Over 16,536,507 people are on fubar.
What are you waiting for?
Has 4 widely talked about calls by refs have an adverse impact on the matches? All of the calls involve 4 separate games.
2 calls involve 2 USA games. In both games the USA goals were disallowed due to being offsides. Replays clearly showed the USA were not offsides.
England, in their match against Germany, had a goal disallowed that would have tied the match at 2-2. The ball hit the crossbar and ricocheted down to the turf and with backspin bounced out to the goal keeper. It was ruled a non-goal and play continued. On replay the ball is shown to hit the turf a full foot inside the goal.
The other call was between Argentina and Mexico. Argentina already up 1-0 scored and went up 2-0. On replay the Argentine player that scored was seen to be at least 2 yards past the last defender of Mexico, thus the call should have been offsides and the goal disallowed.
The final score of England/Germany was Germany 4 and England 1. The final score of Argentina/Mexico was Argentina 3 and Mexico 1. Now most people would look at the final score and say if the calls were reversed the outcome would be the same. I, however, beg to differ. The results of these blown calls forced England and Mexico to commit more pressure on the offensive end by bringing forward more players. When this occurs defenders brought forward are out of position when ball possession changes and the defense is now at a disadvantage. The result is a goal is easier to score.
If FIFA, the World Cup and International Soccer sanctioning body, had incorporated video technology or additional refs at the goals the proper calls would have been made and the match results may have been different. As has been seen in after game interviews coaches of the teams affected do not criticize, I suppose, to avert the wrath of FIFA penalty sanctions.
Current FIFA President Joseph S. Blatter of Switzerland has made a statement on FIFA's stance to incorporate technology to assist refs on questionable calls. Simply put he feels that the game must be played the same from youth leagues through the highest levels. And he further stated, "The simplicity and universality of the game of association football is one of the reasons for its success." I for one think reasoning such as that is a load of crap. In the United States everyone knows that for football, baseball, basketball, and hockey the rules are not the same from youth leagues through to the professional leagues.
Not one person here believes that youth leagues should incorporate the type of technology assistance that the NFL, MLB, NBA, or NHL have instituted.
Why can't FIFA incorporate camera technology at the goals to assist refs? FIFA's statement cites the cost as being to prohibitive. Crap again. It doesn't make sense for youth leagues to have that imposed for a list of reasons. However, it should be mandatory for all World Cup matches starting with all qualifiers through the World Cup Championship. As for all the professional leagues around the world incorporating the technology. My thought is that should be a league decision. If the Premier League in England and MLS in the USA want it and the Bundesleague in Germany refuses fine. That is a decision that should be left to the leagues not FIFA. If FIFA were to implement camera technology at the goals for the World Cup then I'm sure all the major leagues throughout the world would follow suit.
About stopping play to review calls. If you have ever watched any soccer match on this planet after a goal alot of time is lost to celebrations after a goal is scored. If there are review officials, like in the NFL, during the celebration those officials could be reviewing the goal to verify if it should be allowed or disallowed. It would have no impact on the speed or pace of a match. When I read the following statement from FIFA's stance I almost drowned in the coke I was drinking. FIFA's President closed their stance on technology with this statement. "The nature of the game: association football is a dynamic game that cannot be stopped in order to review a decision. If play were to be stopped to take a decision, it would break up the rhythm of the game and possibly deny a team the opportunity to score a goal. It would also not make sense to stop play every two minutes to review a decision, as this would go against the natural dynamism of the game."
Just use the camera technology at the goals idiots. The play on the field would not be helped significantly enough with this technology. It is only needed to verify the validity of a goal scored. Was the offense offsides or did the ball cross the goal line is what needs to be determined. A ref 30 or so yards away and assistant refs on the sidelines a too far away to make those determinations.
Cleaning play up on the field. Let me talk about that in a later post.
