Whats the reason for it? I am also against it as teams could use it to point out my mistakesAgainst it then, against it now!
Yeah I could see that happening as well.It won’t stop anything from happening in a game. Let’s face it, how many people watching a game have their phones out recording an incident, that doesn’t deter anyone from kicking off. Just opens you up to potential physical violence when they then try and take the camera from you afterwards. I’m being extreme, I know but I just can’t see what it will achieve. I certainly won’t be buying one it they get the green light
Also we would need to think about safeguarding as at Open Age anyone 16 and above can play. So that would be another thing to think about.It is specifically written into LoTG that they cannot be used, so RSUK, who are the ones championing them, need to lobby IFAB as there is nothing the FA, or any other association for that matter, can do about it.
Personally I think that once the red mist has descended to the level that someone is about to hit a match official, a body cameras isn't going to make a blind bit of difference. Yes, it could help for evidencial purposes after, but it is unlikely to prevent the attack as anyone doing that has gone well beyond the realm of rational thinking. There are also multiple cases of security guards and even police being assaulted when wearing them, and the perpretator trying to remove the camera from them to destroy the evidence. Which means you are looking at one that instantly uploads to the cloud rather than onto local storage, and the costs for those are prohibitive (and the question of who pays for them anyway is one that no one has been able to answer).
Finally, there is the privacy issue. If the recording contains personally identifiable information (PII) there are regulations around how the data, in this case the footage, has to be stored, who can request access to it, etc. All a bit of a minefield. And yes, I know that some games are filmed anyway, but that doesn't mean thery are compliant with regulation.
I don't think you quite understood.I agree this is a legal minefield with storage of data and recording children etc etc and they all need to be resolved, if they can, before this even gets thought about. But the issue around people being attacked for the footage is an urban myth. I worked in retail for years and had to wear these in busy city centres. I never heard of anyone being attacked for that reason. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, just it's not high on the reasons this can't be put into practise.
As James has said, I'm not saying that someone would attack the referee just to get the camera for the footage, just as I don't think someone stealing a pair of boots from Sports Direct would assault the security guard just so the footage can't be used.I agree this is a legal minefield with storage of data and recording children etc etc and they all need to be resolved, if they can, before this even gets thought about. But the issue around people being attacked for the footage is an urban myth. I worked in retail for years and had to wear these in busy city centres. I never heard of anyone being attacked for that reason. I'm not saying it hasn't happened, just it's not high on the reasons this can't be put into practise.
It is specifically written into LoTG that they cannot be used, so RSUK, who are the ones championing them, need to lobby IFAB as there is nothing the FA, or any other association for that matter, can do about it.
Personally I think that once the red mist has descended to the level that someone is about to hit a match official, a body cameras isn't going to make a blind bit of difference. Yes, it could help for evidencial purposes after, but it is unlikely to prevent the attack as anyone doing that has gone well beyond the realm of rational thinking. There are also multiple cases of security guards and even police being assaulted when wearing them, and the perpretator trying to remove the camera from them to destroy the evidence. Which means you are looking at one that instantly uploads to the cloud rather than onto local storage, and the costs for those are prohibitive (and the question of who pays for them anyway is one that no one has been able to answer).
Finally, there is the privacy issue. If the recording contains personally identifiable information (PII) there are regulations around how the data, in this case the footage, has to be stored, who can request access to it, etc. All a bit of a minefield. And yes, I know that some games are filmed anyway, but that doesn't mean thery are compliant with regulation.