Rovers boss Bowyer makes call for technology

Grant Hanley is sent off at Millwall

Grant Hanley is sent off at Millwall

First published in Sport This Is Lancashire: Photograph of the Author by , Blackburn Rovers reporter

BLACKBURN Rovers boss Gary Bowyer has called on the football authorities to introduce technology to clear up controversial penalty decisions – as he waits to hear if Grant Hanley’s ban has been overturned.

Bowyer’s comments come after his captain was hit with a two-game suspension as a result of being sent off in Saturday’s 2-2 draw at Millwall.

Hanley was given his second red card of the season after he was adjudged to have manhandled Lions striker Steve Morison in the box.

Having studied replays of the incident Rovers lodged an appeal with the FA – the result of which they expect this morning.

However even if their appeal is successful, making Hanley eligible to play in tonight’s home clash with Brighton & Hove Albion and Saturday’s visit of Ipswich Town to Ewood Park, that would not change Bowyer’s opinion that football needs to follow the example of sports like rugby league and cricket and give referees video assistance when it comes to awarding spot-kicks.

Bowyer said: “I think something has to be introduced.

“It’s all well and good if Grant Hanley gets off and he doesn’t get banned but the decision to give the penalty, which they went on to score, changed the course of the game.

“It has a massive effect on people’s livelihoods so for the sake of 30 seconds to review it, like they do in rugby league (with tries), I don’t see why in this day and age it can’t be done.

“I don’t think it should be done for every incident, say a foul leading up to a goal or something like that, but for key moments, yes, as surely it helps the game?

“It would be a bit like waiting for a try or waiting for an out or not out in cricket, it would add a little excitement.

“It’s something that should be looked at, discussed and trialled.”

Goal-line technology has been introduced in the Premier League and the Capital One Cup this season but has not been launched in the Football League due to the cost of installing and maintaining it.

Rovers have had to prepare two line-ups for tonight’s match – one containing Hanley and one without.

Bowyer added: “For Grant especially, it is going to be a big decision from the FA and we hope that they see it from our point of view because even at the time, if it was a foul, Matt Kilgallon was there to clear.”

Rovers went on to give away a second penalty at Millwall, bringing the total they have conceded this season up to 10 – all of which have come away from home.

Bowyer said: “It’s a staggering amount. I’ve no problem with the fact that if you give a penalty away and it is an actual penalty but we’ve a good case this season for feeling very, very hard done by.

“Look at Leicester away, Nottingham Forest away, and Watford and Millwall away – they were just not penalties.”

Striker Rudy Gestede missed Saturday’s trip to the Den with a groin problem but he could return tonight while on-loan Millwall winger Liam Feeney will be available for selection after he was ineligible to face his parent club.

However midfielder Jason Lowe has not yet recovered from the ankle injury he sustained in the 4-2 win at Huddersfield Town.

Comments (16)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:38am Tue 1 Apr 14

TurfMoorTom says...

Aaah leave it. It's one of the talking points and sometimes they go your way, sometimes they don't.

Fair play Rovers have perhaps had it rough but perhaps next season it will even out. On top of that Rovers will have a bedded squad and a developing manager with 1 more seasons experience. Based on this and whats been achieved this season against the run of play the playoffs should be the minimum target. Perhaps this season the bar was set just too low and it took the edge off some performances.
Aaah leave it. It's one of the talking points and sometimes they go your way, sometimes they don't. Fair play Rovers have perhaps had it rough but perhaps next season it will even out. On top of that Rovers will have a bedded squad and a developing manager with 1 more seasons experience. Based on this and whats been achieved this season against the run of play the playoffs should be the minimum target. Perhaps this season the bar was set just too low and it took the edge off some performances. TurfMoorTom
  • Score: 0

9:43am Tue 1 Apr 14

thresholdweller says...

It doesn't seem to be a problem in rugby internationals. What's wrong with giving the 4th official access in the Premier league and Championship?
It doesn't seem to be a problem in rugby internationals. What's wrong with giving the 4th official access in the Premier league and Championship? thresholdweller
  • Score: 13

9:53am Tue 1 Apr 14

Harwoodstblue says...

I'm all for it. We can send a space craft to land on Mars but we can't get a penalty decision right. Bowyer's right, the cost to clubs this day and age can be staggering due to these mistakes which needn't happen. The FA need to get up to date and enter the 21st century like other sports.
I'm all for it. We can send a space craft to land on Mars but we can't get a penalty decision right. Bowyer's right, the cost to clubs this day and age can be staggering due to these mistakes which needn't happen. The FA need to get up to date and enter the 21st century like other sports. Harwoodstblue
  • Score: 12

9:55am Tue 1 Apr 14

realisticrover says...

problem is that half of the decisions, whilst maybe harsh, are still 'technically' penalties.
Even if its agreed that Grant was fouled first, theres probably some evidence that he lifted his arms just before the opponent ,manhandled him
similarly, most penalties involve some sort of dive, but also, they nearly all involve some sort of contact AND contact with the ball, so in many ways, video refs would make the situation worse!
problem is that half of the decisions, whilst maybe harsh, are still 'technically' penalties. Even if its agreed that Grant was fouled first, theres probably some evidence that he lifted his arms just before the opponent ,manhandled him similarly, most penalties involve some sort of dive, but also, they nearly all involve some sort of contact AND contact with the ball, so in many ways, video refs would make the situation worse! realisticrover
  • Score: -5

10:35am Tue 1 Apr 14

KingGouldy says...

It's not just the number of penalties we've conceded, it's the lack of any being awarded to us. One that really sticks out is Barnsley away. Rhodes gets flattened in their box and yet no penalty. Then, not 20mins later Barnsley are awarded a penalty for less of a foul.
It's not just the number of penalties we've conceded, it's the lack of any being awarded to us. One that really sticks out is Barnsley away. Rhodes gets flattened in their box and yet no penalty. Then, not 20mins later Barnsley are awarded a penalty for less of a foul. KingGouldy
  • Score: 5

10:41am Tue 1 Apr 14

owd nick says...

Harwoodstblue wrote:
I'm all for it. We can send a space craft to land on Mars but we can't get a penalty decision right. Bowyer's right, the cost to clubs this day and age can be staggering due to these mistakes which needn't happen. The FA need to get up to date and enter the 21st century like other sports.
Sorry I am totally against it.

The referee and his team have to be the sole arbiters on the day.

Just look what has happened in Cricket, the Umpire's word was once sacrosanct, now nearly every decision is referred upstairs and the game gets slowed down appreciably as the third umpire studies every angle.

It may be entertaining but it ain't Cricket.

OK, the first penalty could have been overturned but the second? I have looked at both several times now and the second remains a tough call.

No matter how infuriating it can be wrong decisions are made in every game by officials, players and managers, all create talking points, interest, argument, isn't that why we love it?

BTW, we aren't that successful at sending spacecraft to Mars, only around 50% of missions have actually made it, errors occur there as well, the most notable being when a recent NASA probe smashed into the red planet before slowing down because they got their miles and kilometers mixed up! :-)
[quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: I'm all for it. We can send a space craft to land on Mars but we can't get a penalty decision right. Bowyer's right, the cost to clubs this day and age can be staggering due to these mistakes which needn't happen. The FA need to get up to date and enter the 21st century like other sports.[/p][/quote]Sorry I am totally against it. The referee and his team have to be the sole arbiters on the day. Just look what has happened in Cricket, the Umpire's word was once sacrosanct, now nearly every decision is referred upstairs and the game gets slowed down appreciably as the third umpire studies every angle. It may be entertaining but it ain't Cricket. OK, the first penalty could have been overturned but the second? I have looked at both several times now and the second remains a tough call. No matter how infuriating it can be wrong decisions are made in every game by officials, players and managers, all create talking points, interest, argument, isn't that why we love it? BTW, we aren't that successful at sending spacecraft to Mars, only around 50% of missions have actually made it, errors occur there as well, the most notable being when a recent NASA probe smashed into the red planet before slowing down because they got their miles and kilometers mixed up! :-) owd nick
  • Score: -2

11:34am Tue 1 Apr 14

eddyo says...

Technology is all well and good but if the results are reviewed by a clueless idiot you will just cause a riot ( in the big games at least).
*
We have had some right geek refs this season. Recruiting ex-players to ref is a possibility but most won't because of the stiffy image it has.
Technology is all well and good but if the results are reviewed by a clueless idiot you will just cause a riot ( in the big games at least). * We have had some right geek refs this season. Recruiting ex-players to ref is a possibility but most won't because of the stiffy image it has. eddyo
  • Score: 0

11:41am Tue 1 Apr 14

A Rover 45 years and over says...

Agree for penalty decisions only. Especially for these stupid hand balls when the ball hits someones hand or arm when it is impossible to get it out of the way in time. Also for the cheats who wait for some one to touch them in order that they can go down in the penalty box, some of them even stick their leg and then fall over. Most of the penalties shown on telly recently looked manufactured and is a real wind up to see these guys constantly cheating.
Agree for penalty decisions only. Especially for these stupid hand balls when the ball hits someones hand or arm when it is impossible to get it out of the way in time. Also for the cheats who wait for some one to touch them in order that they can go down in the penalty box, some of them even stick their leg and then fall over. Most of the penalties shown on telly recently looked manufactured and is a real wind up to see these guys constantly cheating. A Rover 45 years and over
  • Score: 2

11:52am Tue 1 Apr 14

inflightmagazine says...

eddyo wrote:
Technology is all well and good but if the results are reviewed by a clueless idiot you will just cause a riot ( in the big games at least).
*
We have had some right geek refs this season. Recruiting ex-players to ref is a possibility but most won't because of the stiffy image it has.
not sure its the image that stops people becoming referees , its more likely the intense pressure from , players , fans, managers ect.

I think it would be interesting to see what would happen in a game if it was introduced, the biggest fear seems to be a lack of flow in the game, but I wonder how much time would be saved by Players not simulating fouls ( because they could be reviewed and then given a yellow card) the time after these events when the players surround the ref are pretty time consuming and I think you might have mangers telling strikers to stay on their feet , if they thought he might get a Red card for simulation. I just wonder would it force a bit more honesty back into the game in terms of players and mangers.

I am really not sure if it is the answer but I do know that the 1000`s of refs leaving the game every year is not good and that the physical demands of the modern game are such that its making it harder for refs every year to keep getting it right. Some closed games employing the technology with proper data in terms of actual playing times , fouls committed and real decision waiting times would be good to see.

Rugby league doesn't seem to have suffered too much from it, from what the rugby league fans I know tell me then again there zero grief for refs in that sport.

I just think sometimes taking a look at something to see what it would look like rather than worrying about all its negatives and killing it based on a feeling is a better way to move forward.
[quote][p][bold]eddyo[/bold] wrote: Technology is all well and good but if the results are reviewed by a clueless idiot you will just cause a riot ( in the big games at least). * We have had some right geek refs this season. Recruiting ex-players to ref is a possibility but most won't because of the stiffy image it has.[/p][/quote]not sure its the image that stops people becoming referees , its more likely the intense pressure from , players , fans, managers ect. I think it would be interesting to see what would happen in a game if it was introduced, the biggest fear seems to be a lack of flow in the game, but I wonder how much time would be saved by Players not simulating fouls ( because they could be reviewed and then given a yellow card) the time after these events when the players surround the ref are pretty time consuming and I think you might have mangers telling strikers to stay on their feet , if they thought he might get a Red card for simulation. I just wonder would it force a bit more honesty back into the game in terms of players and mangers. I am really not sure if it is the answer but I do know that the 1000`s of refs leaving the game every year is not good and that the physical demands of the modern game are such that its making it harder for refs every year to keep getting it right. Some closed games employing the technology with proper data in terms of actual playing times , fouls committed and real decision waiting times would be good to see. Rugby league doesn't seem to have suffered too much from it, from what the rugby league fans I know tell me then again there zero grief for refs in that sport. I just think sometimes taking a look at something to see what it would look like rather than worrying about all its negatives and killing it based on a feeling is a better way to move forward. inflightmagazine
  • Score: 2

12:17pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Fidel Castro says...

Soemtimes can't help thinking that GB is an idiot. What difference would technology make in this case? It was a foul and the ref has got to make a call on it, don't matter how many replays you watch the decision is exactly the same. Getting really sick of managers constantly moaning about referees decisions and GB is becoming 1 of the worst.
Soemtimes can't help thinking that GB is an idiot. What difference would technology make in this case? It was a foul and the ref has got to make a call on it, don't matter how many replays you watch the decision is exactly the same. Getting really sick of managers constantly moaning about referees decisions and GB is becoming 1 of the worst. Fidel Castro
  • Score: -8

12:36pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Rover47 says...

inflightmagazine wrote:
eddyo wrote:
Technology is all well and good but if the results are reviewed by a clueless idiot you will just cause a riot ( in the big games at least).
*
We have had some right geek refs this season. Recruiting ex-players to ref is a possibility but most won't because of the stiffy image it has.
not sure its the image that stops people becoming referees , its more likely the intense pressure from , players , fans, managers ect.

I think it would be interesting to see what would happen in a game if it was introduced, the biggest fear seems to be a lack of flow in the game, but I wonder how much time would be saved by Players not simulating fouls ( because they could be reviewed and then given a yellow card) the time after these events when the players surround the ref are pretty time consuming and I think you might have mangers telling strikers to stay on their feet , if they thought he might get a Red card for simulation. I just wonder would it force a bit more honesty back into the game in terms of players and mangers.

I am really not sure if it is the answer but I do know that the 1000`s of refs leaving the game every year is not good and that the physical demands of the modern game are such that its making it harder for refs every year to keep getting it right. Some closed games employing the technology with proper data in terms of actual playing times , fouls committed and real decision waiting times would be good to see.

Rugby league doesn't seem to have suffered too much from it, from what the rugby league fans I know tell me then again there zero grief for refs in that sport.

I just think sometimes taking a look at something to see what it would look like rather than worrying about all its negatives and killing it based on a feeling is a better way to move forward.
Fully agree. I cannot think of one valid reason why there is this resistance to the introduction of penalty technology.

Cheating is rife in today's game. At one time when players were generally honest and there was only the odd cheat in the game, referees weren’t making the mistakes they are repeatedly making today.

I’m sure today’s refs watch match highlights and shudder when they see how they are being conned.

But what is almost as frustrating is how many clear-cut penalties referees are NOT giving. They would be justified in giving one at almost every corner kick these days. Defenders seem to think they can get away with anything at a corner – and, without exception, they do!
[quote][p][bold]inflightmagazine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]eddyo[/bold] wrote: Technology is all well and good but if the results are reviewed by a clueless idiot you will just cause a riot ( in the big games at least). * We have had some right geek refs this season. Recruiting ex-players to ref is a possibility but most won't because of the stiffy image it has.[/p][/quote]not sure its the image that stops people becoming referees , its more likely the intense pressure from , players , fans, managers ect. I think it would be interesting to see what would happen in a game if it was introduced, the biggest fear seems to be a lack of flow in the game, but I wonder how much time would be saved by Players not simulating fouls ( because they could be reviewed and then given a yellow card) the time after these events when the players surround the ref are pretty time consuming and I think you might have mangers telling strikers to stay on their feet , if they thought he might get a Red card for simulation. I just wonder would it force a bit more honesty back into the game in terms of players and mangers. I am really not sure if it is the answer but I do know that the 1000`s of refs leaving the game every year is not good and that the physical demands of the modern game are such that its making it harder for refs every year to keep getting it right. Some closed games employing the technology with proper data in terms of actual playing times , fouls committed and real decision waiting times would be good to see. Rugby league doesn't seem to have suffered too much from it, from what the rugby league fans I know tell me then again there zero grief for refs in that sport. I just think sometimes taking a look at something to see what it would look like rather than worrying about all its negatives and killing it based on a feeling is a better way to move forward.[/p][/quote]Fully agree. I cannot think of one valid reason why there is this resistance to the introduction of penalty technology. Cheating is rife in today's game. At one time when players were generally honest and there was only the odd cheat in the game, referees weren’t making the mistakes they are repeatedly making today. I’m sure today’s refs watch match highlights and shudder when they see how they are being conned. But what is almost as frustrating is how many clear-cut penalties referees are NOT giving. They would be justified in giving one at almost every corner kick these days. Defenders seem to think they can get away with anything at a corner – and, without exception, they do! Rover47
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Rover47 says...

Unless the referee saw something the camera did not see, the Hanley penalty must go down as one of the most ridiculous ever given - compounded, of course, by the sending off.
Unless the referee saw something the camera did not see, the Hanley penalty must go down as one of the most ridiculous ever given - compounded, of course, by the sending off. Rover47
  • Score: 2

1:58pm Tue 1 Apr 14

owd nick says...

Rover47 wrote:
Unless the referee saw something the camera did not see, the Hanley penalty must go down as one of the most ridiculous ever given - compounded, of course, by the sending off.
Technically Hanley was leaning into him first, you could say he was protecting the ball, you could also say that it was obstruction, the guy then wraps his arms around Hanley's neck and drags him down, that's when the whistle goes.

Everyone has an opinion, all 8,000 or so at the ground will have differing opinions based on what they saw at the precise moment, based on the angle of view and their allegiance.

Another million plus, probably after listening to managers, players, commentators, hacks et al after the game will have seen the incident later that evening on TV.

Many, like us will have voiced an opinion.

The only opinion we haven't heard is that of the referee.
[quote][p][bold]Rover47[/bold] wrote: Unless the referee saw something the camera did not see, the Hanley penalty must go down as one of the most ridiculous ever given - compounded, of course, by the sending off.[/p][/quote]Technically Hanley was leaning into him first, you could say he was protecting the ball, you could also say that it was obstruction, the guy then wraps his arms around Hanley's neck and drags him down, that's when the whistle goes. Everyone has an opinion, all 8,000 or so at the ground will have differing opinions based on what they saw at the precise moment, based on the angle of view and their allegiance. Another million plus, probably after listening to managers, players, commentators, hacks et al after the game will have seen the incident later that evening on TV. Many, like us will have voiced an opinion. The only opinion we haven't heard is that of the referee. owd nick
  • Score: -1

2:11pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Harwoodstblue says...

owd nick wrote:
Harwoodstblue wrote:
I'm all for it. We can send a space craft to land on Mars but we can't get a penalty decision right. Bowyer's right, the cost to clubs this day and age can be staggering due to these mistakes which needn't happen. The FA need to get up to date and enter the 21st century like other sports.
Sorry I am totally against it.

The referee and his team have to be the sole arbiters on the day.

Just look what has happened in Cricket, the Umpire's word was once sacrosanct, now nearly every decision is referred upstairs and the game gets slowed down appreciably as the third umpire studies every angle.

It may be entertaining but it ain't Cricket.

OK, the first penalty could have been overturned but the second? I have looked at both several times now and the second remains a tough call.

No matter how infuriating it can be wrong decisions are made in every game by officials, players and managers, all create talking points, interest, argument, isn't that why we love it?

BTW, we aren't that successful at sending spacecraft to Mars, only around 50% of missions have actually made it, errors occur there as well, the most notable being when a recent NASA probe smashed into the red planet before slowing down because they got their miles and kilometers mixed up! :-)
I know what you mean Owd Nick but as Bowyer says and I agree " It doesn't need to be done for every incident" but for something as important as a penalty, which can have an immense impact on a game, those decisions need to called correctly. The number of decisions which are called incorrectly must be embarrassing for the ref's and I think most would welcome some help. Only my opinion of course.
[quote][p][bold]owd nick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Harwoodstblue[/bold] wrote: I'm all for it. We can send a space craft to land on Mars but we can't get a penalty decision right. Bowyer's right, the cost to clubs this day and age can be staggering due to these mistakes which needn't happen. The FA need to get up to date and enter the 21st century like other sports.[/p][/quote]Sorry I am totally against it. The referee and his team have to be the sole arbiters on the day. Just look what has happened in Cricket, the Umpire's word was once sacrosanct, now nearly every decision is referred upstairs and the game gets slowed down appreciably as the third umpire studies every angle. It may be entertaining but it ain't Cricket. OK, the first penalty could have been overturned but the second? I have looked at both several times now and the second remains a tough call. No matter how infuriating it can be wrong decisions are made in every game by officials, players and managers, all create talking points, interest, argument, isn't that why we love it? BTW, we aren't that successful at sending spacecraft to Mars, only around 50% of missions have actually made it, errors occur there as well, the most notable being when a recent NASA probe smashed into the red planet before slowing down because they got their miles and kilometers mixed up! :-)[/p][/quote]I know what you mean Owd Nick but as Bowyer says and I agree " It doesn't need to be done for every incident" but for something as important as a penalty, which can have an immense impact on a game, those decisions need to called correctly. The number of decisions which are called incorrectly must be embarrassing for the ref's and I think most would welcome some help. Only my opinion of course. Harwoodstblue
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Tue 1 Apr 14

kfc yummy says...

Why don't you cry see if that helps.
Why don't you cry see if that helps. kfc yummy
  • Score: 0

4:18pm Tue 1 Apr 14

Harwoodstblue says...

kfc yummy wrote:
Why don't you cry see if that helps.
Excellent post from a Dingle as usual,
You couldn't even type that one sentence correctly.
[quote][p][bold]kfc yummy[/bold] wrote: Why don't you cry see if that helps.[/p][/quote]Excellent post from a Dingle as usual, You couldn't even type that one sentence correctly. Harwoodstblue
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree