world cup

FIFA stays silent on referee errors

17 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

17 Comments
Login to comment

Other sports regularly change the laws of the game to react to the new technology. We don’t do it and this makes also the fascination and the popularity of football.

uh no. Just helps me think you all are fools. Probably also easier to keep the games rigged this way.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

" . . . spokesman Nicolas Maingot said . . . 'We obviously will not open any debate. This is obviously not the place for this.'"

So, if not at a new conference, then WHEN and WHERE is a good place for debate?

FIFA considers the matter closed after Sepp Blatter's March Dictate. The FIFA website doesn't offer any room for thoughts or opinions on the matter. And Blatter himself seems entirely unwilling to broach the subject of using technology to preserve the spirit of fairness that gives all games and sports their inherent value -- despite indulging Blatter’s regular indulgence in the technology of instantaneous Twitter updates, as transparent an attempt as their ever was to make oneself appear hip and contemporary.

So, being able to instantly read the banal details of Blatter's mental processes holds more importance than being able to instantly determine whether a goal in international football was fairly scored or not?

Emperor Blatter has proven amply that he his interests do not lie with what is best for international football, but rather with generating cash for his salary though artificially contrived controversy. The emperor needs to be cast from his throne.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We dont want technology in the game if it leads to poetic justice like that controversial decesion against England as they were crushed by Germany.

Put the blame on inadequate linesman, not on the lack of a not needed technological addition.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

as long as FIFA resists instant replay for goals, there will always be suspicion on match-rigging in soccer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Emperor Blatter has proven amply that he his interests do not lie with what is best for international football, but rather with generating cash for his salary though artificially contrived controversy.

LFRAgain - you hit the nail on the head. Blatter thinks controversy is good for business.

“Other sports regularly change the laws of the game to react to the new technology. We don’t do it and this makes also the fascination and the popularity of football.”

That quote is pretty much an admission that that is the true reason.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“Sepp Blatter should announce tomorrow that video replay will be implemented or he needs to resign,” Hiddink said.

This man needs a medal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't know or really care much for Soccer (football) but if they are still not using video replay on controversial calls then they are really in the stone age!

Even Sumo uses video replay, when the judges are not in agreement about who hit the ground first they all gather on the dohyō and look at the replay footage on hand held devices.

And people complain about Japan needing to join the 21 century I think FIFA needs to join the 20th.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"When video technology was debated—and rejected—again this year, Blatter said it was too expensive to impose worldwide on FIFA’s 208 members, would break up the flow of games, undermine referees’ authority and was not always conclusive."

Ludicrous arguments. Yes, if they have to stop for EVERY play in the game to check, it might hamper the flow of the game SLIGHTLY, but my guess is that it would only be used for very tight decisions, like in the unallowed goal for England, or other such plays when so much is on the line. Would it break up the flow of the game any more than when both teams are sitting there arguing with the refs? or when some idiot on the field fakes a bullet to the head when no one is even close to hitting him? if the ref had a mere two seconds to check the video replay he could simply red-card the idiot lying on the ground with the massive imaginary head wound (at which point the guy would probably jump up and plead, forgetting about faking it), and would save at least a minute or so in injury time. And if this guy is suggesting that video technology is 'not always conclusive' but that a ref's naked eye IS, he's a moron.

And anyone saying that such errors add to the 'fun' of the game, I ask if you enjoyed the unallowed goal, and if it was charming that a Mexican player was called off-side and their goal not allowed, either. Sure, some of the stunts the players pull add to the heat of the game, okay... but errors like these only add insult to injury, and Blatter is all the worse for this.

I mean, the only way I can TRULY see not introducing video tech into the game being harmful is if there is bribery going on.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Technology would help stop match rigging, which is one reason why the corrupt FIFA organisation is against it.

I don't agree with Dunga that controversy adds to interest in the game. When blatant errors, which could be avoided, are allowed to stand it makes a mockery of the sport. Why bother watching a "sport" where cheats go unpunished and where goals are arbitrarily disallowed? The rules should be changed to restore fair play and Blatter and his money-grabbing son should be kicked out of FIFA.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hurtado

"We dont want technology in the game if it leads to poetic justice like that controversial decesion against England as they were crushed by Germany."

Who's this "we" you're talking about? You got a mouse in your pocket? Or are you presuming to speak for the entire fanbase of Germany?

So, let me see if I've got your position correct: “If technology to prevent illegal calls by field judges gets in the way of a 44-year old thirst for revenge, then we don’t want it.” If that’s the case, it’s no wonder Germany keeps finding itself on the losing end of grudge wars.

Besides, you’re failing to grasp the actual meaning of "poetic justice." The controversy behind the 1966 World Cup win by England was an issue of whether or not the ball had actually entered the goal. Grainy replays to this day still leave the question unanswered, and an Oxford “study” of old footage claims that the goal missed actually being a legitimate goal by a scant 6cm.

England’s shot in the 2010 World Cup game was CLEARLY in the goal area, no confusion, not second-guessing, no Oxford University studies needed. It was a goal. And it was summarily ignored by the ref. That’s not poetic justice. That’s gross negligence on the part of a ref whose only job is to enforce the rules of the game.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I just read an updated article elsewhere about how FIFA is more adamant than ever that they are correct, and that the "only error made was allowing a reply to be shown on the big screen", which they also said they plan to remedy in future games. UNBELIEVABLE the lengths they will go to avoid doing what's right!

On the plus side, a whole lot of calls of corruption and bribery are on the rise, which might cause FIFA to back-step slightly just to quell such calls. There have already been calls of bribery and bid-rigging in terms of who will get the 2018/2022 venues, so I doubt FIFA needs the situation to grow worse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

LFRAgain

England lost. Get over it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

FIFA 'is' behind in the technology department. I would have love to see the Germans beat the English at dead even, that would have ended all this controversy and shut those english fans up. They probably might have beated them, but not with so much ease. As for the point of rigged matches in FIFA, one ex NBA ref Tim Donaghy proved he can rigged matches even with instant replay technology present. Anyhow, FIFA is in the same position as that other dinosaur sports league known as MLB which itself hasn't adopted the instant replay technology either to the shock of many baseball fans and the dismay of pitcher Armando Galarraga. Adopt the technology next WC to avoid anymore controversy and embarrassment, FIFA!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Soccer moves too fast for it to stop for replay review. Boytom line: England got owned by Germany which comes as no surprised. They moved into the knockout round behind the USA, a country whose citizens don't even take soccer seriously. That is an indication of just how bad the Brits are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RR: "Soccer moves too fast for it to stop for replay review."

As I said, do you think it would take any less time than when they are surrounding a player moaning and grabbing at his obviously unhurt angle, during which the audience gets to see several replays, until the player finally gets up two minutes later as though nothing ever happened? Now... do go ahead and tell us about how soccer has no time for things like this. An instantaneous review, which the fans got within seconds, would take far less time than the players all arguing in circles around the ref.

USINinJapan2: "England lost. Get over it"

I'm rather surprised at you. It's not England losing that most people are upset about, clearly, or are you suggesting the Mexicans are angry England lost? Clearly there are problems. I for one was complaining about the exact same thing from the first German match, when the ridiculous Spanish ref was making bad calls which could clearly be seen as wrong in the replays (and which took at least half a minute of arguing with him for him to tell everyone off, as to... wait... how long would it take him to look at a monitor?). So, I hope you're not suggesting I was cheering for the Germans in one game, and the English in another by complaining about the obvious errors in both games.

Boom!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The England goal wouldn't have needed a replay and the flow of the game wouldn't have changed. The technology is available for it to be used in the rest of the tournament.

However in other key decisions, the Henry goal, the Mexico offside it's a bit less clear cut. What happens if a referee awards a penalty, the replay shows it's not. Drop ball in the 18 yard box? What happens if a team is attacking, the referee doesn't award a penalty, the defending team hoofs the ball up the pitch to the forward who scores. 5 seconds later after the not given penalty there's a goal. Twenty seconds after that the video official decides it was a penalty... The vast majority of contentious issues do not end up with the ball out of play and that's where it gets messy.

Also, you can spend ages looking at videos and not make a decision. One side it's clear, the other side it's not. What do you then?

Basically, what I'm saying is that technology should absolutely be used in instances that it doesn't interrupt the flow of the game (and I would have said the same if it had been Germany who scored) but in other instances they need to work out if it's possible to bring it in without impacting the game. It can't be a straight yes/no for video replays until there has been a lot of work done on the matter and they can fully deal with the negatives.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USNinJapan2,

My irritation has nothing to do with England losing. I'm not English and I'm not a fan. It's about establishing simple safeguards against not referee error, but referee incompetence. But thanks for asking. Your recommendation to “get over it” has been duly noted and filed accordingly, Sparky.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites