That tennis example brings up one place where video technology really has helped, and that's in all the 'did the ball cross the line' situations. How many of those went down controversially in days gone by. That's probably the most important decision that can be automated, has a goal been scored or not. So it's not all been bad.
I think the use of video for subjective decisions can be helpful, and it is also helpful in determining whether a player is doing simulation.
But these cases where three heads are put together and they can't determine if a tug of hair is violent or if a head butt that'd have broken a nose if it succeeded as intended is violent... just farcical.
Obviously the last one has been stuck in my craw, that the player gets off the hook because he executed a violent action in an inept fashion, it's not judged to be "violent conduct"
I get what you’re saying; but I guess there will always be a degree of subjectivity when it comes to those sorts of situations; and imo it’s simpler if left to the on-field ref ( whose performance can always be confidentially reviewed, in private “ for training purposes “ if you will .
As I’ve said before; the offsite law should be simplified and then let technology do what it’s best at . Everyone would know where they stand .
