The suggestion by Major League Soccer Commissioner, Don Garber, that MLS would like to test out In-Game Video Review can be looked at from a few different angles. The first thing to consider in this decision is whether or not its good for the game from a domestic AND international perspective. Domestically, the generations prior to the Millenials don't really understand or appreciate the match flow of soccer. This makes it hard to crack into the Big 4 of major league sports. This is where these types of decisions come into play. Soccer lacks the natural breaks in the game that Americans desire. Which means fewer chances to take bathroom breaks, discuss the last call with your friends, more time spent having to focus on one thing, and, most importantly to execs, it decreases the amount of advertising inventory.
From an international standpoint, MLS is already receiving criticism because of player availability on international friendly dates and because of the timing of their season and how it doesn't fit in with the international calendar. While some of that has come from U.S. Soccer, much of it comes from FIFA as well. Scheduling issues aside, MLS is already a strange animal to international fan. It is viewed as an unprofessional league where stars go to retire by many. At a time when many of the biggest and most successful clubs are transitioning to an international model and establishing academies in the United States, MLS could potentially alienate it's core fan base if they were to implement/experiment with In-Game Review. It could also damage the league's image in the eyes of some of it's international counterparts.
The flip side of this argument is if MLS finds a way to implement IGR in a manner that minimally effects match flow, the league could possibly be perceived as an innovator. The problem is that not many leagues are taking cues from this side of the pond when it comes to soccer. Unless you count the vanishing spray that everyone seems to be using. So, no. I don't see this trend sticking.
From a business standpoint, this move could certainly create more opportunities for sponsorship inventory and activation. I can already see "In-Game Review brought to you by GoPro". And I'm sure this opportunity would be taken into consideration the MLS front office. Yes, they already use live reads during the match broadcasts to create some exposure for league and team partners, but this element creates that desired stoppage in play so that you have the viewer's undivided attention. Even if its only for 15-30 seconds.
The most important thing to remember in all of this is that fact that NEVER in the history of sports has a team won a championship because they were relying on the referee to make the right call. That's not how this works. The teams that perform at the highest level on the most consistent basis are going to win championships in any sport. There is no luck involved in winning championships at any level. High School soccer all the way up through the World Cup.
There are more than enough games in the MLS season to flatten out any variances or abnormal occurrences caused by errors in refereeing or otherwise. The current playoff system does a pretty good job of that as well. I understand that there is some desire to make the game "better" but there are other ways to do it. It is already perception that MLS refs are terrible. Why highlight that by letting coaches challenge questionable calls? The league is much better served by working to improve the quality of refereeing to minimize missed and/or questionable calls.
It has been stated by World Cup and MLS referee, Mark Geiger, that the league asks referees to 'overlook' some calls in the interest of game play and flow. It seems hypocritical to implement that practice then turn around and want to review questionable calls. It stands to reason that the league should just train their referees and referee's assistants better to ensure that they call games the "right" way. I believe it was in the D.C. United vs. New York Red Bulls match last week when the linesman called Bradley Wright Phillips offside when he was clearly on. That assistant was behind the play and in a horrible position to make the call.
But that's part of the reason its called the Beautiful Game. Because of its subjective nature and the Soccer Gods pushing a call in your favor later on in the match or the season. Calls are left up to the opinion of the referee. It's in the rules of the game. This means that if the referee issues a red card, he or she saw something that warranted it. It may not always be the right call but that's the way the ball bounces. It is manager's job to step up and make adjustments to put his team in a position to win or get a draw out of the match. Something about this whole In-Game Review has the aroma of "everyone gets a trophy" and I am not a fan.
I see the short-term benefits in terms of sponsorship and possibly pulling in some new fans who don't like the fact that the game is is played continuously for 45 minutes at a time. But if I were a gambling man, I'd be willing to bet that this experiment will be short lived. Similar to penalty shootouts in regular season games during the dark ages of MLS.
No comments:
Post a Comment