World Cup 2010

[Harleqin]

I guess that England finally got their third goal for Wembley.

[quantumf]

What an utter blunder by the man with the whistle, let alone the other goon with the flag.

What are you talking about? They couldn't possibly tell whether the ball went over the line or not. They can only give the goal if they're sure. The linesman is standing on the offside line, not the goal line.

[Hushfield]

What are you talking about? They couldn't possibly tell whether the ball went over the line or not. They can only give the goal if they're sure. The linesman is standing on the offside line, not the goal line.

People at the top of the stadium could see that that ball was over the line, so we can't assume it's that hard for the officials much closer by. And come on, a linesman has only 3 tasks during an entire game, all line-related: check whether a player is offside, check whether a ball goes out of bounds, and check whether such bouncy wembley balls go over the goal line or not. I can understand that, as there are many close calls to make, one can make some mistakes. But puh-lease, this was not close by any means. The guy should have his eyes checked.

[edit]: this post sounds somewhat agressive, I apologize, I have no quarrel with you, good sir. It just seems a really big mistake, and it plays a huge role in the outcome of the game at that level of play.

[oren]

I couldn't tell from camera in real time that it was a goal, and the refs making the call had to run quite a ways to keep up. It would be a very difficult call to make and be sure of.

As far as Ghana time, I think refs handled it well. The extra time was put in, and the game was pretty much what you would expect at the world cup when a team is up late.

[topazg]

It was a gross refereeing blunder. I have been both a linesman and a referee (at different times, obviously) at saturday league football matches, and missing something going over the line by well over a foot is inexcusable. In the defence of the referee, it is not his job to spot the ball crossing the line, it is the linesman's, who is supposed to be as close to the goal-line as possible. At that stage he was about 10 yards up the sideline, at which angle it should have been completely obvious. There are some really close and hard balls to judge at times, that was most definitely not one of them.

At local saturday league level, missing that would be really, really bad. At an international tournament, it is completely inexcusable. Yet another clear and obvious reason to have the ability to view replays for critical moments.

That said, Germany completely deserved to win - England were not good, but Germany I thought were excellent today.

[Hushfield]

What is this? Goal for Argentina? We need camera's for this sort of thing. Period.

[quantumf]

What an utter blunder by the man with the whistle, let alone the other goon with the flag.

What are you talking about? They couldn't possibly tell whether the ball went over the line or not. They can only give the goal if they're sure. The linesman is standing on the offside line, not the goal line.

On the other hand, the offside Argentina goal was a shocker of the highest order.

[quantumf]

It was a gross refereeing blunder. I have been both a linesman and a referee (at different times, obviously) at saturday league football matches, and missing something going over the line by well over a foot is inexcusable. In the defence of the referee, it is not his job to spot the ball crossing the line, it is the linesman's, who is supposed to be as close to the goal-line as possible. At that stage he was about 10 yards up the sideline, at which angle it should have been completely obvious. There are some really close and hard balls to judge at times, that was most definitely not one of them.

The referee was about 25-30 yards away, and partially unsighted. It's incredibly unlikely that he could have made the call. The linesman was a bit more than 10 yards up the sideline, I thought he was more in line with the 18 yard line. Given the frequency with which these mistakes are made by top officials at the highest level, it's clearly not as easy as you imply.

Personally, I'm somewhat mixed about the benefit of technology. I reckon its FIFA's opinion that the controversy generates interest, publicity and hype, and hence sponsors. Hard to argue with that. The only people I feel sorry for are the officials who get vilified for making inevitable mistakes.

[Hushfield]

Today's referees have tapped into the dark side of the whistle.

[Harleqin]

I have just heard this opinion that the mistakes stemming from not having video analysis affect the game would "increase drama" and thus add interest to the game. I think that this is complete nonsense. This is rather the kind of drama that makes people turn away from this sport.

The only counter argument against video analysis is that it will seem conclusive, but may not always be. For example, look at the foul against Fernando Torres in the Chile-Spain game (which led to yellow-red): from the side, it seems like Torres was just lightly touched, if at all; from behind, you see that there was quite some force at work there. Now, what if the camera from behind was missing? Who would have the final word, the main referee or the guy at the video screen? If the main referee has seen exactly what was going on, but the video seems to contradict him, how would he be able to overrule the seeming "proof", when everyone else has only seen the video? There need to be quite high standards for the conclusiveness of video footage, and it would take a lot of experience to see how the video may be mistaken.

So, this is a genuine counter argument, but I think that the FIFA should take a closer look at this option.

[zinger]

Agree Harleqin, there would have to be some well thought out limits on when video replay would apply. Such as - gasp! - goal/no goal calls. A camera on each goal line (which is there anyway!!) and there is never a wrong call again. The NFL (American football) has a well tuned replay process, that excludes a variety of judgement calls from review, such as pass interference, holding, etc. It can be done and FIFA knows it.

OK, so the fools at FIFA (president in particular) are dead set against replay. It would slow the game too much? I don't agree with that. But even if you accept that argument - put an extra offical on each goal line for crying out loud. This is the freaking World Cup, and they have exactly as many officials on the field as at my son's U12 games. It's a total disgrace IMO.

And please, another official on the field as well. Then you would always have two views from different angles on fouls, handballs, etc.

The solutions are so obvious and simple, that the only rational conclusion is that FIFA wants these atrocious calls to continue happening, even (especially?) in the World Cup.

[Solomon]

[quantumf]

I have just heard this opinion that the mistakes stemming from not having video analysis affect the game would "increase drama" and thus add interest to the game. I think that this is complete nonsense. This is rather the kind of drama that makes people turn away from this sport.

For evidence, I refer you to all the posts on this mistake on this (non-football) forum.

[Hushfield]

optical illusions

I lolled.

[tj86430]

optical illusions

I lolled.

Very much so.