Video Evidence Used Against Diving (1 Viewer)

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,128
#1
footballitalia

Video evidence used against diving
Friday 3 October, 2003

The Italian Players’ Association has announced it will expand video evidence to catch players who are “dishonest and divers.”

“In this moment in time when football is working to recover credibility among the public,” announced AIC President Sergio Campana after recent fan violence, “it is necessary for players to show professionalism and proper conduct on the field.”

“Therefore we ask our members to avoid improper conduct and blatant dissent. We have always battled to help referees and improve the rapport between officials and players.”

The statement from the Players’ Association follows a series of unfortunate incidents over the last few weeks.

Bologna were able to score a crucial goal in their 2-0 win over Udinese after Andre Guly’s obvious handling offence went unnoticed.

Last week Inter players, including Mohamed Kallon (pictured), were seen pushing a referee in protest at what they considered to be a harsh red card for Luciano.

“We at the AIC,” added Campana, “therefore propose that the Federation introduces video evidence to sanction clear simulation and serious dishonest behaviour that has not been witnessed by the referee.”

Currently the use of video evidence in the Italian game is very limited, used only for off the ball incidents that were not seen by the official.

If the referee claims in his report to have witnessed an incident, even if he did not see the foul clearly, then video evidence cannot be used.

------------------------------------------------------------

I know I could've posted this in the Serie A thread, but I just thought we could take this opportunity to discuss video evidence in football in general.

I think the video evidence for diving thing is a good idea. This discussion extends to other aspects of football...

IMO, I think video evidence should be used in certain offside situations. Of course, it'd be stupid for the ref to blow a whistle when he suspects a player's offside, then give him the ball back when the video referee decides that it wasn't offside, because this removes the advantage from the player and interrupts the flow of play. However, I think they should just let the players continue playing until the action comes to a stop, then go to video evidence to verify the goal.

It happens here in Rugby, and the umpire doesn't break the play, but once the play is complete, he goes to video evidence if he decides that it's a dubious situation.

I also think video evidence should be used for situations such as "did the ball cross the goal-line" situations, as well as penalties, because it's way too much pressure on the referees to make the correct decision as soon as he sees an incident, especially if there was a big crowd of players and there's confusion everywhere.

What do you guys think?
 
Sep 28, 2002
13,975
#2
for offside calls. it would be rather unjust that ref would be able to disallow scored goals after watching a video. what if game is ruled out by offside which is a mistake by referee? there would be even more voices heard that juve, milan etc owns the referees. i for watching videos in all disputable situaltions but i just pointed out a weak point in your offer.
 

slack

Junior Member
Dec 13, 2002
208
#3
Good news.

Basically, this means that Totti/Pippo Inzaghi is screwed and Milan/Roma are gonna be docked quite a few points. While they're at it, they'd do well to include mobbing refs, dissent, asking for players to be booked and most importantly, suggesting Juve buys refs when the truth is sheer incompetence. We'll win Scudetto by December.

Unless of course, there's something hidden between the lines ie. applicable only on smaller teams.
 
OP
OP
gray

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,128
#4
++ [ originally posted by slack ] ++
Good news.

Basically, this means that Totti/Pippo Inzaghi is screwed and Milan/Roma are gonna be docked quite a few points.
Hmm I don't think there's gonna be any point-docking in the near future, especially for something like diving, which is a part of football, esp. Italian football :p

While they're at it, they'd do well to include mobbing refs, dissent, asking for players to be booked and most importantly, suggesting Juve buys refs when the truth is sheer incompetence. We'll win Scudetto by December.
I agree on things like mobbing refs and swearing at them. I'll take another example of rugby here in Australia. The referees wear microphones, for two reasons:

1. When the ref is explaining to the players why he made a certain decision, or what rule has been breached, the TV audience can hear what's going on

2. No player in his right mind is going to go upto a referee and call him f#[email protected] blind when he's got a worldwide audience listening to him...
 

Martin

Senior Member
Dec 31, 2000
56,861
#6
Well it's a good thing, it's a nice step forward. I'd like to see this being used extensively in the league, and then just wait until fans of English clubs gulp up their usual "Italians are cheaters, they dive all the time" crap.
 
Jul 19, 2003
3,286
#7
Video Evidence should be used before making any critical decisions. For example:

1-Ejections
2-Suspected Handballs in the Penalty box
3-If an offside is suspected, the striker should be allowed to complete his attack and if he scores, then the ref goes and checks the replay and decides whether or not to count it.

It would basically eliminate the need for linesmen and avoid a lot of controversy and fines being imposed on refs and angry players lashing out at blind ones.
 

Meow

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2003
2,377
#10
++ [ originally posted by nosubstitute959 ] ++
LOL......no, no complaints.......curiousty killed the cat :D
:down:

I just got killed.....

Hey Gray.....you let me down AGAIN!!!!:fero:
 
OP
OP
gray

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,128
#12
what?!?!

u mean in ur occupation thing? well that wasn't really my guess, more of a clue request :p

Hmmm lemme think some more about that..
 

Meow

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2003
2,377
#13
++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++
what?!?!

u mean in ur occupation thing? well that wasn't really my guess, more of a clue request :p

Hmmm lemme think some more about that..
No....I forgot all about that....:fool: (yes...keep guessing...start a thread if you wish...:LOL: )

Why on earth a good Christian like Gray would put such a link in his signature?? THAT'S what let me down....:down:

I'm kidding of course....Gray....you go %&)(*@ yourself!!:D
 
OP
OP
gray

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,128
#14
Hehe it was just for a joke, everyone knows I'm just kidding :p

Okay, I guess i've had my fun :rolleyes:
 

Meow

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2003
2,377
#17
Back onto the topic.

Good if we can penalize diving players even AFTER match that might reduce players' temptation to dive. And to cancel yellow/red cards that are wrongly issued.
 
OP
OP
gray

gray

Senior Member
Moderator
Apr 22, 2003
30,128
#18
++ [ originally posted by Meow ] ++
Back onto the topic.

Good if we can penalize diving players even AFTER match that might reduce players' temptation to dive. And to cancel yellow/red cards that are wrongly issued.
Hmm but I think a player would be willing to pay a few thousand pounds fine (which is peanuts to most footballers) in exchange for a match-winning penalty...

Yellow/red cards are already cancelled if they're deemed to be incorrect.
 

Meow

Senior Member
Jun 8, 2003
2,377
#20
++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++



Yellow/red cards are already cancelled if they're deemed to be incorrect.
I was thinking about the yellow cards Davids and Miccolli got in that Olympiakos match...:frown:
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)