The world Cupthat is currently taking place in Russia, became the first FIFA that uses videoreferee. This decision provoked an active debate among football fans. We will tell you about the videoassisted judges, and what advantages and disadvantages it has.
With the chief referee on the field, no complete overview of what is happening. For this reason, it can miss some abnormalities in the game. Of course, he has assistants who help in this, but the decision always remains with the chief arbiter, and he sometimes makes mistakes.
In fact, it often happens that the viewers watching the replay during the broadcast, you can rightly criticize the actions of the judge. It happens that on replay is really good to see, if the ball crossed the goal line, and worthy of a violation of a red card.
From this point of view, the introduction of videoreferee seems quite a logical step. Opponents say that such innovations can kill the culture of football. Fans like to discuss the actions of the judge no less than a colorful goals. In addition, the practice of the FIFA world Cup 2018 showed that the appeal to videoreferee can take a large amount of playing time.
For each game, which you can watch in the days of the world Cup in Russia, there is one videoreferee, three of his assistant and four operators of repetitions. In the event of a situation in which the attention of the referee wanted to bring to the video replay, the referee stops the game and goes to videoreferee. Game time does not stop. A referee is only able to add a few minutes to the end of the first half.
However, all the time that the arbitrator studies the replay, viewers, fans in the stadium and the players themselves are forced to wait. In this sense, viewers were more fortunate than others, as they can watch replays together with the referee. Having carefully studied the situation, he makes a decision and resumes the game.
The pros and cons of videoreferee
It would seem that after reviewing the replay of the game situation from different angles, the main judges are more likely to make the right decision. This can make the match more fair, and its result is more equitable. It is difficult to argue, but football fans continue to worry about the lost excitement that gave instant and sometimes controversial decisions of the referee.
As you can guess, the fans do not like that the gaming time is spent on absolutely not spectacular procedure. The referee must leave the field, see everything carefully, then return. In the best case will be lost for two to three minutes, which are often decisive for the teams.
Finally, it turned out that, videoreferee may not be perfect in making fair decisions. The problem is the imperfection of the technology itself. Not always the cameras are in the right place and give the desired angle in order to completely clear in a game situation.
The conclusion is the same. Modern technology can make cultural events like football better. That’s just technology needs to become more sophisticated. To fix the actions of players must not only camera and if the camera, the better. For example, now has an automatic locking system goals, determining without human intervention, if the ball crossed the goal line.
The chief justice could more quickly obtain supporting information and we know that the technologies for this already exist. But, the sport adopts modern tendencies gradually, and in this championship we check the operation of what can be called transitional technology.