Video technology argument adds up in football

For me it in conclusive. You can see a touch and his leg move. That is the reason he missed the ball and went to ground.

It was a penalty. If he did not make illegal contact from behind it is most likely a goal.

If thats the future of my sport I dont like it at all ,its not enough evidence needed to clarify one bit .We dont have video technoligy in football globaly,but we have at hand immediately (the replay). The A League G.F. proved one thing that video technoligy is not a reliable form of edudication . If people believe Berisha dived you hate sport .

I agree that the lunge from Miller was so desperate it was going to arouse the ref's interest, personally, and I said this on the day, Berisha took the game on in a way that Perth was not wanting to do, and he got the reward. But many are saying the video evidence is conclusive that there was contact, and I simply want to say that the video evidence is not conclusive.

Not only then but everyone on the TWG on SBS on Monday night and everyone on Fox Sports FC tonight thought it was a penalty.

Sorry, I don't think that comparing an attempt to save lives with a game of football is valid. Enforcing the speed limit is not done in the interests of fairness. It is done to increase public safety. Football is not like that. By reviewing only some decisions and not others you inherently make the game less fair. Bad decisions will be made both ways. I played long enough to know that they really do even out over time. Brisbane fans were incensed last Tuesday night about what they thought was a soft penalty decision, but are more than happy to take one that comes their way to even things up. Perth fans were happy to accept an offside goal to get them to the grand final, but are not happy with the soft penalty given against them. It is only in rare instances like Sunday where the difference really is significant. It is one of the reasons why many football fans argue that the premiership is more important than a grand final. A final can be won on one decision. A premiership, much less so. The number of decisions that would be reviewed under the proposal above would be minimal to say the least and do very little to satisfy anybody. Goals are important. Reducing the number of penalties awarded, which is all this would do, will do nothing to improve the sport. To be honest all I can see is that referees would blow for more suspect penalties on the understanding that the decision would be reviewed immediately, thereby decreasing the speed and flow of the game. What is more exciting than seeing a quick counter attack, initated from your own penalty box resulting in a score at the other end? This suggestion could quite possibly reduce the likelyhood of that happening. Further, there is still little concensus two days latter about Sunday's decision. A video review at the time, particulalrly if it gave the penalty, would have done nothing to alleviate peoples angst.

Cattery - Just an observation. It surely isn't all about actual contact but about "intent". If you watch this penalty decision and then go back to the penalty decision given against Roar in the Asian Cup you will see the human factor emerge for Adnan did connect with the ball taking it away from the attackers feet, and that man,in forward motion, tripped over the outstretched leg that had in fact robbed him of the ball. A penalty? The ref thought so.. After Berisha had kept the ball away from 3 defenders Miller,in desperation threw himself at the ball,coming from behind, trying to do what Adnan had done.He missed the ball, perhaps he did connect with Berishas leg,but in doing so ,in the words of the law,prevented a goal scoring attempt. The one glaring mistake the referee made was that when he awarded the penalty he should probably have sent Miller off for that punishable offence.We'll never know will we? and that's what makes our game so debatable. Cheers jb

I dont know mate ,but thats the first time I've seen contact,where in other clips" C.Foster" they proved nothing for mine . I'm still deliberating three days later, I dont know . I've made no sense what so ever on this thread .

Philip - How right you are,it takes time,lots of time for good ideas to penetrate & even they are not always recognised for what they are. In 1983,while a member of the Qld Soccer Federation, we called a meeting between coaches,players,referees and interested parties to discuss the possibities of introducing a "non-pass back to the goalkeeper ruling". It was decided to try it out in a little pre- season local competition,the XXXX Cup,and it was agreed there would be no passing back in the back third of each defensive area unless the goalkeeper was treated as a normal outfield player. From figures generated comparing the games from previous seasons it was found there was an increase in goals scored by around 30%. At the next management meeting these figures were presented in the agenda to be met by blank looks from the then president and secretary .When pressed the president (also a sitting member of the ASF ) pontificated that the ruling would never be accepted by FIFA, !!!! It was introduced worldwide in it's present form some 6 years later. Australia wide football???? In 1973 a local Brisbane team called Bardon-Latrobe brought Hakoah,St George and Rasic's Australian team to Brisbane on a morning flight,took them to Perry Park,gave them lunch, played a game,then took the teams back to the airport for the flight back to Sydney. All this was done without the local football authority risking one dollar. Four years later the Philips League (NSL) started up. As you say Philip.never say never in this sport of ours. jb

Actually, that angle is on there, later in the clip, and to me, it doesn't look conclusive that there was contact, true, I agree it's a desperate lunge with the ball miles away, so the player has brought it upon himself, that much I agree, but still not sure that there was contact.

Do you think that is conclusive? I'm not sure that it is.

Thats the first time I can now say that contact did occur,if hardened people to the game genuinely deliberate over a decision then its a one off and no person should hold blame .

I've seen one other side on view where it is not clear cut at all that he has hit Berisha's leg, where there appears to be a gap the whole way through. Why doesn't this clip include that side on view?

I'm not sure if FIFA have a specific rule about replays on the big screen at matches but the FFA decided to allow replays this season as a direct result of the 'fans forums' of a year ago. It was a constant beef of the supporters that the videos weren't being shown and FFA reversed their earlier ruling of no replays and decided to allow them for 2011/12. Buckley wrote about this somewhere during the season but I cant find the reference. As there were no crowd problems I am sure they will continue to be shown next year.

"Never be implemented"? Never say never Fuss. As a keen observer of the game you would know that in 1964 the Asian Football Confederation said Australia was not an Asian nation and some member states said we would never play in the AFC. Where are we now? We will have goal line technology as standard within a few years and video technology will eventually follow. It's just a matter of time.

Just because you cant review every decision doesn't mean you shouldn't review those decisions that you can deliberate on. The cops cant stop everybody from speeding but they still book the ones they do catch speeding. Your argument would be don't book anybody for speeding because we cant book everybody who speeds and its unfair to those who are arbitrarily caught. An argument that you should only do something if you can do it 100% of the time is not a very convincing argument.

I do have little interest. However, it was a grand final so when I switched over to it late in the second half, with the scores locked at 1-1, I thought 'this is interesting'. If that is a penalty, then the game of soccer is softer than even I imagined. Berisha's antics left an even more sickening taste in my mouth. (OK I'll admit him being an Albanian and me a Greek may have something to do with it) So much for sportsmanship...

The clip in this blog was enough for me to agree that it was a penalty. By clipping the left leg of Berisha, thus making that leg not land where it should, making the ball deviate from where Brisha expected it to be meant he had a fresh air shot. There was no dive and there was a touch which affected the ability of the player to shoot. Ultimately this is a decision I think could have been handed to a 4th official looking at a video monitor. The referee should do as they do in Rugby Union and not ask for a decision on the incident, but should ask for a reason not to go along with their decision on the pitch. "I am thinking about awarding a penalty, can you provide me any reasons why I shouldn't?" Its a simple question. The 4th official would then be able to review the incident and provide reasons or confirm the the decision of the referee on the pitch. This would immediately remove the ugly scenes of players protesting in the face of the on field referee. As other posters have stated. The restart to play is a simple one. Either, goal kick, free kick, corner or penalty. The only time this would be an issue is if the ball stays in play and the defending team is on the break. The referee would have to stop play to go to a review. Then possession would be forfeited temporarily and return to the last team in possession much like when you have an injury.

The clip in this blog was enough for me to agree that it was a penalty. By clipping the left leg of Berisha, thus making that leg not land where it should, making the ball deviate from where Brisha expected it to be meant he had a fresh air shot. There was no dive and there was a touch which affected the ability of the player to shoot. Ultimately this is a decision I think could have been handed to a 4th official looking at a video monitor. The referee should do as they do in Rugby Union and not ask for a decision on the incident, but should ask for a reason not to go along with their decision on the pitch. "I am thinking about awarding a penalty, can you provide me any reasons why I shouldn't?" Its a simple question. The 4th official would then be able to review the incident and provide reasons or confirm the the decision of the referee on the pitch. This would immediately remove the ugly scenes of players protesting in the face of the on field referee. As other posters have state. The restart to play is a simple one. Either, goal kick, free kick, corner or penalty. The only time this would be an issue is if the ball stays in play and the defending team is on the break. The referee would have to stop play to go to a review. Then possession would be forfeited temporarily and return to the last team in possession much like when you have an injury.

beirsha used every trick in the book and milked the penalty and therefore was able to fool the young inexperienced referee - maybe a older experienced referee would have dismissed the penalty appeal and waved play on ? the only thing that the incident has proved is that berisha is no paolo di cannio and how can he be revered or respected outside of brisbane roar - just ask the perth glory players