Video Evidence - Sky Finally Admit Their Self Interest

[Im_Spartacus]

SSN just interviewing Dave Whelan as I write. Without mentioning his own club's situation re the offside goals and Ivanovich's assault he had a very interesting debate for the last 10 minutes with the SSN presenter.

Initially Whelan was making the case for breaking away from FIFA rules regarding video evidence, obviously he has experience of this through his rugby connections. He said that if FIFA won't sanction the use of another official for referrals there must be some sort of agenda, so we should go it alone.

It was pointed out by the SSN presenter that the UK holds 4 seats and votes on the FIFA committee which would decide such a matter, and was asked for his opinion as to why we couldnt get the rules changed...........he had no idea.

Then came the sucker punch........"Dave, what you would take away from the game if video referees were allowed would be the debate, the discussion and the unpredictability in football, as you have seen over the weekend, situations caused by refereeing mistakes gives stations like us something to report on and the fans something to talk about. Wouldn't it all be a bit boring if the referees got everything right?"

Whelan answered by saying if there is a set of rules it should be played to, and if help is available in adhering to those rules, that help should be sought and used.

And there it is...........

Sky's position on video evidence, and why it will never be brought in in this country.

[Beefymcfc]

I seen the interview just before I popped out and have to say that I was quite taken back by the question. I'm glad you've got it down as I wasn't sure if I heard it correctly and due to being in a rush forgot to pause it.

Nice one mate, you've confirmed that I ain't going mad ................. yet!

[Tokyo Blue]

Coincidentally technology and correct decisions would also take away some of the control.

[bigblue]

They currently have the monopoly on video evidence and hold the trial by slow motion reply with whomever they see fit. Why would they want it to change?

[Im_Spartacus]

They currently have the monopoly on video evidence and hold the trial by slow motion reply with whomever they see fit. Why would they want it to change?

You have to wonder don't you, going into each weekend the players and refs must wonder who is going to be Sky's Monday Villain. In the absence of a big story, you will always see an item of limited controversy played over and over again - but it will never involve United as the party committing the offence - ever.

Tokyo, that was my very first thought too. Correctly refereed games would result in a very different looking league table, and a very different potential outcome for Sky. For example, why would sky want Swansea or Norwich to be a regular top 6 side when they don't have enough fans to satisfy the advertisers.