Introducing formalised video evidence for player conduct & decision adjudication

[lynchbhoy]

Are we going to have to succumb to/embrace video technology eventually, at some point?

I think it's more of a case of succuming to pressure from the usual places. This incident with the Leinster final was always going to be used to highlight someones agenda. I have no problem with embracing technology (such as whistles and flags) but I do have a problem with it it when it can't be equally used at every venue (reasonably) in the country.

thats just it - we have already embraced this change - we are using video evidence to ban players retospectively - thats why there is a furore and outcry from Kerry as these measures are still relatively unprecedented and there is no proper adoptation in the procedures for this.
We need things to be on a level playing field and have cameras at all games or none.

by the swame token, we know that the answer will be that we will eventually have the cameras installed and eventually hopefully there will be fewer and fewer incidents for cccccccccc
to look at until its the odd isolated incident.

As FOSB says, in the time taken to walk to the umpire, the video ref will have made the decision. Hound if this video procedure was in place, then refs would know they can use it and wouldnt hesitate for a second to go to it and ensure they are blameless from any ultimate contentious decision.
I would think referees would love the prospect of a video ref.
A system that can confirm if a ball is over the line/sideline or between the posts takes these decisions away from officials also.
In life an work we automate things to make it easier for ouselves. The yanks have it right for their sports, we surely can implement new things successfully to improve decision making and lessen contention also.

[lynchbhoy]

its fairly obvious that refs cant see everything, umpires and linesmen likewise.
They need help in making sure that a game is going to have undisputed big decisions like goals/points.

We are starting to have more and more of these incidents- I contend that it is due to the levelling off of teams/standards and that games are now more competitive and closer than ever - so we need additional measures to address these before we have a problem in every game !
That would be a disaster and make a joke of our games - especially when its so easy to take steps to remedy.
Tradition is great, but sometimes we need to progress things.

[fearglasmor]

its fairly obvious that refs cant see everything, umpires and linesmen likewise.
They need help in making sure that a game is going to have undisputed big decisions like goals/points.

We are starting to have more and more of these incidents- I contend that it is due to the levelling off of teams/standards and that games are now more competitive and closer than ever - so we need additional measures to address these before we have a problem in every game !
That would be a disaster and make a joke of our games - especially when its so easy to take steps to remedy.
Tradition is great, but sometimes we need to progress things.

Ah now.  You not doing you argument any favours with the above. Games are more competitive or close than they were 10/20/30/40/50 years ago.  I think not.
I'd say you will find there were the same number of incidents 40 years ago.
What has changed is the blanket tv coverage, the frame by frame analysis  by tv and newspaper. The popularity of interactive tv and radio programmes all combine to elevate all incidents to unprecented levels.

None of this can be reversed of course so maybe the GAA will be forced to bring in technology. My view is that it will be another step on the slippery slope to a severing of the connection between club and county teams. It is just becoming less and less tenable to maintain the amateur ethos of representative football in the face of the GAA hierarchys manic drive towards professionalism in all aspects of intercounty GAA activity.

[Zapatista]

by the swame token, we know that the answer will be that we will eventually have the cameras installed and eventually hopefully there will be fewer and fewer incidents for cccccccccc
to look at until its the odd isolated incident.

Do you mean the CCCC or TSG?

[lynchbhoy]

its fairly obvious that refs cant see everything, umpires and linesmen likewise.
They need help in making sure that a game is going to have undisputed big decisions like goals/points.

We are starting to have more and more of these incidents- I contend that it is due to the levelling off of teams/standards and that games are now more competitive and closer than ever - so we need additional measures to address these before we have a problem in every game !
That would be a disaster and make a joke of our games - especially when its so easy to take steps to remedy.
Tradition is great, but sometimes we need to progress things.

Ah now.  You not doing you argument any favours with the above. Games are more competitive or close than they were 10/20/30/40/50 years ago.  I think not.
I'd say you will find there were the same number of incidents 40 years ago.
What has changed is the blanket tv coverage, the frame by frame analysis  by tv and newspaper. The popularity of interactive tv and radio programmes all combine to elevate all incidents to unprecented levels.

None of this can be reversed of course so maybe the GAA will be forced to bring in technology. My view is that it will be another step on the slippery slope to a severing of the connection between club and county teams. It is just becoming less and less tenable to maintain the amateur ethos of representative football in the face of the GAA hierarchys manic drive towards professionalism in all aspects of intercounty GAA activity.

ok so you dont agree - and we will agree to differ
but can you not agree that TV replay evidence is already being used to ban players?

so what small step forward is required to put real-time video ref fired replays into practice for championship matches !
It is obvious that manual officiation isnt good enough for some incidents.

[lynchbhoy]

by the swame token, we know that the answer will be that we will eventually have the cameras installed and eventually hopefully there will be fewer and fewer incidents for cccccccccc
to look at until its the odd isolated incident.

Do you mean the CCCC or TSG?

whoever is responsible for banning the players obv- ccccc

lets not stick our heads in the sand and say we dont want this due to tradition or cost.
we have changed the face of Gaelic games over the past 30 years so more change to improve things is nothing beyond us.
The cost of the hardware is very small in comparison to what the GAA take in.
The money ring fenced to pay players can be used to give players increased expenses and to purchase and run Hard Disk digital video cameras.

rather than continue on being the 'sure we'll deal with it when it hapens' nation - we need to put policy and procedure into effect to ensure we cover all areas off.
As a nation we know only too well what the lack of policies, procedures and regulation has done to our economy - banking and financial regulator toname just two that needed prior policy/procedure.

[Lar Naparka]

I have a problem with retro analysis of any sort. IMO, there are many compelling reasons to try and ensure that a result is declared at the final whistle. Anything other than a conclusive result is going to lead to acrimony, recriminations and cries of "we wuz" robbed from one side or the other and frequently from both.
Take the latest Paul Galvin peccadillo for instance:
I feel he deserved his punishment without doubt. But others in that game deserved the same treatment and got away scot-free, presumably because the CCCC who reviewed the video some days later did not see fit to 'invite' the referee to look at a video of other controversial incidents.
'Sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander' and all that. As it was, Galvin spent several days waiting for the proverbial axe to fall in the full knowledge that he was going to be found guilty of as red card offence. There was never going to be any other outcome, given the fact that TSG had proved his guilt beyond any possibility of doubt. Colm O'Rourke was to defend Tohill's hatchet job on Galvin on the grounds that it was done in the interests of freedom of speech and the public's right to know –or some crap like that.
I don't accept any of this- it was done to boost viewing figures for the interests of his TV bosses and, indirectly, for the commercial sponsors of RTE.
It served to highlight the inadequacies of our present referring system also. Far too many games are marred by referring c**k ups ; followed closely by dissections of selective incidents on public television and then followed by directives from the CCCC to the unfortunate ref to go back and amend his errors.
I'm all for the video referee system used in rugby. Its use might have averted the fiasco we saw last Sunday; then again it might not as Martin Sludden seems to have made his mind up without consulting with anyone.
BTW; I'm not getting stuck into a partisan debate here; Sludden's 'terrible mistake,' could have been made by any other referee just as easily and the teams involved could have been any other pair in the land.
To my way of thinking, a relatively simple change of rule that would allow a sideline official or umpire to directly approach a ref to bring something to his notice would be a massive step in the right direction.
After all, we have a total of six individuals hanging running up and down the sidelines or scratching themselves against the nearest goal posts for most of the time.
By contrast we have one unfortunate hoor out in the midst of the action, who knows full well that his every mistake will be reviewed for the benefit of the nation on TSG or similar.  Throw in the fact that he is very likely to be considerably older and slower than the thirty superfit and hyped up players who are passing him out on all sides and it's obvious that we need to come up fast with a more efficient way of controlling our games.
It's quite possible that some referees may choose to ignore the advice given by any or all of his assistants and may decide not to use video playbacks of controversial scores or wides but he won't be able to put it down to human error if he ever finds himself owning up to a 'terrible mistake.'

[lynchbhoy]

Lar, while not in the rules to directly approach the ref, the sideline men and umpires have in ther remit to stand with hand in the air/wave at ref to attract his attention towards something he has not seen.
The problem isnt with the alerting of an official, its with the competency of the other officials.

A ref is human and if some big 6' 7" lad is standing in front of him at some critical point in the match obscuring his view - then he is not going to see something - whether any of the other officials see it or not is also questionable.

While nobody likes or wants trial by TV - we have arrived at a point in time where we have the technology to review games or more specifically - review reported incidents.
Without cameras being at every ground, I would have to agree with Kerry and Mickey harte and say that this is not fair towards all teams and players.

an instant review system by video ref would stop any future potential incidents like the 'goal' in the leinster final.
If people are worried about a ref being too arrogant and not call for the replay to assist his decision - then have the 'three challenges' option available to both team managers - that way they can have an incident reviewed and the ref can do nothing about it !
I suspect though that refs dont want to be seen to be wrong - so they will revert to video booth after each slightly contested goal/point so they dont get the same blacklisting as mr sludden has.
Once this system is available to refs - they will use it , I have no doubt !

[Lar Naparka]

You've made some very interesting points here, lb.
I know the assistant officials may seek to attract the ref's attention okay but, right now, they can be totally ignored if the ref so decides. I accept that the man with the whistle has to be the sole arbiter in all cases but he should be compelled to hear the opinions of one or more of his "extra eyes," if they are offered.
After all, we have four umpires who may as well be scratching their butts or playing pocket billiards for most of the game. Surely it could be arranged that one of each pair could keep his eyes on the actual play while the other could watch out for off the ball incidents?
The ref's view of proceedings can be obscured by one or more extra large guys okay and the same goes for every high ball lofted into the goal mouth or dropping down in midfield. But if a total of 7 officials can't figure out what is going on in a crowded situation, I feel a video review mightn't be conclusive either.
I do feel that the addition of a video ref would be a great idea as it can make great use of modern technology while at the same time being unobtrusive in every way. The faster an incident is resolved, the better to my way of thinking. The way video reviews are used under the present system sucks.
People are being conditioned into accepting that one or more incidents will be put under scrutiny on TSG and then followed by the CCCC asking the ref to go back and take another look at his handiwork.
I think your idea of the 'three challenges' option is a novel one alright but it does have considerable merit. Anything is preferable to having the media playing up all manners of off the ball incidents and the likes until the ref is invariably obliged to admit his mistake(s) in public and has to hand out belated red cards. IMO, there is another flaw in the present system of retro penalising; a retro suspension does not carry the same weight as one handed out on the field of play. Say for instance that two players get involved in a barney and the ref decides to send one of them off- the other escapes his notice and is thus able to complete the full game. Even though he may eventually be red-carded through the present drawn out process of retro review, he will have been able to stay on the field for the remainder of the game.
The selective use of video recording used in the league was even dafter than the present one- ASAIK, all IC games this season are being recorded any may be used if required.
Still video use, even in the form we are discussing, has its drawbacks; obviously, they are of no use whatever if the game is not being recorded!
Extending the role of the assisting officials can be useful wherever and whenever there's a ref and his little elves.

[Frank Casey]

The further we've come the more we've forgotten.

Its amazing to look back at the early days of the GAA and see how many matches were replayed/abandoned due to objections. I don't think the hand cranked cameras of the early 20th century would have been much good for instant replays but as FOSB intimated are not the GAA better off embracing this technology now rather than having it almost forced upon it because of some other howler down the road.

Hound made the point that Sludden was not for listening the last day - I'd concur with that. However a system where the ref could call on it any number of times with each team captain having say 3 calls (with 3 more in extra time as its a new game!!) would not be the end of the world as we know it.

As has been said us animals are smarting as the video evidence has cost us (and yes do the crime so do the time) but this technology should also be to the benefit of teams and players not just for sanctioning purposes.

[The Biff]

Funny moment in yesterday's Hurling game Tipp v Offaly.  Late in the game, an Offaly shot curled close to one upright, a typical example where you need to be in the right place to judge it properly.  A moment of hesitation from both umpires and then ... the closest man waves his arms for a Wide while the other umpire picks up the white flag to wave a Point at the very same time.  The cameras must have caught it.

A laugh/groan breaks out across the whole ground.  The ref trots in and consults both umpires, making sure to send any players away.  The chat last a decent while (making me think both umpires thought they were correct).  Final decision is with the nearest umpire - a Wide.

I thought it was a point myself, but certainly the umpire was not well placed to see the ball pass the post coming from the correct angle.  Luckily it was not significant to the result or ...... well, you know how us Offaly folks dont like being on the wrong end of a contentious decision.