well-run experiments” are the only way to be sure of how practical the concept is.

The International Football Association Board (IFAB) will meet next month, with several radical moves on the agenda, including the use of sin bins. But it is the possible introduction of video technology that would be the most far-reaching, with pressure growing on FIFA to correct the anomaly where spectators can see within seconds if a decision was correct via their phones, but not the referee.

It follows some extended but unofficial trials, including one in Holland. Now Football Federation Australia is keen to be in the vanguard of any trial that IFAB assents to, using the ¬myriad cameras already at every A-League game through Fox Sports’ coverage.

“FFA will be contacting IFAB and FIFA to express our interest in conducting a trial in the Hyundai A-League,” FFA chief David Gallop said.

“FFA is always looking for ways to introduce broadcast innovations with Fox Sports. The use of video replays would not only help referees, but would enhance the viewer experience.

“The Australian TV sports industry has the expertise and technology, so the A-League would be a perfect competition to extend the trials started in the Netherlands.”

The Dutch trial was suspended under pressure from FIFA, but other leagues — ¬including the MLS — have strongly signalled their wish to be allowed to run something similar in competitive matches.

The review of decisions would be limited to key moments including goals, offsides and penalties, and incidents the referee might have missed that could lead to a red card.

The so-called “fifth official” with access to video could only advise the main referee who would still make the final call, with a strict time limit of a few seconds to pull the game back.

The Dutch experiment suggested that on average one key decision per game would be reversed, with the game not stopped unless the video evidence was instantly compelling.

In a statement last night, FIFA said that IFAB “has been working on potential scenarios and clear protocols for how it could be tested, with the idea that well-run experiments would be the best way to understand the pros and cons of video assistance in full”.

The A-League was one of the first leagues in the world to introduce the use of video evidence retrospectively to penalise players guilty of diving, effectively eliminating it from the competition.

The A-League was one of the first leagues in the world to introduce the use of video evidence retrospectively to penalise players guilty of diving, effectively eliminating it from the competition.

Sin bins would be fucking stupid. They would dramatically alter the way football is played.

Also sceptical about video evidence, but at least it wouldn't be changing the fundamentals of the sport...

Sin bins would be fucking stupid. They would dramatically alter the way football is played.

Also sceptical about video evidence, but at least it wouldn't be changing the fundamentals of the sport...

I wonder where everyone would stand if it was trialled successfully in europe and then got implemented. I assume everyone on here would be all for it because the euros were keen on it and it would make sense to follow suit.

But because we're the one's that want to trial it, well of course people on here would be against it...

It's ok guys we all know that if europe gives it the tick of approval we'll all be able to sleep soundly. Relax.

I wonder where everyone would stand if it was trialled successfully in europe and then got implemented. I assume everyone on here would be all for it because the euros were keen on it and it would make sense to follow suit.

But because we're the one's that want to trial it, well of course people on here would be against it...

It's ok guys we all know that if europe gives it the tick of approval we'll all be able to sleep soundly. Relax.

Football is perfect because its not perfect.

Not always

They already have goal line technology. So fixed :D

Im not too upset about the Italain dive these days. Lucas shouldnt have attempted that tackle.

My biggest Australian travesty is Harry Kewell being sent off for the handball. Perhaps on another day he would stay on. Its not actually that that pisses me off. Its that Luis Suarez does a water polo save in the same tournament and gets the same penalty. 1 match ban. All the while they show that grub celebrate on the sideline when Gyan missed.

The "dive" I thought was a penalty. We Australians love to say we was wobbed.

Harry being sent off, these things happen in football. That's part of what makes it football. The final decision right or wrong should be with the referee.

The Suarez handball was punished. Once with a penalty, the second time by being suspended for the semi-final. Of course every player would celebrate that miss.

All those incidents above would still be confirmed with video technology. So I am not sure how they fit in with the topic on this thread.

Video review technology would be the most important facet introduced to football in over 50 years.
Took far too long to happen
One of the benefits of Sepp Blatter being extinguished from FIFA

I wonder if there is a correlation between people who object to the introduction of video technology for football and the objection to autonomous cars. I'll bet there is.

The Suarez was a red , the same as Kewells. They were both treated as handball in the box.

Perhaps Kewells handball could have been reviewed under replay conditions. There was a chance in my mind it could have been called a non intentional handball. So, penalty and no card. No replay relies on the refs eagle vision.

The car thing has to do with safety.
The football thing has to do with the rules of the game...
and most importantly, the millions to billions spent on bets worldwide for such tournaments as the WC.

LOL - I forgot we need to change the rules to cater for the betting markets out there :lol: :lol:

It would ruin the magic of football.

Every goal will be disputed and reviewed. Yuck