World Cup 2010

[wyly]

There should definitely be goal review. I know soccer is a game without stoppage, but you don't need to review fouls. Would not take long to check that.

they worry about the proverbial slippery slope, first goals, then fouls, then offside...plus fifa has always tried to maintain consistency from the lowest levels of competition to the top, that rules and officiating be the same everywhere...

[jefferiah]

they worry about the proverbial slippery slope, first goals, then fouls, then offside...plus fifa has always tried to maintain consistency from the lowest levels of competition to the top, that rules and officiating be the same everywhere...

I think that is silly, though. Hockey, for instance, does not allow for reviews except for on goals. Goals are a pretty easy thing for people to agree on as a review point. I mean not that that would have necessarily changed the game for England, but its kind of pathetic that the ball goes about a foot behind the line, and FIFA has no way to guarantee that it will count. If that happens in the finals in a very tight game.....and it can easily be corrected in a few seconds. In a game where a team generally scores no more than 2 goals, getting goals right should be very important.

Edited June 27, 2010 by jefferiah

[wyly]

I think that is silly, though. Hockey, for instance, does not allow for reviews except for on goals. Goals are a pretty easy thing for people to agree on as a review point. I mean not that that would have necessarily changed the game for England, but its kind of pathetic that the ball goes about a foot behind the line, and FIFA has no way to guarantee that it will count. If that happens in the finals in a very tight game.....and it can easily be corrected in a few seconds. In a game where a team generally scores no more than 2 goals, getting goals right should be very important.

I agree for the most part my only concern that it slows down the game, even the best video system will not catch everything and some things only the Ref will see, do they use the video for those situations? do you stop play after a possible goal to look at the video while the defending teams counters and possibly score themselves?

[jefferiah]

I agree for the most part my only concern that it slows down the game, even the best video system will not catch everything and some things only the Ref will see, do they use the video for those situations? do you stop play after a possible goal to look at the video while the defending teams counters and possibly score themselves?

In hockey you do it during the next stoppage. I would think it would only make a throw-in, corner kick, goal kick or free kick a few seconds longer....you know if you do the review at that time. In hockey there are situations where reviewing a goal can be time consuming. Not to mention the fact that it is usually the league in Toronto that does the review. And some goals are obviously more complex than others. Still though I think it would be ten times easier to review it in euro football than in hockey. Ball is bigger, net is bigger. Hockey has certain fine rules about scoring goals that can be challenging to review as well. Things like:

Did the puck come off the players skate? If so, did he kick it in or did he redirect it with his skate? A redirect is allowed if you turn your skate. A kicking motion isnt. Was the puck knocked in with a high stick (which in the case of scoring means did the stick meet the puck above the crossbar)?

In football it should be easier. And in a game where goals are few and far between, and where most of them are easily visible, it should be very rare. In hockey they dont even have to employ a system whereby a team is punished for making a false challenge. I think it should be less so in football. I think with football there would be little need to make a stoppage to review. Employ a goal judge and a video goal judge. Do not count fouls or offside. Even in the goal review. Those are ref's jurisdiction. If they are missed, they are missed. Does the ball cross the line? That's all. They could give teams a challenge limit after which time they would be penalized for any challenge which was incorrect. Or penalize all incorrect goal challenges. They could regulate it easily. Or don't allow challenges. Have a goal judge at the line. He should catch 99 percent of it. If he is in doubt he can whistle for review. Probably would happen once in a blue moon. I think there are several options, and I think it could be done very quickly.

You obviously know the game better than I do and how the majority of fans would react to something like this. I do think they realistically could keep this quick and simple, and that it would be rare.

Edited June 27, 2010 by jefferiah

[Sir Bandelot]

Having the occasional bad call in a game is normal and players have to accept that. That's part of what we call sportsmen-like conduct. Right or wrong, agree or no, the ref has final authority. Not reduced to some simpering crybaby like we saw the umpire in a recent MLB game. I heard the suck-holes even whined about it in congress...

[jefferiah]

Having the occasional bad call in a game is normal and players have to accept that.

Sure, I can accept that. But there is no reason nowadays why that goal should have been missed. And I see no reason to shake a stick at getting a few more goals called right. Seems reasonable to me. There will still be plenty of bad calls to go around.

Edited June 27, 2010 by jefferiah

[wyly]

In hockey you do it during the next stoppage. I would think it would only make a throw-in, corner kick, goal kick or free kick a few seconds longer....you know if you do the review at that time.

but the next time there is a stoppage in football could be a long time off and it may be when the other team picks the ball out of it's own net...

In hockey there are situations where reviewing a goal can be time consuming. Not to mention the fact that it is usually the league in Toronto that does the review. And some goals are obviously more complex than others. Still though I think it would be ten times easier to review it in euro football than in hockey. Ball is bigger, net is bigger. Hockey has certain fine rules about scoring goals that can be challenging to review as well. Things like:

football has a much much bigger playingsurface so it's hard for a ref to be on the right spot every time plus there are far more players to obscure the view...

Did the puck come off the players skate? If so, did he kick it in or did he redirect it with his skate? A redirect is allowed if you turn your skate. A kicking motion isnt. Was the puck knocked in with a high stick (which in the case of scoring means did the stick meet the puck above the crossbar)?

similar situations occur in football in regards to the ball striking a hand before going in the net, offense or defense, intentional and unintentional, you can watch a replay on that a thousand times and not come up with a definitive answer...

In football it should be easier. And in a game where goals are few and far between, and where most of them are easily visible, it should be very rare. In hockey they dont even have to employ a system whereby a team is punished for making a false challenge. I think it should be less so in football. I think with football there would be little need to make a stoppage to review. Employ a goal judge and a video goal judge. Do not count fouls or offside. Even in the goal review. Those are ref's jurisdiction. If they are missed, they are missed. Does the ball cross the line? That's all. They could give teams a challenge limit after which time they would be penalized for any challenge which was incorrect. Or penalize all incorrect goal challenges. They could regulate it easily. Or don't allow challenges. Have a goal judge at the line. He should catch 99 percent of it. If he is in doubt he can whistle for review. Probably would happen once in a blue moon. I think there are several options, and I think it could be done very quickly.

problem with stopping the games teams will use that as a tactic to stop play for their own benefit...a major tactic is to counter-attack the precise moment when possession is gained, catching the attacking team pressing up and hitting them on a quick break out, the team that losses possession will call for a review the moment they lose the ball preventing an opportunity at the other end...

You obviously know the game better than I do and how the majority of fans would react to something like this. I do think they realistically could keep this quick and simple, and that it would be rare.

FIFA has experimented with various technologies such as sensors in the balls/goals to detect goals but those have been rejected(I don't know why) but for the next WC if my info is correct they will an goal official behind each net whose sole job willl be to signal if the ball completely crosses the line and nothing else...that should help but it won't be perfect...

[wyly]

Having the occasional bad call in a game is normal and players have to accept that. That's part of what we call sportsmen-like conduct. Right or wrong, agree or no, the ref has final authority. Not reduced to some simpering crybaby like we saw the umpire in a recent MLB game. I heard the suck-holes even whined about it in congress...

the WC comes only once every four years, most players never get there and of those that do few get more than one chance at it, and of those even fewer have a chance of winning...yes refs are only human and they make mistakes just like players do but to lose to the ref and not the other team is devastating, these players work their entire lives for this moment I wouldn't classify them as crybabys...

[jefferiah]

football has a much much bigger playingsurface so it's hard for a ref to be on the right spot every time plus there are far more players to obscure the view...

FIFA has experimented with various technologies such as sensors in the balls/goals to detect goals but those have been rejected(I don't know why) but for the next WC if my info is correct they will an goal official behind each net whose sole job willl be to signal if the ball completely crosses the line and nothing else...that should help but it won't be perfect...

Yes I realize it is not easy for the ref to be everywhere, but I am referring to a goal cam. I know there are more players but I do think it would be easier to catch most of these goals.

When its not definitive its not a goal.

I think the goal judge would be a huge improvement. Nothing is ever perfect, but I find it hard to believe that such a goal as we saw today would be missed in such an important global sport.

Handballs are against the rules in any situation, so I would file that under ref's jurisdiction. I dunno. I'll shut up now though, since it's not my game anyways.

Edited June 28, 2010 by jefferiah

[Sir Bandelot]

the WC comes only once every four years, most players never get there and of those that do few get more than one chance at it, and of those even fewer have a chance of winning...yes refs are only human and they make mistakes just like players do but to lose to the ref and not the other team is devastating, these players work their entire lives for this moment I wouldn't classify them as crybabys...

No the fans are the crybabys. The players know that's the game and they can move on.

In the sport I play we have to deal with contentious ref decisions sometimes. There may be times of strong disagreement with what the ref saw. As long as I know the ref is not unfairly biased but doing his best I can live with it. I know in the grand scheme of things, bad calls average out. Clean goals are always obvious. For a screwy goal there's a slight chance it might not get accepted, if the ref thinks they saw something illegal etc. That's the human element.

[jefferiah]

No the fans are the crybabys. The players know that's the game and they can move on.

In the sport I play we have to deal with contentious ref decisions sometimes. There may be times of strong disagreement with what the ref saw.

Sure there has to be a balance between accepting imperfection and trying to improve things. For instance if they had the blind refereeing the soccer matches I am sure you would not say, "...well as long as he is trying" when there is a perfectly simple solution to that problem. I think we disagree on where the balance is. I have no stock in today's match nor any of them really. I just find it incredible that a goal like that could be missed in a pro sport.

Oh yeah...I'm supposed to shut up about this. I forgot pretty quickly about that resolution I guess.

Mmmmm....I know you can never have the perfect microscope. And I fully realize that football fans do not want to see a game where you have to scrutinize everything. But I really think the goal official is a reasonable middle ground at least. So it's nice that FIFA will have that next time around. Though, maybe it's not such a good thing. If this guy makes a mistake I suppose he could end up dead somewhere.

Edited June 28, 2010 by jefferiah

[Wilber]

Got to agree, goals should be subject to review. If it takes a little time to get it right, it would be worth it. Time added on is at the referee's discretion anyway. France qualified for the World Cup because of a goal off a double hand ball that would have never stood if it had been reviewed. Result, France went to South Africa, Ireland stayed home. What's the matter with getting something like that right?

[Sir Bandelot]

Sure there has to be a balance between accepting imperfection and trying to improve things. For instance if they had the blind refereeing the soccer matches I am sure you would not say, "...well as long as he is trying" when there is a perfectly simple solution to that problem. I think we disagree on where the balance is.

Yes it's quite difficult to decide where that balance is. I confess my argument is biased by my personal dislike of technology and the idea that it brings perfection. I enjoy human imperfection, and the innate capability for humans to overcome it, all on their own.

Also that dealing with the concept of injustice, and bravely moving on is character forming. I view the inability of people to effectively deal with error as part of the disease of modern society.

But maybe that's going a long way off from a mere soccer match...

Oh yeah...I'm supposed to shut up about this. I forgot pretty quickly about that resolution I guess.

I don't know what resolution you're talking about, but I appreciate your views and politeness in this debate!

[Wilber]

Yes it's quite difficult to decide where that balance is. I confess my argument is biased by my personal dislike of technology and the idea that it brings perfection. I enjoy human imperfection, and the innate capability for humans to overcome it, all on their own.

In the real world however it is usually the human imperfection part that gets you killed.

[jefferiah]

Yes it's quite difficult to decide where that balance is. I confess my argument is biased by my personal dislike of technology and the idea that it brings perfection. I enjoy human imperfection, and the innate capability for humans to overcome it, all on their own.

Well a goal official like Wyly mentioned would not be technological. But then I also have to admit there is a point to be made about fan whininess and how it could cause the slippery slope Wyly mentioned. I know for certain that a goal official is not going to stop complaints over calls.

Edited June 28, 2010 by jefferiah

[wyly]

Yes I realize it is not easy for the ref to be everywhere, but I am referring to a goal cam. I know there are more players but I do think it would be easier to catch most of these goals.

camera will never happen it's too slow, an official behind the goal is likely all we see...and that should catch hte most obvious errors...

When its not definitive its not a goal.

which is how the ref calls it, they must see the ball cross the entire line or they cannot call a goal, no guessing allowed...a goal official must be only allowed to call it if he sees it, it must be 100% or he calls nothing and lets paly continue...

I think the goal judge would be a huge improvement. Nothing is ever perfect, but I find it hard to believe that such a goal as we saw today would be missed in such an important global sport.

still happens in many sports...

Handballs are against the rules in any situation, so I would file that under ref's jurisdiction. I dunno.

handballs are discretionary calls...the guide is "ball to hand or hand to ball", ball to hand is regarded as unintentional, but hand to ball deliberate...so the ref can make no call and let play continue or a goal to stand or decline it or issue a warning, caution(yellow, or ejection(red) or a penalty...then the ref also has determine if there was an advantage gained and if a player has recklessly raised his arms, watch free kicks and most defenders bring in their arms tight to their body to avoid being called for a hand ball...a ball striking an outstretched arm even if unintentional can result in a penalty but no caution...

and a ref has to consider all those options and make a instant decision. it's a tough job...

I'll shut up now though, since it's not my game anyways.

hell no post away, good discussions are always welcome...

[wyly]

So it's nice that FIFA will have that next time around.

don't quote me on that FIFA decision I've heard two versions, 1-they will do it by 2014 and 2- they're condsidering it for 2014...

Though, maybe it's not such a good thing. If this guy makes a mistake I suppose he could end up dead somewhere.

ya I thought about that, he'll need protection, I remember growing up going to local senior hockey games and the goal judge was in wire cage for his own protection...

and even with goal judges goals will be missed, with the speed that ball can come in at and the number of bodies sometimes in the net on and around the goal line there will still be disputes...

[wyly]

Yes it's quite difficult to decide where that balance is. I confess my argument is biased by my personal dislike of technology and the idea that it brings perfection. I enjoy human imperfection, and the innate capability for humans to overcome it, all on their own.

which puts you into agreement with FIFA they are very reluctant to introduce technology, technology and reviews will only slow the match down...FIFA prefers to improve officiating...adding goal officials would do that but I understand the reluctance to do that as well....

[jefferiah]

bowling, darts, snooker and curling in his mind were activities that required technical skills but not sports in the true sense...

I agree with this assessment as well. And then there is poker which gets coverage on sports networks. Poker!!!

[wyly]

to clarify the missed goal today there was no error made by ref or the assistant ref they were in spots they should have been, the velocity that the ball was hit and how quickly it rebounded out would have made it very difficult to judge at a distance on ground level with certainty, if the officials are not 100% certain they cannot call a goal...millions of us with overhead multiply angle and slow mo camera shots see everything perfectly...

contrast that with the missed offside call in the Argentina Mexico match, the assistant ref absolutely blew it...but in the WC refs are judged on their performance as well it's unlikely that AR will be back for any more games...

[RB]

In a game where a team generally scores no more than 2 goals, getting goals right should be very important.

I hope soccer is able advance and embrace technology, most sports are making allowance to challenge points via use of cameras - I am making reference to the England game clearly denied a critical goa. Anyway they were not convincing enough in their game against Germany who deserved to move on. England were outplayed and outrun, what a major disappointment - they were not in the same league as Germany.

[SF/PF]

they worry about the proverbial slippery slope, first goals, then fouls, then offside...

The thing about bringing in video replay for just goals is that it covers such a tiny percentage of the controversial decisions in the sport as a whole. Offside, I would think, would be the officiating decision that accouns for the lions share of controversy.

plus fifa has always tried to maintain consistency from the lowest levels of competition to the top, that rules and officiating be the same everywhere...

I tend to agree with FIFA on the importance of that.

[SF/PF]

I agree for the most part my only concern that it slows down the game, even the best video system will not catch everything and some things only the Ref will see, do they use the video for those situations? do you stop play after a possible goal to look at the video while the defending teams counters and possibly score themselves?

Exactly. I remember this same debate about bringing in video replay to the CFL. While it has helped reduce the number of errors, it quite clearly does slow the game down consistently.

Its not as noticable when watching on TV since they just cut to commercials anyway, but when you're at the stadium watching the officials discuss the play amongst themselves and the challenging coach, then the referee run over to the video booth and stand with his head in the video booth for 5 minutes, then run back onto the field to deliver his decision, it regularly eats up 10 minutes. Almost every video review in the CFL quite literally destroys the flow of the game.

And if it can do that to a game with a fairly disjointed flow in the first place, I can only imagine what it could do to soccer.

[Shady]

I am appalled with the rank nationalism, and the supposed respect of laws and referees - as if an ulterior power can decide a victor.

I tend to agree. The idiotic nationalism of the World Cup is a thousand times worse than even the Olympics. And the officiating makes it hard to take the games seriously. I've been watching much of the tournament so far, and for the most part, enjoying it. But the officiating has gotten to the point of absurdity. There's no replay of anything, even when everyone in the stadium knows that the incorrect call has been made. And referees don't have to answer any questions after the games as to why they made certain decisions. Until FIFA corrects this situation, soccer will never take off in North America. It's far too frustrating.

[Shady]

I can only imagine what it could do to soccer.

Provided they just used it for reviewing goals, it would make the game better.