A case against instant replay in soccer

by Martin Shatzer on Jan 25, 2025 8:53 PM EST

FIFA President Sepp Blatter is considering adding instant replay technology to international soccer, but it is unlikely to be ready in time for the World Cup this year.

When the NFL put replay into use, I was one of the few fans who was against it. I’ll go into my reasons why after the break.

You can’t challenge everything. It seems so arbitrary what the NFL allows a coach to challenge and what they consider to be irreversible. Why should a coach be able to challenge the exact location of the ball down to the inch, when they cannot challenge a pass interference penalty that could be worth 50 yards.
It slows the game down. The NFC Championship game last night offered the best possible example of how replay can totally interrupt the flow of a game. The Saints’ winning drive in overtime had three booth reviews, and none of them resulted in a call being overturned. That drive should have been an exhilarating conclusion to a fantastic game. But instead, it just dragged.
It still doesn’t guarantee accuracy. With or without replay, it will never be possible for officiating to be 100% accurate. Countless times a referee has incorrectly reversed a call even after reviewing the tape.

Its entirely likely that these complaints will be even stronger from the soccer community. Can you imagine Cuahtemoc Blanco writhing on the ground in feigned anguish and yelling for his coach to throw a challenge flag after an opposing player tapped him on the shoulder?

Instant replay slowing down a football game or hockey game isn’t completely devastating because those sports have natural stoppages anyway. But soccer? Would the clock actually stop during a replay? That just seems so… unnatural!

Maybe I’m overreacting. In fact, it sounds like replay in soccer will be more like replay in baseball than any other sport. Replay is only used in baseball to review home run calls. And if ever approved, it will probably only be used in soccer to review goals.

It’s nice to see that FIFA is considering making changes to address a legitimate issue. But there is still a whole lot that needs to be worked out before I can get on board with this.

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

As long as it’s only to clarify goals, and it doesn’t involve the ref going to a booth (but rather, a guy looking at a monitor that has decision-making powers), I can just barely live with it.

I’d much rather it be as is, though. Soccer, like life, is not always fair. As the years have gone on, more and more people are looking for things off the field to correct on-field issues. Look at the Henry handball controversy; Ireland’s total lack of dignity in asking for a replay should have been seen as a disgrace. Instead, they were given actual consideration. It was pathetic.

I say this as someone who is notorious about getting on refs too much as a player. Ultimately, you have to live with the calls against you (just like anything else in life that goes wrong). You should try your best to succeed in spite of a mistake against you. Your goal is wrongly disallowed? Score another one. That guy was offside? Don’t let them score again. What’s more enjoyable: Seeing a team on the field overcome adversity, or awaiting the outcome of a protest? People need to come to grips with the fact that calls will go wrong, defenders will ball-watch, and forwards will miss sitters. If you can’t deal with those things, then sports aren’t for you.

by ChestRockwell on Jan 25, 2025 9:20 PM EST reply actions

I agree with just about everything you said, except for the comment on Ireland. They rightfully felt cheated, and the pathetic part about the whole ordeal was the lack of respect for the game displayed by the French. Requesting a replay of the match was a fair resolution to an unfair situation. The French would have had an equal chance to go back and win the match cleanly, but they, instead, chose to sully the reputation of the sport. The moment that a French player takes the pitch in South Africa is what should be seen as the disgrace.

by renstar on Jan 26, 2025 12:31 PM EST up reply actions

We will have to agree to disagree. Asking for a replay because of a bad call means that literally every single game of soccer that has ever had a bad call needs to be replayed. Did Ireland benefit from a bad call to get to the point total that saw them into the playoff? Well, before the France-Ireland replay, we have to replay that game (and so on, and so on…).

Ireland had 180 minutes of regulation play and 30 more minutes of extra time to win that playoff. They didn’t. I even have a soft spot for Ireland, but it doesn’t matter. You win games on the field. The handball didn’t even cause the goal; the goal was scored by Gallas, who was left unmarked to put in a cross that was not defended properly. Roy Keane’s take on the game was perfect. Where were the defenders and goalkeeper? That’s Ireland’s big problem there, not some handball. With the game on the line, they failed to defend well enough to keep France from scoring.

by ChestRockwell on Jan 26, 2025 2:48 PM EST up reply actions

We don’t disagree that far, actually because what Keane (and you) have said is correct, I was more commenting on your discussion of the after the game. After the game, France’s behavior (sticking their heads in the sand, pretending it did not happen) was disgraceful. The Irish were rightfully upset, asked for what would be a fair resolution, had the request denied, and let it go. My ire has little to do with the fact that the Irish did not qualify (though I have a soft spot for them as well) and more to do with a big power getting through (and nearly getting seeded!) when they really didn’t play like they deserved it.

Your point about every game needing to be replayed is pure hyperbole. Do bad calls happen? Sure. Have I been on the receiving end? Sure. Have I been on the benefiting end? Sure. Have I made those bad calls? More than I’d like to admit. However, a blown call in a 5-0 WAGS div 4 regular season game vs a bad call in a closely played World Cup Qualifier are two different beasts. One matters little, one matters much. The fundamental issue is that the official’s poor positioning and game awareness affected the outcome of a tightly contested game with much on the line. An error that could have been corrected if (1) replay was used, which I would prefer against or (2) Henry had any class and respect for the game and his opponents, which he clearly doesn’t.

The point is moot on that issue though, because I’m not sure if that play would even qualify for review. It is my understanding that the review would be used to determine if the ball crossed the line, not how it did.

by renstar on Jan 26, 2025 3:41 PM EST up reply actions

Sure, France acting like nothing happened was wrong. Of course it was upsetting to the Irish and to anyone with a sence of justice. However, asking for a replay was completely without dignity. It totally brushes aside the standards that have been in place within soccer since the laws of the game were codified: The referee makes the call, and you have to live with it. What makes Ireland so special that they get a replay when this one call goes against them, while the rest of the national teams in the world are just stuck when a ref blows an important call? It smacks of a totally undeserved sense of entitlement. Every team is entitled to a referee doing his best; none are entitled to the right to replay a game when one call is partially responsible for a crucial goal against.

I don’t think the slippery slope thing is at all hyperbolic. If we’re replaying France-Ireland, what’s stopping us from looking at every other qualifier in their groups (since those qualifiers lead to France-Ireland)? Ireland got the very last playoff spot, ahead of Norway by 2 points. They had even goal differential, and Norway had scored 1 more goal. If any of Ireland’s 4 1-goal wins featured an Irish goal that benefited from a poor call, then the Norwegians would have every right to demand a replay of that game, because that single goal cost Norway a spot in the playoff. You see how quickly this gets out of hand? There’s no way to give just Ireland a replay for just this one call without dealing with every other team who got knocked out of qualifying by a narrow margin. It’s opening Pandora’s box.

You’re right that one blown call in a rout at the youth level is different, but it also has nothing to do with the subject at hand. We’re both talking about high-pressure qualifiers. Qualifiers have been determined by goals scored due to bad calls before, and it will surely happen again. There will never be an instance in which I would condone even asking for a replay. If I was an Irish FA official, I would have had a hard time continuing working with a group that felt justified in seeing themselves as more deserving than the rest of the world’s national teams.

by ChestRockwell on Jan 26, 2025 5:21 PM EST up reply actions

Asking for a replay because of a bad call means that literally every single game of soccer that has ever had a bad call needs to be replayed.

You’re right that one blown call in a rout at the youth level is different, but it also has nothing to do with the subject at hand. We’re both talking about high-pressure qualifiers.

So yeah, per your original comment, my response was relevant.

I’m not gonna continue to argue with you. But, fwiw, cheating is completely without dignity. Cheating is a worse offense than asking for a replay.

by renstar on Jan 26, 2025 10:01 PM EST up reply actions

Slightly related to Chest’s comment re: looking for things off the field, a guy yesterday bemoaning the Vikings/Saints made the point of saying that we’ve almost become a society that looks for that type of thing in their sports, be it replays or flags. Soccer might have predated this behavior when asking for fouls and such, but football (and to lesser extents hockey and basketball) lend itself to checking these things and righting the wrongs. Not saying its fair, really more observational and barely awake thoughts.

If you don't know how to write or what to think, or have a question about something on an elitist blog, read its community guidelines for assistance.

by Bald Pollack on Jan 26, 2025 7:23 AM EST reply actions

I agree with Chest, in that replay should only be used to review goals. That is the way that hockey uses replays, and it is rarely obtrusive. I have rarely seen more than one “booth” review during a hockey game.

by JeremyInDC on Jan 26, 2025 9:00 AM EST reply actions

Agrea with DCUMD

The most important thing for soccer is to keep the game at a predictable length. Lets face it, if there were breaks in the action and the length of the game were in question, ESPN wouldn’t air it so much. To me, this is a minor point. To the game officials and people making money on it, this is a major point. MLS had to alter their overtime rules years ago in order to get the TV deals done.
For fans, there is flow to the game that can’t be interrupted. This has to be preserved. Now, I haven’t read how the video would be used, who would initiate, or which rules were reviewable. I’m all for accuracy in sports, but not at the sacrifice of the game. The game has a human element to it and has for a long time. This human element has shaped the game we know as well. Like it or not, the diving on the field, the calls for flags, and lobbying the ref are all products of the human element.
If the video is only used to check if the ball went over the line, how much time do they a have to check it? Will play continue until a call is made to the field ref? Will coaches be able to through a challenge flag? Will play be stopped if they do? Could Carlos Ruiz find a way to cheat this too?

by monk81 on Jan 26, 2025 11:03 AM EST reply actions