FIFA to again explore 'goal-line technology' after blown World Cup officiating (updated)
Maybe it's just us, and by "us" we mean the US -- a country accustomed to using technology as a means to validate human officiating during our professional sporting events. As such, it came as a shock to Yanks, many of whom were watching international soccer football for the first time, to learn that FIFA had no such system of checks and balances in play at what is without a doubt the Earth's most important sporting event: the World Cup. In particular, the USA, England, and Mexico teams suffered severely at the hands of FIFA referees... and the tournament hasn't even reached the quarter-finals. Today, FIFA President Sepp Blatter apologized to England and Mexico for refereeing mistakes that helped eliminate the teams from the competition. Importantly, he said that FIFA would "reopen the file" on the use of video technology when the rule-making panel meets in Wales next month, adding that it would be "nonsense" not to consider such changes. Let's just hope that a solution can be applied to keep the game beautiful without turning it into some kind of stuttering bureaucracy played by men in short trousers. Regardless, surely it's time to inject a little proven technology into the game instead of relying upon the hand of god to guide FIFA's officials?
Update: The New York Times has a more detailed account of Blatter's statement that specifically excludes consideration of "video replay." According to the NYT, Blatter said, "The only principle we are going to bring back for discussion is goal-line technology. For situations like the Mexico game, you don't need technology." Okaaay, then what's the solution Sepp? Afterall, it was the video replay that instantly showed the world that Argentina's Carlos Tevez was offsides when scoring against Mexico, something your officials on the field missed completely.
[Image courtesy of iA]
Update: The New York Times has a more detailed account of Blatter's statement that specifically excludes consideration of "video replay." According to the NYT, Blatter said, "The only principle we are going to bring back for discussion is goal-line technology. For situations like the Mexico game, you don't need technology." Okaaay, then what's the solution Sepp? Afterall, it was the video replay that instantly showed the world that Argentina's Carlos Tevez was offsides when scoring against Mexico, something your officials on the field missed completely.
[Image courtesy of iA]
It's part of the game. Sometimes you get lucky and sometimes you don't. Just stop trying to change it every chance you get.
@Techno1q Absolutely agreed. Refs are paid to make their best judgements regarding calls on the playing field. If a ref is found to consistently make bad calls, boot the ref, not the system. What motivation does a ref have to make the right call the first time if he knows he's likely to be doublechecked?
@Techno1q But of course the North Americans need to complain right? As if it would have made much differente when would drop out.
The only good teams in America are Brazil, Argentina and Mexico. DOT
@Techno1q John Cleese explains:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sD_8prYOxo&feature;=player_embedded
@Techno1q
Games should not be decided by the ineptitude of the ref, technology has been brought into games like Rugby and Tennis and it takes mere seconds for the refs decision to be backed up or otherwise. In cases like the England Germany match just 2 days ago that decision could have completely changed the game (not saying it would, we played truly awfully) that is NOT a refs call to make and the game is ruined for millions of fans across the world.
We need to stop hanging on to an archaic system and start accepting that technology can make the game better and fairer.
I'd like to see a chip/piece of metal in the ball, so that you can quickly tell if the ball passed the goal line or not. It's not really hard to do, either.
However, in-game replays could kill the gameplay with their interruptions, so I'm not sure about that.
@Techno1q
If the percentage of blown calls were low then your explanation of "just part of the game" would be acceptable. Low, like less than .5%. What's the percentage now? 5% 10%? It's way too high.
My biggest complaint about the game though is the flopping. It's the only sport I know where it seems like the object of the game is who can pretend they're the biggest pussy. I'm used to watching American Football where if a stretcher is brought on the field it's likely because a player has lost the ability to walk. When he is taken off the field he goes to the hospital, not 3 feet off the field, hop up and run over to his coach letting him know he's ready to go back in immediately.
@DylanUK
I don't know...it could have an effect. If England had tied up the game, they may have not felt the need to press as many players, and leave more to hang back and play defense to prevent further Germany scoring. They still most likely would've lost, but to say that evening the score would not have changed the style of the play is to be completely ignorant to the dynamics of soccer.
@sweet greggo part deux
Couldn't agree more. I love soccer...it's a fantastic game.
But watching it for the World Cup makes you feel like you're watching a pageant for tweens. Everything is a cry-worthy event. Ouch, someone lightly brushed me or ow! I half missed the ball and fell on my ass. Now I'm going to lay here in fetal position sobbing till the ref hands the other team a yellow and makes it all better.
It's disgusting. I say let em play and be a man about it.
@Endadget Yeah, all those players taking dives dont kill the speed and rhythm of it now.
Why the hell were these comments downranked?
@Techno1q @rmcray08 @Mr w00t
They are actually valid points.
This is Football (soccer to you yanks and here for aussies).
One of the best things is that you can "fake" an injury to get a penalty/free kick/yellow card opponent at the risk of losing ball possesion.
And it is great when you notice the replay's of the fake's and the actual injuries. Remember Rivaldo at the corner ... lolz!
@jrm125
It happens in every sport. You cant even touch a basketball player without being called a foul on. In rugby errr american football you cant even touch a reciever without being called for ibterferance yet its a contact sport. If you apply technology, the game would be hours linger as each side would bitch about certain calls n ask to be reviewed causing in delays n players getting "cold". That results in injuries.
@Endadget id rather have a truly fair game with interruptions than see any team get shafted. Football needs this system. Tennis @ wimbledon has this.
@Endadget
I think the flow of the game will remain the same. It's feigning injuries and players diving which makes the game stutter at the moment. And that's down to the refs.
@Techno1q
I also think that instant replays, or at least two more referees, are way over due. And it's certainly not only the US who thinks that, as football is the only major european sport I can think of that hasn't implemented instant replays yet.
On then matter of players faking, I also agree, but there's a couple of things to keep in mind. First, most players want to be absolutely sure that they're 100% fit to continue, as even a small loss in preformance might cost you a goal and the match. This means that players will take their time even after small hits, which will look like faking. Second, they are proffesional players who'll do almost anything to win. Thus, I think referees should take a harder line on faking, as as long as players are allowed to do it, and gain a advantage through it, they will. Only when it's no longer tolerated will it go away, like hooking in hockey.
@JonE
sorry but instant replay is never going to happen. Soccer is an always moving sport, and that's part of the beauty of the game. In the picture for this article, it's hardly a goal since the ball has to be completely over the line. In fact, if you ask FIFA what they think of it... They'll tell you they love the critizizm and it's part of soccer. I mean, this happens in every world cup, and it's been great so far. The ideas were proposed a looong time ago, it's just the fact that it would slow down the game.
@chrisrottan Psst rugby and american football are not the same. No where near the same and will never be the same.
@deliteguy I don't think it would slow down the game at all. Watching on the BBC or ITV, the commentators see the replay within a matter of seconds. So instead of the players swarming around the referee's in protest of a bad call for a couple of minutes, the team manager can issue a formal protest right a away, the referees can run to the side of the pitch and look at a monitor with all the appropriate video angles already cued up and ready to view.
And football is not as free flowing as everyone seems to say it is. The ball is touched out of play on the side lines, for throw-ins, then you have goal kicks, free kicks, corner kicks (which some teams take ages to set up for), and the occasional player squirming around on the grass, yellow cards, red cards, etc. You could make a rule to challenge only for questionable goals and offsides that aren't properly called that result it goals. From what I've seen, the typical game of football usually has between 3-5 goals in the 90 minutes, and 95% of the balls that end up in the back of the net are clear cut goals.
You could allow teams 1 challenge per half, again only on goals and offsides that aren't called that result in goals, so you maintain the pace of the game. There are plenty of ways to implement a goal line system and an instant replay system that would definitely not "ruin the game."
Hockey, for example, uses goal line technology, and it works. Head coaches can challenge a goal, and nothing else. They can't challenge penalties, offisides, etc., only voice their disagreement with the referee's call. Why would this not work with football?
@chrisrottan
Well, that's not how it works in other sports, it seldom takes a minute. The fourth referee, or a dedicated new one, could have feeds to the cameras above goals, which would already solve the unclear goals. Also, considering how long a process it is for a eleven-meter to be shot, taking half a minute to make sure that it's justified doesn't seem like that big a sacrifice.
@Techno1q Wrong. If a guy scores a goal, he and the team should be credited for the goal. Not a non-goal because some guy didnt get a clear view or because he was looking elsewhere. A goal is a goal. Instant replay now!!!
@BrianK
That's quite my point, I'm saying the dynamic of the game WOULD have been changed, going into the second half 2-2 could have made all the difference to the English team. Thus the ref's/linesman's appalling call may have single-handedly knocked us out of the world cup.
Now please be aware thus is a lot of if's and maybe's, out performance had been bad right through the group stages, and germany out-played us the entire match. But these bad calls should not be a factor in my argument, or the argument of anyone else, they SHOULD NOT EXIST.
It has been said already but the game is not a single flowing entity, it is stopped all the time, and to say goal line tech would break up the dynamic of the game when after a goal is scored all players have to return to their positions and the game starts again from kickoff is totally absurd.
@JonE
The picture is from the England-Germany game, the ball was nearly a foot over the line. And for the record the head of fifa thinks fans love to "debate ref's decisions" just about the entire rest of Fifa, along with just about every player, manager and coach and most of the actual "fans" want to see this tech in the game.
Implement a replay system just like the one the NHL employs. It's for goals only and every goal can be reviewed. There is plenty of time between the goal being scored and the restart to do this. This would have righted the wrong call in the Mexico-Argentina game and the U.S.-Slovenia game. As for the England-Germany game, with the knowledge that the goal could be disallowed, the referee could have felt safe awarding a goal and letting the replay sort it out.
However, this is not enough to fix what's wrong with soccer. FIFA needs at least one more roaming referee and perhaps even two. The ref is almost never within less than 15 yards of a play, and usually far more than that, too far to make accurate calls consistently.
Secondly, FIFA should implement an injury rule. If you are on the ground for an injury for longer that say 30 seconds, you have to sit out for 5 minutes. Either that or ditch the running clock. The time wasting and gamesmanship is what is killing soccer. I am tired of seeing all of the flopping and delaying. Just play the game! It could be such a beautiful, fast-paced game (as evidenced in many of the 3rd group games, notable US-Algeria), but too often a team scores and then tries to waste the remaining time.
@jrm125
you seen people get injured, perhaps a broken leg in kickboxing for example and they try to stand up as fast as possible to get back in the match and then they make the injury 200% worse.
if i was making footballers money, i wouldn't risk my carer getting up to fast.
i dont have a problem with a player taking his time to get up, but players jumping on the floor after a good tackle hoping the ref didn't have a good angle of view. i wouldn't pee on them if they were on fire.
@DylanUK
How many times have you Brits lost to the Germans in major events? What's your excuse going to be next time?
@E71
Don't be so dumb. No one is saying that the Disallowed goal was an excuse for the poor performance but if you know anything about sport you will know that it is moments like that which can tip the balance. With that particular incident England would have scored twice in a matter of minutes to bring the game back equal moments before half time. Psychologically this could have been an enormous boost for the England players and a huge weight on the minds of the German players. Now no one is saying that England would have won but we will never know what the outcome would have been. Mexico were in a similar position. They were playing quite well at 0-0 and then up pops Tevez clearly offside (not even a goal keeper between him and the goal) and the goal is allowed to stand! Now Mexico are incensed and a goal down which could easily have been the reason they lost (But again we will never know) The US also had a couple of very bad decisions go against them. The Goal line tech instantly notifies the ref that the ball has gone in the goal so it would have a positive impact on the flow of the game rather than a negative one and the replays for other decisions can be accessed almost instantly by the 4th Ref so again would be quicker than dealing with a bunch of angry mexicans!
Don't mis-understand the anger at the disallowed England goal as an excuse, Pretty much every England fan is fully aware that it was not the sole reason for the loss and that the Players, the FA, the Premier league and the Manager are all more to blame. This dos not mean that the situation does not need sorting out though.
@Endadget "could kill the gameplay with their interruptions"
You mean like pretending to be injured and waste 3min of overtime?
@Endadget That chip-in-the-ball already exists. It was planned to be used at the 2006 world cup but was not because they felt it was not ready. Now it is ready for primetime but FIFA still decided against it for this world cup. Its called "the system Blatter" where fat, old, corrupt men (who likely never kicked a ball) decide over the worlds favourite sport.
@jrm125 Apparently you're more used to sports where you play with heavy armor, pads, helmets, shield, sword...
Go play only with a plaque on your shin running with all you got then have someone kick your ankles with a metal spiked shoe then see what happens.It's NOT whining. Beckham, Ballack, Pilro, Elano and a whole team of multi-millionaire stars are out of the games just because they hurt SO BAD! You really don't know what you're talking about
@Techno1q
PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE! Who cares anyways? Soccer is an awful sport. At least hockey is exciting, nothing happens in soccer. And before someone throw the "YOU AMERICANS HAVE BASEBALL, WAY MORE BORING!", i agree, but baseball isn't the topic of discussion.
Getting ready to be downranked because i have to like what the rest of the world likes in 3......2......1......
@Leobons
No, I played soccer all the way through college. You don't act like a pussy, you keep playing. Nowhere but the World Cup does it get taken to this extreme.
If someone's hurt...sure, they should lay there in a ball. But if you somehow missed the 30 second intervals between which a guy would barely graze another player, fall down, curl up, get carried off the field on a stretcher and then jump up in exhilaration immediately after...then you clearly weren't watching the same WC as me.
They're acting like massive pussies and spoiling the game.
@jrm125 When you're playing with your friends, it's way different than professional football where you play hard, really hard.
That problem is also because FIFA won't allow technology. Sometimes it hurts and sometimes it doesn't and a lot of times the other player deserves to be red carded which is a huge advantage to the other team so that's why there are sometimes faking and also sometimes they want to delay the game so they can keep the score. They should also stop the clock. Truly, to me, it's all FIFA's fault and their President who can''t keep the ball in the air for more than 2 kicks
I think a lot of people herejust don't understand the sport, or the mentality of the sport, frankly.
Do they refs make terrible calls? Of course. But adding refs don't necessarily solve the problem. If you had been following soccer (which sounds like 99% of you don't), they actually experimented with having 2 refs. It did nothing, because the other ref would typically defer to the ref making the call.
Slowing down the pacing of the game with replay-watching is a big deal, especially for players. Because when you get towards the end of the game, stoppages between corner kicks and throw-ins are really short, because players are rushing to get the ball in. Conversely some fake injuries to drag out injury time, but if they do that excessively they get yellow-carded (ditto for bad flops). And people are severely downplaying how replays slow a game down, to the point of delusion. If you've seen NFL replays and how long they take, how much longer the 4th quarter takes in NBA due to the added replay reviews, you can't say with a straight face that replay monitoring doesn't severely slow down the game.
Replays only for goals would still severely impact the pacing, because of the multitude goal attempts from corners kicks, centering, etc. Heavily disputed foul calls are almost always at the goal anyways, as opposed to mid-field.
Flops and bad calls are a part of any officiated game. Heck Derek Fischer was flopping in the NBA finals. The difference is that goals are far scarcer, so a bad call has more dire ramifications. And there isn't a simple fix to the issue without dramatically changing the dynamics of the game.
I think the easiest fix would be to standardize the calls. Make them go to a class, show them a play, then see how all the refs would call it. Dismiss/throw out the refs that make the poor calls. FIFA refs have dramatically different views on what should/shouldn't be called, and that's the greater issue.
@Techno1q So bad officiating is part of a game? That is some seriously epic logic right there. Can I get a job where doing a bad job is part of the job requirement and my boss thinks that its all in a days work.
Here's a thought. When something is important and we have the technology to make sure that human error can be eliminated or at least mitigated don't we owe it to the players to make sure it gets done right. And yes I'm an American. I don't care about either type of football, be it international or American. I do care about folks who work their *** off to get where they are, only to be screwed over because of human error. The Olympics are almost 100% monitored by sensors and you see very few instances of people throwing a temper tantrum over the outcome of a game.
@Mostly everyone up there, except the downranked..
Oh, man.. it's really fun qatching a bunch of american geeks trying to understand the sport.. you just can't..
it's a game man.. get over it.. its played by humans, refereed by humans.. and in some places we humans even experience the sport other than through our flatscreens for the WC...
you cant say its fair or unfair.. if the referee makes a bad call on purpose, boot him.. but often times its just mistakes.. that's just pure luck.. as much as the ball bouncing off a player and going in the net..
that's just how the game is man.. there's no need to change the game so you yanks understand it.. the rest of the world has been enjoying it for decades.. live with it man.. nobody is trying to change the rules of your "World Series".. and by the way there is a reason there is only one country playing that one.. you guys dont live sports the way we do.. dont spoil it for the rest of us.. you already got american football.. leave plain footbal alone
"Godfather" Blatter won't do it. Technology would help render the officiating accurate and fair and destroy his political power game, meaning that he would not be able to pay back with a "protection" of organizations and people who put him (and keep him) in power.
@shishi
They already decided NOT to bring goal line technology for the 2006 WC in Germany. So why would they reconsider now? They will debate over it for a year or two and then do nothing. There might be a chance for a 5th ref but no goal line technology for sure.
except that no camera in the world could have helpt the US soccerboys because the Ref whistled before they scored...
Jup, just as a coleague ahead of me explained - USA were not cheated of anything in the match vs. Slovenia.
@Prometej
not strictly true. The whistle was blown on a non-existent foul. the ref called it wrong. but that's 1000x more forgiveable than what happened to england and mexico.
@roxxor
Look closely at the situation in the penalty box, when the free kick was taken. There is clearly a lot of pushing and shoving. The ref had two options - whether to call a foul on the attacking or the defending team. So, it could have been a penalty kick, as well, but refs tend to judge the attacking side harsher in situations like this. All in all, the whistle was blown seconds before the goal was even scored. It could well also be argued that the goalkeeper just let the US attacker score, for the whistle was blown some time ago.
@Prometej
not all fouls committed by the defending team in the penalty box result in penalty kicks. i wasn't arguing that the goal should be awarded, i was arguing that the whistle shouldn't have been blown in the first place. whether this still would have resulted in a goal is a moot point.
@Prometej rewatch that video in slow-mo, and find me a definite foul that the US committed. on the other hand, there were at least three fouls committed by Slovenia.
there was also the BS off-sides call that disallowed a goal in the game against Algeria. luckily Donovan ended up scoring in the 91st minute anyway, but if he hadn't we wouldn't have made it out of the group.
@Prometej Perhaps you should see things for yourself and not have your colleague explain it too you. It WASN'T an offside.. and I'm not an American
@Leobons
If you would have truly read my posts, you would see I haven't mentioned any offsides. The call was strictly about an asummed penalty box foul, nothing more, nothing less. Where you drew the offside from, god only knows.
@Techno1q
erm...no
They do it in Tennis, let's do it for Soccer
@DeviantmacG
Yeah but football has traditionally been a poor man's sport no need for expensive equipment just a ball/can and a couple of goal markers that's why it's so popular. I don't think it can be compared to Tennis or Cricket the traditionally upper class sports.
If the tech costs the $300,000 per pitch they are quoting many countries will not be able to implement it and hence will not be able to comply with FIFA competition rules.
@fais There already exists a fourth and fifth official, there's no reason one of them couldn't just be given a couple screens with the feed from whichever cameras are available, give them 5-10 seconds to make a decision and if the replay isn't conclusive, let the referee's decision stand.
@fais
you still don't need all those fancy technology and referees to play soccer, or tennis, basketball, ruby, football... but in the case of professional level, these thing help the game relatively "fair"
@qbgabe12
This fairness thing is a basic misconception about football. It's not supposed to be a fair, honest and beautiful game, it's meant to be ruthless, ugly and mean. Why do you think there's only one ref and a couple of assistants to watch 22 guys?