It continues to be a divisive term in football, but another reason for the use of video technology in the sport was seen during the weekend’s games.
Leicester City’s Jamie Vardy was sent off, harshly in this writer’s opinion, for what appeared to be a two-footed lunge on Stoke City’s Mame Biram Diouf, during Saturday’s Premier League game. Referee Craig Pawson flashed a red card for an offence that should have been mitigated by the fact that Vardy did not connect with Diouf with both feet, as he had visibly appeared to control his challenge by having one foot on the floor by the time he reached the ball, which he actually won.
It is a separate and surprising point that Vardy and Leicester failed to win their appeal against the dismissal, which was rejected by the English Football Association’s independent regulatory committee.
More football
• Richard Jolly: Team-by-team evaluations halfway through the season
• Team of the season so far: Who makes our starting XI?
Going back to the red card itself, imagine if Pawson had been able to use video technology at the time or have access to another official in the stand with a monitor at hand.
Picture the scene. Pawson stops the game and radios up to the video referee, and says: “I believe that was a reckless two-footed lunge by Jamie Vardy and I should send him off. Is there any reason why I should not issue a red card?”
The video official will watch the replay, make an assessment by taking as many looks as necessary before relaying back whether he agrees with Pawson’s call or if he thinks it should only be a yellow card, just a free-kick to Stoke or just a drop ball if it was not considered to be a foul. Yes, it would require a hold-up in play, but it would not take that long. Think of how quick replays come on our TV screens as entertainment during a live game. Goal-line technology has already proved a success in deciding if a ball has crossed the line or not.
A replay system was used at the Club World Cup last week in Japan, and while it was a step in the right direction, it was flawed with the on-field referee having to go view the replays himself.
If this is to work more efficiently football will need to follow in the footsteps of other sports such as cricket and the two rugby codes by having a video official in the stand. It would quicken things up for a start, and takes some of the pressure off the referee, as another set of eyes is looking at the issue at hand.
To further develop things, what could happen is each team is given a single review for a match in which a video referee is working.
They can challenge a decision they do not like, within a set period, and it will go to the video referee.
If they get the challenge right, they keep the review, a format used in a number of other sports, including tennis, but if it is deemed to be wrong then they would lose it.
Imagine if Liverpool could have reviewed Ross Barkley’s lunge on Jordan Henderson on Monday in the Merseyside derby, or if Arsene Wenger had been able to challenge Manchester City’s winner against his side on Sunday due to his belief it was offside.
Yes, you are losing some of the purity from the sport. But, in an era when every football referee in the Premier League is getting their decisions increasingly analysed, it is time to offer them help.
The technology is there.
Now go and use it.
gcaygill@thenational.ae
Follow us on Twitter @NatSportUAE
Like us on Facebook at facebook.com/TheNationalSport