Numerous leagues around the globe have adopted replay technology in an effort to increase accuracy and efficiency of refereeing calls. But with the influx of technology to analyze the game, officials have become increasingly accountable since this system essentially tests their judgement calls. Since there are available systems that can improve a referee’s capabilities, the standard of officiating has risen. The new technology could account for the flaws in the human element aspect of the game.
In the English Premier League (EPL), debates have ignited on whether or not replay technology should be utilized. Many believe that the EPL’s lack of technology has been detrimental to the game. Fan’s expectations of officials have increased since it has been widely recognized that there are systems that would promote the accuracy within a game— accuracy that has sorely been missed.
Get The Latest Sports Tech News In Your Inbox!
According to the Premier League, the “authority of the referee” is as follows: “Each match is controlled by a referee who has full authority to enforce the Laws of the Game in connection with the match to which he has been appointed.” And the “decisions of the referee regarding facts connecting with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final… The referee may only change a decision on realizing that it is incorrect or, at his discretion, on the advice of an assistant referee or the fourth official, provided that he has not restarted play or terminated the match.”
As established by the above rules, it is clear that the referee’s actions are absolutely vital to the game. But, one official (plus whichever linesmen is added to the game), simply wields too much power— especially when it is expected that the referee sees absolutely everything on the field. Regardless of playing on the smallest pitch in the EPL at Boleyn Ground (110 x 70 yards) or the largest at the City of Manchester Stadium (116 x 77 yards), it is far too much ground to cover without any assistance.
Therefore, replay technology is absolutely necessary in the Premier League. Replay technology would correct any missed calls on the field, whether the official chooses to review a play or the play is challenged by a coach. Also, replay capabilities would deter players from diving and embellishing— both of which are absolute nuisances on the viewability of a game. Players often escape consequences after inflicting [sometimes serious] injuries on another player because there is no replay— when players should always be held accountable for illegal play that results in injury.
When implementing any sort of technology in sports, the question of whether the game would slow down is always proposed. If replay technology were to be implemented, would the pace of the game be affected? In order to avoid slowing the game too much, there have to be guidelines. For example, officials should not have to use the technology after every single play, nor should the expectation be that each and every play will be perfect once replay is implemented. Replay should give officials an opportunity to give certain plays a second look— not necessarily watching from every single angle numerous times to examine an offsides.
Even Mike Riley, head of the Professional Game Match Officials Ltd (PGMOL) believes technology could help improve the accuracy within the game. Riley told BBC radio “Technology doesn’t provide a solution to everything but we can all think of cases where a quick reference to a video replay would help us get the decision right.”
Against Manchester United earlier this season, Wes Brown was red carded for a foul on Radamel Falcao. Replays displayed Brown’s teammate John O’Shea actually committing the foul. While Brown’s red card was rescinded, Sunderland scored on the resulting penalty.
West Bromwich Albion’s Gareth McAuley was mistakenly dismissed in a match against Manchester City. McAuley was shown the red card for bringing down Wilfried Bony— yet it was actually Craig Dawson who should have been fouled. The referee incorrectly determined who committed the penalty and Tony Pulis— manager for West Brom believes video technology would have rectified the situation. “We obviously don’t have a say what the refs do or what they don’t do, but it affects us… But if you’re given that opportunity where the referee can have a 30-second call-back — I’d have two 30-second call-backs for each manager in each game. That eradicates all the stuff that we’re going to be talking about now,” Pulis told BBC Sport.
The Premier League is one of the most watched and scrutinized soccer leagues in the world. Everything an official does is under a microscope. Humans inherently are flawed— the players are not expected to be perfect, but the officials certainly are. Perhaps that is because a single mistake could be game-changing. One mishandled situation, whether a controversial call is made or a blatant call is missed, can overshadow the entire game even if the referee was perfect in all other aspects. Because of that, officiating has become such an impossible, even daunting, task.
The technology is available and potentially could improve the game, yet many are still hesitant to further implement technology on the game and diminish the human aspect. So the question of priorities remains— as it does in all of sports— which is more important: the speed and length of a game, or accuracy and minimizing game-changing mistakes?