June 30, 2010
It was all so simple, Blatter, and by extension Fifa were opposed to goalline technology, and that was that. No discussion, no ifs, no buts and certainly no experiments. Fifa even went as far as to release the following statement following their 124th Annual General Meeting in March.
“The IFAB has decided not to pursue goal-line technology and to no longer continue experiments in that area,”- Jerome Valke, Fifa Secretary General
Well, that seems fairly conclusive, wouldn’t you agree?
However, in what proved to be his only notable contribution to the English cause during the World Cup, Frank Lampard could well have reopened the door on goalline technology. After witnessing Lampards’ phantom goal against the Germans, Blatter has decided that some kind of technology wouldn’t be such a bad thing after all. During a media briefing in Johannesburg today, Blatter stated:
“It is obvious that after the experience so far in this World Cup it would be a nonsense to not reopen the file of technology at the business meeting of the International FA Board in July.”
Blatter has also announced that there will be a drive to improve the overall standard of high level refereeing, but the big story here is Blatter’s sudden U-turn on some kind of additional help for match officials (maybe technology, maybe additional officials like in the Europa League). Obviously something needs to be done, in an industry where seasons and careers can hinge on a referees decision it seems like a madness that the officials don’t have all the resources they need.
November 20, 2009
I had hoped I’d be able to discuss another topic in today’s blog, but the Ireland-France row seems to have taken another turn. I guess it’s only right for me to give my two penneth.
It would seem the Irish FA are not prepared to let the dust settle following Henry’s handball, and even the Irish government are getting involved in the argument. Now as much as I sympathise with them over the incident, and I agree that losing in that manner is a travesty, I think calling for a replay is somewhat ridiculous.
If FIFA were to agree to this request, the sport of football would be thrown into chaos, and that is something which cannot be allowed to happen. I also believe it is dangerous for politicians to start meddling in sport, which I’ll come on to later.
First thing for me to say here is I don’t blame the Irish FA for being angry. I can certainly understand them questioning the referee’s ability to officiate the game, but calling for a replay is taking things too far. And surely they know what the ramifications would be if their request is granted by FIFA. We’d have replays every week! Manchester United would never lose another game, as every time they do Fergie criticises the referee. Imagine if they had the power to call for a replay?
World football would go into meltdown if this precedent was set by FIFA, and it is naive in the extreme of the FAI to think FIFA will not consider the future if they agree to this request. And how many times has another nation been cheated out of a world cup, or European Championship spot? Indeed, England won the tournament in 1966 with a very fortuitous award from a certain Russian linesman. Then on the flip side, there was the ‘hand of God’ in 1986. If FIFA agree to the replay, how far back do we go? Do we just think of games this season, or do we look to replay every game since 1865? And what happens if the incident occurs in a match that is won 5-0? Does the right to request replays still stand? I appreciate I’m being facetious here, but quite frankly, I think the FAI are mentalists!
While the game is in the current state, the FAI should instead be taking this on the chin. Yes, call for increased technology, call for actions to be taken against the referee if they must, but the replay request MUST be denied. Incidentally, I thought the referee had a fantastic game, barring this one incident. The game was allowed to flow, he didn’t go overboard with yellow cards, and he saw through Anelka’s blatant attempt at diving. I think the real rage here should be towards the linesman, who had a clear view of Henry’s handball as well as the fact there were two French players offside when the ball was played.
I also can’t let the fact the Irish government joined in the call for a replay slide. As much as I can understand the frustration they may have felt as fans, the cynic in me believes there is only one true motivation for them adding their voice to the request: money. I truly believe that government should stay out of sport unless they are considering supporter well-being. This well-being can be either physical safety or financial well-being, ensuring sport remains affordable. However, this does not include heartbreak, like the way many irish fans will be feeling now.
It’s no coincidence that the Irish government would call for a replay in a time the world is in recession. After all, world cup qualification offers economies all over the world a boost, but when your nation is involved the boost is substantial. I really belive the Irish government have opened themselves up to criticism with this comment.
However, the French government commenting is more favourable. Indeed, French MP Christine Lagarde has offered her support to the replay call, which is commendable. Indeed, it would appear that 80% of the French population support the replay request. If the French Federation feel similar, the replay is feasible, but the approval will not come from FIFA themselves.
Indeed, I fully expect the French to move on and look forward to the World Cup. I’m sad to say this, but I hope the Irish can too.
November 19, 2009
There was never going to be another blog topic today. After a fantastic example of international football in Paris, the ‘Hand of Henry’ broke Irish hearts and once again opened up the technology debate. As for Henry himself, I’ll come to that later.
Technology in football is very divisive amongst fans, players and managers. Indeed, my good friend Mr Mantle wrote just last week that he didn’t want to see video technology in the game as the drama of wrong decisions is part-and-parcel of this sport we love so much.
He makes a good point. Football is all about drama. Each match seems to contain a bucket load of the stuff, and none of us want to see that dwindle down. However, there comes a point where we have to act. As many people are so keen to point out now, football is a business these days, no longer just a game. It seems like every match played is worth ‘millions’ but last night was worth more than money; last night was about playing on the biggest stage in world sport.
For a match worth so much to be decided on a blatant act of cheating leaves a really bad taste in the mouth, and once again FIFA will be asked to assess the options open to them. There are a couple available.
The first is to introduce a video ref. The video ref could have the role of watching off-the-ball incidents, as well as being able to tell the referee when a player has dived or the ball has crossed the line. The positives of this are that there will now be no excuse for a referee to get a decision wrong. However, it will come at a cost to the flow of the game, and the drama will be gradually squeezed out.
The second option would be more referees. Now we’ve already seen the Europa League scenario, with an additional linesman behind each goal. However, the problem here is people don’t seem to be exactly sure what they’re meant to be doing. On top of this, we’ve seen some decisions slide in the competition, so it would seem that their vantage point may not be ideal. Perhaps standing behind the goal might make the job a little easier? However, I think the game may benefit more by having 2 linesman in each half. The three-dimensional view the officials will then have would certainly make a few decisions easier.
I have to say I agree with Ross, and I’m not really behind the call for a video ref. I think it will be too detrimental on the pace of the game, as what we want to see most of all is a game that’s allowed to flow. However, that does not mean I don’t want to embrace technology. As I stated on an earlier blog, I believe we should add a microchip to the ball, and a light behind the goal that turns on when the ball crosses the line. That is one decision referees clearly need taking out their hands, and I’m certain that is help they would appreciate. However, it also keeps the drama in the rest of the game.
I would also then introduce two more linesmen.
But the second part of this blog is reserved for cheating, and today it is Thierry Henry who deserves a special mention.
I don’t know about you, but that is about as blatant a handball as I’ve ever seen. After the match, he even had the audacity to say it wasn’t deliberate. I’m sorry, if that wasn’t deliberate I’m an Argentine and my name is ‘Juan’. And once again, the referee is getting abuse for not spotting it. Henry’s ‘I’m not the referee, it is not my job to spot it’ attitude really sticks in the throat. No Thierry, it’s not your job to referee the game, but it’s also not your job to handle the ball and score from it, but you did that OK didn’t you?
Of course, we may very well have been having another debate today. ‘Le Sulk’ Anelka could also have been responsible for cheating the Irish out of a World Cup spot if his blatant dive had been interpreted differently by the referee. Now this was even worse than Henry in my opinion. At least handball is ‘instinctual’, rather than a pre-meditated attempt at cheating. However, Anelka should be held-to-rights over his Tom Daley impression.
And just to finish this off, I wonder what devoted Frenchman and UEFA President Michel Platini made of last night’s action? After all, he’s been as quiet as it gets today. I wonder if the same would be said had a similar incident occurred against the French yesterday?
Just a thought…
October 30, 2009
Regular readers will know by now I hold most of football’s regulatory bodies in deep contempt. The announcement that FIFA are not prepared to explore technology on the goal line for at least another 18 months doesn’t do them any favours in my book.
Clubs all over the world are crying out for goal-line technology. Just a simple microchip in the ball, linked to a light behind it, would be enough to clarify whether a goal should be given or not. However, once again FIFA and the IFAB (International Football Association Board) seem to be on another planet to the people they claim to represent.
The most infuriating part of this is that on the 4th October, after a referee and his assistant failed to allow a strike from Fiorentina’s Alberto Gilardino against Lazio in Serie A, Blatter FINALLY seemed to accept technology was required.
“We still haven’t found anything which settles the problem. Now the inventor of Hawk-Eye (the system used in both Tennis and cricket) has said publicly his system would work. We will gladly take a look at it,” he said.
This from the man who instead said that more officials were the answer. We’ve then seen the controversial introduction of extra referees in this year’s Europa League, who none of us can say what they’ve actually provided in the three rounds they’ve been available for. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see this experiment continue into next Summer’s World Cup either.
However, FIFA had allowed some associations to try their own systems in non-league football, which includes the English FA. This latest ruling means that these trials cannot be taken any further until FIFA and IFAB’s AGM in March 2011.
The only positive to come from this appears to be Sepp Blatter has finally accepted that without this technology, too many big games are decided on errors of judgement. As much as FIFA insist the element of human error must still be a part of the game, even referees would like help in deciding whether the ball has crossed the line or not.
Despite my frustration that progress will not be made until 2011, I take my hat off to FIFA for finally exploring the proposal.
I just wish it hadn’t taken them so long.