With the recent USA/Slovenia match and the victory that was robbed due to a horrible call…what does everyone think FIFA could do to improve and avoid these situations in the future?
Obviously instant replays all the time are not a possible solution because it would slow down the pace of the game, and well…this isn’t NFL and having pauses and breaks all the time for commercials and replays is irritating. However, I think that each team should be allowed ONE challenge for these decisive game changing calls. Looking at that replay…the American team was not offsides and did not foul…and the ref did not explain to the players on the field what the call actually was, he just blew his whistle and disallowed the goal.
Is there anything that FIFA can do to avoid these situations? Should the ref have to explain what his call was? Should teams be allowed to challenge one time in a game if a goal is disallowed?
I think they should add another referee to the referee team on the field - the 4th man should sit before a bunch of screens and analyse what he can see from the cameras.
When he sees what he thinks is a false decision of his colleage on the field (for example a blatant fall that was counted as a foul), he tells him by radio.
I would still leave the final word to the man on the field, though.
In return, you could perhaps replace the assistant referees by a telemetric system - each player has an RFID chip at a special position (let’s say, at the backside of his trousers’ waistband), the referee gets a signal by radio when the offside rule is violated and then he blows his whistle.
Bad refereeing is an integral part of any football match, however. We Brits learned to deal with it a long time ago. It’s infuriating, but it’s part of the joy of the game (like the S. Africans and their vuvuzelas).
While I see the value in the Instant Replay calls, as witnessed in Cricket and Rugby (union, not league, I don’t know if league’s gone that way yet), I have to applaud FIFA’s stance on the issue.
(And this is a first for me, so handle with care.)
If it can’t be replicated on every football pitch in the world, it has little or no place on a World Cup Final pitch.
The ‘little or no’ qualification is important, because the pitch in (eg) the Mbombela Stadium is fit for a snooker game, just find a big enough cue, and no dusty pitch in Kenia is ever going to be on par. There are also leagues in this world where referees have to operate without their assistants, making off-side calls entirely on their own.
The principle remains, if they can’t provide ‘technological assistance’ on every pitch where football is played, they’re not going to provide it on the World Cup Final’ pitch.
I’m not sure for how long they’re going to be able to withstand the pressure of gazillion dollar/euro/pound leagues and the ‘need’ for definitive decision, but for the time being, I’m with FIFA.
Please watch your language.
Kids are left here by their parents to find out more about unicycling.
If you/we continue to use such language, nanny software will trip up over this site and prevent new unicyclists from accessing a host of information about their new, chosen sport. And that would be a shame. So, please, while on this forum, check your language?
Please?
Apart from that, you didn’t lose.
You were robbed by a Vegas Dealer masquerading as a referee.
Rather than figure out replays, FIFA should figure out psychometric tests to weed out those whistle-bearers who think the game is going to be all about them.
Got a pm on this already,
and as a relative newbie I will of course comply to what you think is good for the community. I can express myself in other ways, no problem.
Sorry Dave, but I’m afraid we’re going to have to differ on this one.
If the technology is there, why not use it?
Most Rugby Union fans were against using TMO replays when they were introduced.
Cries of “It’ll take up too much time!” and “It’ll disrupt the game!”
Now we wouldn’t be without it.
I think a thirty-second delay is not too much too ask when a crucial match-changing decision has to be made.
It’s a nice idea to say “If it can’t be used on every pitch in the world, then it shouldn’t be used.”
But we all know that’s never going to happen, not just with video replays, but with any aspect of modern play.
Would you have players in upper leagues not be allowed to have three or four changes of kit just because teams in lower leagues can’t afford it?
Would you have Liverpool players go to games by public transport just because the players in Preston North End have to?
If multi-million pound stadiums have the technology to use replays, then use 'em, that’s what I say.
And yes, Rugby League uses instant replays.
I believe they used it before Rugby Union.
Thanx for the response, I’ve had people freak on me when I’ve asked the same thing, so I do appreciate the fact that you understand and can be adult about it.
Agree to disagree works for me, as long as there’s beer.
There are many differences between the way rugby and soccer have been run over the past hundred and something years.
Rule-changes being a main one.
Rugby is constantly niggling at the rules, to the point where teams now regularly book sessions with referees before important games to get up to speed with the particular referee’s interpretation of certain, recently-changed, rules.
While football referees are anything but infallible, cough howardwebb cough, you’d be hard-pressed to find an ‘interpretative difference’ between the way the rules are applied.
In my original post I made the point that they’re never going to get the playing fields level, the dusty patch of ground in Kenia isn’t a smooth-as-silk pitch that is watered before the game to ensure a good playing surface for the multi-million pound stars about to play on it, using balls that probably cost more than the monthly income of said Kenian village, and boots about double the price.
Yeah, there are always going to be discrepancies, yet the inherent simplicity of the game is something that can be preserved, and in my opinion, ideally should.
Refer our beloved unicycles.
While you can have a cHroMo alloyed this and a bi-spokeabillity spanner to do that, you remain on one wheel, with a seat and two pedals.
It looked like the Wembley goal. But this time it is very clear from the TV images that the ball was inside the goal.
I want to repeat my plea for that 4th referee I talked about by the beginning of the thread… or a telemetric system, or both.
We have the technology to avoid such injustice.
Perhaps the game would have taken a different course if it had been a draw by half-time (which it technically was).
I like the one challenge per game idea (and maybe only on goals) and I think just about all sports could use another referee. Look at basketball and American football. There is at LEAST one foul/penalty on every play. I’m not a fan of the 'let them play mentality. In basketball there is so much elbowing and ‘hooking’ now that it looks more like a wrestling match under the basket.
But I don’t get my tail in a bunch about it either. For a long time to come (never say never or always) there will be a human element in sports. Both among the officials and the competitors.
I like the way they have fine tuned instant replays in the NFL. Only so many challenges on certain kind of plays and they cost a time-out if the play is not overturned. Makes asking for a replay at tactical decision. Soccer could do something similar.
Wow I was just over at Wikipedia on instant replay/reviewed calls and I had not realized so many sports were utilizing some form of instant replay/reviewed call. Even bull riding and NASCAR have some form of it.
The rule is very ‘comprehensive’ and costly in Professional Bull Riding:
"A bull rider, a fellow competitor, or a judge may request a replay review by filing a protest to the replay official within 30 seconds of any decision.
Any competitor (it does not have to be the rider who is riding the bull in question, as fellow riders can observe the action and spot fouls by bull or rider) may file the complaint to the replay official by sounding a signal at the arena and pay a fee of $500 to PBR before explaining to the replay official why he is filing the request."
30 seconds to decide if it’s worth $500 to dispute the action.
I love the $500 dollar fee . . . and the “spot any fouls BY BULL or rider”. WTH?
The BULL can do something WRONG?!?! What, too much snot coming out of its nose? Made a side bet with one of the cowboys?
Well, there are variations of football on smaller fields;
Futsal, which is played indoors by 5 players per team, including the goalkeeper
here in Germany, childrens’ games are usually played as “small field football” with 7 players…
In the football league of Vatican city (consisting of 16 teams!), they play on an outdoors small field too, but with 4 field players, just like in futsal.
They also have a national team…
