World Cup 2010

[Wilber]

For what is supposed to be the biggest sporting event in the world, the officiating has been abysmal. To have this many bad calls involving so many important goals in so many important games in one event is pathetic. Time FIFA joined the 20th century. They can think about joining the 21st century in another fifty years or so.

[jefferiah]

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...

I would like to address this point on its own.

I would say if the ball ends up in the other teams net, do the review then. And count both goals. Would the second goal have happened if the first goal were counted in the first place???? I dont know. But the way it stands, the second goal will count anyway and the first one won't. I'd say this would be an improvement.

[jefferiah]

having ref'ed a few games in my life I can tell you it's impossible to see a ball cross the plane of the goal line with 100% accuracy from a distance

No doubt about it. I don't think you have to ref a game to realize the common sense behind that. The no goal yesterday was certainly not the ref's fault.

[jefferiah]

consistancy in officating is the prime concern in football whether during one game or over many games in a tournament

Actually I think the NHL officiating in this regard is a concern to many fans. "Letting the boys play" in the third period is not exactly a pleasant thing for a team down a goal which took the bulk of penalties in the first two periods on borderline calls which resulted in power play goals for the opponent. And it often seems like there is a different rule book for popular star players.

[wyly]

For what is supposed to be the biggest sporting event in the world, the officiating has been abysmal. To have this many bad calls involving so many important goals in so many important games in one event is pathetic. Time FIFA joined the 20th century. They can think about joining the 21st century in another fifty years or so.

52 games and only 2 calls have had much discussion...that's not bad at all...

[Shady]

52 games and only 2 calls have had much discussion...that's not bad at all...

Unfortunately it's more than just a couple of calls.

[Shady]

World Cup referees taking shots over blown calls

On Sunday, teams from England and Mexico both were victims of bad calls that influenced the outcome of the games. The U.S. also was hurt by poor officiating.

"I think it's been one of the worst-refereed World Cups that we've seen over the last four or five," said Marcelo Balboa, who played 127 games for the U.S., including three World Cups, and now is a commentator for Futbol de Primera, the U.S.-based Spanish-language radio network.

Link

There were 5 or 6 bad calls during the previous round. And that's not even including the horrible way France qualified for the World Cup.

[wyly]

I would like to address this point on its own.

I would say if the ball ends up in the other teams net, do the review then. And count both goals. Would the second goal have happened if the first goal were counted in the first place???? I dont know. But the way it stands, the second goal will count anyway and the first one won't. I'd say this would be an improvement.

what will happen is what has been done on a trial basis in europe two extra officials who are responsible for deciding whether a ball has crossed the goal line and nothing else...they raise their flag play stops immediately and the ref only makes the decision whether the goal was achived within the laws of the game...

there will be no camera technology for any other part of the game, it would fundamentally change the way the game is played...

[SF/PF]

Down to the final four, and I'm a happy man! My two teams are in, and my most hated teams are out...

My predictions for the semi-finals..

Netherlands gets by Uruguay in dominant style, but close score.. 2-1 ORANJE!

Germany squeaks by Spain... 1-0 DIE MANNSCHAFT!

[Wilber]

what will happen is what has been done on a trial basis in europe two extra officials who are responsible for deciding whether a ball has crossed the goal line and nothing else...they raise their flag play stops immediately and the ref only makes the decision whether the goal was achived within the laws of the game...

there will be no camera technology for any other part of the game, it would fundamentally change the way the game is played...

Video review has shown that hockey goal judges often make mistakes. It will be no different with soccer. Humans only get to see it once, real time and possibly not from the best angle. You get a split decision from the two judges, the ref has to side with one of them, possibly the wrong one. Let the ref make the final decision including the use of video replay. The fans will see it and know what really happened, why shouldn't the bloody referee? It's a game between two teams, not a test for referees.

There would be fewer screw ups that determine the outcome of games. There is really no good reason not to have video review of contested goals. Teams and fans don't get ripped off and officials don't have to take abuse for a mistake that may have decided the outcome of a game. It's a win win for everyone. How would determining whether a goal really was a goal fundamentally change the way the game is played other than getting it right more often? Time added on is still the refs prerogative. You could limit the number of reviews a team is allowed and if he wants to add time for any reviews that have taken place, that's up to him.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Wilber

[SF/PF]

Video review has shown that hockey goal judges often make mistakes. It will be no different with

There would be fewer screw ups that determine the outcome of games. There is really no good reason not to have video review of contested goals.

Video review really does interrupt the flow of the game. Honestly.. next time you see one in hockey or football, break out the stop watch and see just how much time they eat up. And then consider how often the game changing call is a referee's decision that is non-reviewable... free kicks, penalty kicks, offsides, etc.

I'm not 100% for or against video review, but I don't think it is accurate to suggest that there is no good reason to not bring it in.

[Wilber]

Video review really does interrupt the flow of the game. Honestly.. next time you see one in hockey or football, break out the stop watch and see just how much time they eat up. And then consider how often the game changing call is a referee's decision that is non-reviewable... free kicks, penalty kicks, offsides, etc.

I'm not 100% for or against video review, but I don't think it is accurate to suggest that there is no good reason to not bring it in.

Arguing over whether it is a goal or not interrupts the game. Injuries, real or faked interrupt the game. All kinds of things interrupt the game. Goals are the only thing that decides a game. If you can't get anything else right in a game, at least get that right. I don't believe in third parties making these kinds of decisions as in some other sports. Let it be the refs decision alone but at least give him the same information as Joe Couch Potato sitting in front of his TV with a beer.

What you are saying is it doesn't matter whether the job is done right as long as it is done on time.

Edited July 5, 2010 by Wilber

[Topaz]

There's been a lot of players complaining about the some players and the referees calling and a sport journalist has written his point of view on this. BTW, about a week before the World Cup, I heard a guy say, that the thought some countries would try to pay off the referees. Do you think this is happening? http://g.ca.sports.yahoo.com/soccer/world-cup/news/soccer-cheating-that-s-really-unsportsmanlike--fbintl_ro-cheating070310.html

[wyly]

Video review has shown that hockey goal judges often make mistakes. It will be no different with soccer. Humans only get to see it once, real time and possibly not from the best angle. You get a split decision from the two judges, the ref has to side with one of them, possibly the wrong one. Let the ref make the final decision including the use of video replay. The fans will see it and know what really happened, why shouldn't the bloody referee? It's a game between two teams, not a test for referees.

goal line officials have been used in europe on an experimental basis and they rarely been called into use possibly the most boring job there is...the situation doesn't happen very often...

There would be fewer screw ups that determine the outcome of games. There is really no good reason not to have video review of contested goals. Teams and fans don't get ripped off and officials don't have to take abuse for a mistake that may have decided the outcome of a game. It's a win win for everyone.

fewer screwups?...there was one missed goal...and I don't recall any at the last WC....

How would determining whether a goal really was a goal fundamentally change the way the game is played other than getting it right more often? Time added on is still the refs prerogative. You could limit the number of reviews a team is allowed and if he wants to add time for any reviews that have taken place, that's up to him.

it allows teams to rest, more significantly it allows the team under pressure to regroup or the team attacking to adjust their attack...this is a ninety minute game 120 if there is extra time, being allowed to confer with the coach at every timeout/video review would completely change the game...

fatigue is a component of the tactical game, restricted coaching communication is also a tactical component...

[wyly]

Down to the final four, and I'm a happy man! My two teams are in, and my most hated teams are out...

My predictions for the semi-finals..

Netherlands gets by Uruguay in dominant style, but close score.. 2-1 ORANJE!

Germany squeaks by Spain... 1-0 DIE MANNSCHAFT!

Oranje should go through unless something strange happens, Uruaguay are not that good...tough to call the other match, Spain is better than Argentina who I thought were a bit overrated but Spain hasn't been playing at their best and Germany can be beat as well...it'll be an interesting, will we see our first new WC winner in decades, Oranje vs Spain? or will it be a repeat of the 1974 final Netherlands vs Germany...

[Wilber]

Deleted, double post.

Edited July 5, 2010 by Wilber

[Wilber]

goal line officials have been used in europe on an experimental basis and they rarely been called into use possibly the most boring job there is...the situation doesn't happen very often...

So why do you maintain that a quick video review by the referee will be such a detriment to the game by interrupting its "flow"?

fewer screwups?...there was one missed goal...and I don't recall any at the last WC...

Same question.

it allows teams to rest, more significantly it allows the team under pressure to regroup or the team attacking to adjust their attack...this is a ninety minute game 120 if there is extra time, being allowed to confer with the coach at every timeout/video review would completely change the game...

fatigue is a component of the tactical game, restricted coaching communication is also a tactical component...

Man, you would think there were a lot of goals scored in this game and that all of them were questionable. Restrict it to two challenges per game per team. That would cover over 90% of the goals that are scored in this game, let alone the questionable ones. Make it only at the referees discretion if you will, just don't make him the goat and a team the victim because of a decision on a goal he would willingly change if he had the opportunity to take a couple of minutes to make sure he got it right when he may have some doubts.

Fatigue is a component in many other games, subjecting parts of them to possible video review hasn't changed that. Do you think reviews of disputed line calls in tennis should be abolished?

[wyly]

So why do you maintain that a quick video review by the referee will be such a detriment to the game by interrupting its "flow"?

goal official that only signals if the ball has crossed the line will cause no interruption....leaving this up to the coaches to decide when to review will lead to abuse, it will never be a "quick review" I've seen questionable situations where even multiple camera angles did not give a clear answer

Same question.

it isn't the huge problem the media makes it out to be...

Man, you would think there were a lot of goals scored in this game and that all of them were questionable. Restrict it to two challenges per game per team. That would cover over 90% of the goals that are scored in this game, let alone the questionable ones. Make it only at the referees discretion if you will, just don't make him the goat and a team the victim because of a decision on a goal he would willingly change if he had the opportunity to take a couple of minutes to make sure he got it right when he may have some doubts.

uncalled/missed goals are a rare event....a missed goal happens far less often than a many other missed or ignored calls/fouls...do you then use video for them too? why not? any one of those calls/fouls could have ultimately resulted in a goal, if you use video reviews for goals then you're only a step away from using them for every other infraction with which the entire game will be altered...

Fatigue is a component in many other games, subjecting parts of them to possible video review hasn't changed that. Do you think reviews of disputed line calls in tennis should be abolished?

football is different than other games the level of fatigue is different, hockey players need much less recovery time between matches than football players, Baseball players(other than the pitcher) need no recovery period between games...ice hockey 60 minutes but with continuous sub reat and rotation and two period breaks..,CFL/NFL play for only a few seconds at a time for a total of about 12.5 minutes per game of which each player may only play 6 minutes per game, two quarter breaks and a half time break...Football games are 90-120 minutes, only three players are subbed per game the remainder must play the entire match and only one halftime break, two for an 120 minute game...fatigue is a crucial in the tactics of a game more so than in most team sports, coaches sub in a fresh player when he thinks an opponent is at the breaking point, normally at about the 70 minute mark...start giving coaches the option for video replay and they'll abuse it gaining rest and regrouping options for their side, as it is now coaches have an assortment of tricks to slow an delay the game they don't need more tools...

the game will change with reviews and more stoppages, just as CFL and NFL now bear little resemblance to their rugby roots...

Edited July 6, 2010 by wyly

[RB]

.... final Netherlands vs Germany...

the spanish eyes are smiling, Spain wins today I am supporting Netherlands otherwise it would be a real feel good to watch Germany in the finals

[wyly]

the spanish eyes are smiling, Spain wins today I am supporting Netherlands otherwise it would be a real feel good to watch Germany in the finals

could be a classic...two sides that love to control the ball, lot's of fire power on both sides, two great attacking midfields, both sides has a top striker who isn't scoring, van Persie and Torres...it all could come down to which manager calls the better game...

many dutch are disappointed they're not meeting the bicycle thieves they were looking forward to avenging '74...they'll have to settle for avenging the inqusition...

Edited July 7, 2010 by wyly

[Wilber]

Either way, it will be a team that has never won before. I like that.

[wyly]

Either way, it will be a team that has never won before. I like that.

not the usual suspects, I like it too, change is good...

[DogOnPorch]

[ironstone]

What's good about soccer is that it's a great sport for kids in that it doesn't require the huge amounts of money like hockey does.The players competing in the World Cup are highly skilled athletes and it's amazing what they can do with the ball.

Now for the bad stuff.The officiating for what is supposedly the most watched sporting event in the world is god-awful to say the least.Then there is the...........DIVING!Depending on your perspective,it's either embarrassing or hilarious.Every team does it.I find it funny to watch in slow motion,the look of agony on their faces is something else .How about the predictable celebration following an actual goal?When the scorer runs ,then slides on his knees,arms spread like Roger Daltrey?

I predict Spain will prevail in the final in what will be a high scoring affair,1-0 over the Netherlands.Sort of like the soccer version of the trap.

I'll take a pass on watching.

[wyly]

What's good about soccer is that it's a great sport for kids in that it doesn't require the huge amounts of money like hockey does.The players competing in the World Cup are highly skilled athletes and it's amazing what they can do with the ball.

Now for the bad stuff.The officiating for what is supposedly the most watched sporting event in the world is god-awful to say the least.Then there is the...........DIVING!Depending on your perspective,it's either embarrassing or hilarious.Every team does it.I find it funny to watch in slow motion,the look of agony on their faces is something else .How about the predictable celebration following an actual goal?When the scorer runs ,then slides on his knees,arms spread like Roger Daltrey?

I predict Spain will prevail in the final in what will be a high scoring affair,1-0 over the Netherlands.Sort of like the soccer version of the trap.

I'll take a pass on watching.

it's bad enough to have the entire forum think you're an idiot but then you go and post something like this and confirm it...

your sports ignorance is out there now for everyone to see...