He is a strong advocate of allowing the use of video replays during matches - if officials request it.
Ironically, such a procedure would have worked against Blues in Wednesday night's controversial Carling Cup win at Bolton when a last-gasp penalty was awarded on the say-so of a linesman.
But Eriksson is adamant that if the technology is in place, it should be used.
"I think referees are good but you cannot expect them to always get it right," said the City chief.
"I think we should give refs the chance to look at replays of certain major incidents. They do it a lot in other sports.
"Take penalties for example, the referee has to decide in two, three or four seconds. It might help him if he is not sure to stop the game and go to the fourth official who has a video screen and look again.
Decision
"That might take half a minute but it would give the referee a much better chance of making the correct decision. I accept that sometimes even on television you cannot tell but I'd like to see it introduced.
"The same goes for decisions about whether a ball is over the line. In that situation, it is crazy not to use technology that exists because such decisions can cost a side a title, league survival or qualification for Europe.
"If we go on relying purely on the referee and linesmen for such decisions, we may never get them right because they are often far away or not exactly in line."
But Eriksson would not back plans for managers or players to challenge decisions and leave the use of the video replay entirely at the referee's discretion.
"It has to be his call," said the Swede. "If he is unsure then he should have the right to see it again. I am sure that the game would still flow and it would only happen maybe once or twice per match.
"I am not advocating that referees check every throw-in, corner or free-kick decision. It is not like he would be running to the sideline all the time - only when he is unsure.
"I would like to see a trial period. Some of the wrong decisions would be easy to avoid and the referees would be happy as well. The game is so quick that you cannot expect them to get everything correct with just one look at it.
"Those decisions are huge because there is such a fine margin between winning a losing. It is not like other sports where sides can win by a lot of points scored."
What do you think? Have your say. Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
They should embrase techology,the football league is still in the stone age!
Television is ideal for penalty decisions and doubtful goals. Could also be used after the event for citing issues, as in rugby, to ensure the on field thugs and cheats dont get away with things. That would scare the life out of the rags.
don't see the problem as the game is usually stopped by players surrounding the ref contesting every decision anyway .... the ref's have earpieces ..simply ask the 4th official to look at it and make a decision..... if not a pen or a goal restart the game with a drop-ball ..simple ..takes nothing more than 30 seconds
Have to be careful what when we use it and don't use it. For example, I can see teams whining that TV replays show that the corner that led to the break-away that produced the winning goal should not have counted. Or that the ball did go out of play 25 min earlier so the play should be called back...
Some teams, managers and players whine enough so can't giving them another excuse to do so. With stoppages it could end up with another 90 mins of play (gives a whole new meaning to 'Fergie-Time')
But for certain decisions like penalties/free kicks near the box and goal line clearances then yes.
I think they should use it. There is no justification for a wrong decision to stand when the technology is there to resolve the matter.
Ignoring TV evidence only allows refs to decide games certain ways (if you know what I mean) and then hide behind the excuse they werent sure or didnt see it properly.
Manure for example wouldnt have been awarded so many penalities - where clearly there was no contact with Ronaldo. And would have conceded that goal Spurs scored (Mendes was it?), that went clearly over the line by at least 3 feet but the ref decided to ignore.
Using technology in football is never going to take off, well I hope not. As already posted, I'd also like to see it used AFTER games to stop thugs and nail them for off the ball "incidents" after the event if it is missed on the day. But I can't imagine anything worse than stopping the game (cricket style) and waiting to see if we've just scored or given away a penalty or even been robbed one. I know nowt about Rugby, though I seem to remember that the English fans were not happy (despite a long delay to analyse it) about a try that wasn't given in the World Cup Final. Imagine that being a goal at Wembley... there'd be riots!!!
Technology should only be used for goal-line incidents. If it is used in other areas football will end up like american football and games will last hours!
Sven is right - as usual!
For the first time i have to diagree with Sven,it would spoil the thousands of debates that football fans have always had(was it or wasn't it a pen,was it offside wasn't it etc).
To all these people that saying that the game would last for hours if video technology came into football, So what? I think for what football fans pay to get in. it should last a lot longer than just 90mins(if that,if you count the amount of throwings etc).Anyway we all know it will never happen, cos the Big 4 will make sure it doesnt!
Works a treat in rugby league.30 secs, then correct decision every time. stops players arguing as well.
Also will be benefitial to non league teams in FA cup.How many minnows have been robbed by a dodgy ref, when playing a league team?
No more 'brown envelopes' to refs, by big clubs me thinks.
I'd go for it - but only at grounds where there's a massive screen to show the fans what the fourth official is seeing. And that leaves us out!!
I am all for technology being used in goal line decisions where is it a black and white issue. However, so many tackles are just opinion whether it was a foul or not. How many times do Shearer and Hanson disagree with other on MOTD and that is after 3 or 4 looks from different angles in slow motion.
I would go the other way and have substitute refs - if the ref you have is boring and not giving cards or pens, you can substitute him for the forth official... you can picture it Howard Webb having a solid game (it might happen) the forth official (Mike Riley)'warming' up on the side line, practicing giving pens and cards, that will spice the odd 0-0 up. You wont be suprised to hear I dreamt that up watching us last season.
CTID
I see Kiwi Blue Christchurch has decided to get up in the middle of the night again to give us his pearls of wisdom, stick to the cheap cider in a brown paper bag mate, it suits you a lot better.
Do we really need cameras? We`ve done without them up until now,this would take away all the after match debates on whether it was a goal or not,handball etc.Having instant decisions is what makes the game,but with so much at stake nowadays prize money wants more say.As they say MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL and is now trying to make decisions on our game!
It is already in place on the television you see the replays and it doesn't hold up the game,should be able to use television if a player has done a bad tackle or a player has attacked another player.Could look and Punish players after the game if something has been missed
Dukinfield Blue, Cheshire. Your're opinions are obviously based on a life of Warburton's bread & horlicks. As its my birthday on sunday, I'll carry on drinking my montana wine. Thank you very much!
I think the people who need to worry are the divers !! A contentious goal or penalty award happens every 7-8 games. Diving in or around the box occurs two or three times a game.
Kiwi Blue, Christchurch.
Its fairly obvious to the whole world that you either dont sleep or you are really a muppet for getting up in the middle of the night to write on these blogs.
I know you dont drink decent wine just floor polish or toilet cleaner so your views are always clouded by the substances in your body.
What would a kiwi know about football anyway?, get back to commenting on your own game which you yet again misarably failed in during this years world cup and leave the proper game to a world footballing superpower.