They shouldn't show it on a big screen of course, they should just have someone up there where the television commentators sit and have a look at the images. This can be done in under a minute, easily. There are sooooo many people there already that have the job to referee the game, they can easily get a screen, watch, and communicate with the referee.
You've got a point there to show how many times they should check the images, but again, this can be done rather quickly. It takes TV barely 5 seconds or even less to replay an offside situation, so it shouldn't take that much time either to communicate it to the referee.
But how it's now done, with all the responsibility resting on 4 or 6 guys, is just incredible and plain crazy. Not to say inhuman and it will always rise suspicion (easily bribed/influenced)
Bad refereeing decisions really ruin the sports and are the sole reason I'm not paying that much attention to football anymore. Too much bullshit and just not wanting to change.
Good points, still a few problems though:
- If they don't show it on big screen, and just have someone "up there" look at the images, then effectively, the referee did not a replay of that incident, which means the call would be taken by someone other than the referee. Remember, the other referees are called assistant referees, and the main referee is not inclined to go with what they say (except in offsides of course). This wouldn't be possible in the case of the replay, as he would have to take the call from someone else (makes his place in the field kinda useless don't you think?)
- Again, those replays may be used effectively with dives, offsides, and whether it crossed the goal line or not, as the rules are clear on that one. Fouls and something like Nani's incident are judgement calls. One ref would call it a red, the other would call it a yellow. That makes it impossible for the main ref to not watch the replay and relay on someone else to take the call. Besides, there is an aim to make the game running with minimum stopping time as possible, which is why it's ok to play a foul right away without having the wall being ready (Not all plays are the same though, there are rules for that. Such as the players of the team that has the foul asking the ref to have the other team go behind the playing distance)
- Think about offside instances, how would that even work? Let the play go ahead every single time and THEN check the replay? What if the ball never goes out? what if the team scores indirectly from that offside (as in, the 2nd team regained possesion, kicked it far away, and then the first scored). Technically, it's a different play, but it will still be a result of an offside
While I'm all in favor of Technology, I still see it hard for anything other than dives, handballs or fouls resulting in PKs, and goal line technology implemented.
I agree that bad refereeing decisions are really ruining a lot in sports (such as Pepe's red card against barca in UCL that turned out to be a dive 2 years ago), but what can be done, they are human afterall.
I'm an amateur referee btw, (only ref for local teams over here) and I gotta tell ya, people really dive in a way that looks totally real! It's really tough to not call that in the game. No matter how unfair it is, some teams will get an unjust calls from that. It's a part of football.
What I do suggest though, in terms of diving, to have a rule or something that whoever dives should get a 10 match ban or even more, and just list it under "non-sportsmanship behaviour" .. People can call it extreme in the cases of fouls, as some fouls cannot be avoided. But a dive is never anything but cheating. If there was minimal contact which led a player to fall and was not called for a penatly, then that wouldn't be considered a dive. But something that is a clear dive should have such extreme ban, and then no one can cry about it. It can easily be inforced as the ban would be taken post match (as in, after all replays and documentations have been submitted)
That's my 2 cents about this
