World Cup disgrace

[Robi D]

Just saw France's goal against Ireland. For it to be allowed after such a blantent and deliberate handball by Henry is disgraceful.

It unbelievable that neither the referee or his assistants saw it, where the hell were they looking. It didn't just hit his hand, he shoveled the ball ffs. When are they going to a introduce video replays, they are in so many sports and for football not to have them is stupid. They could have a challenge system like in tennis.

France might well have qualifed anyway but for this to happen just leaves a bad taste.

[Stapel]

Originally Posted by Robi D

Just saw France's goal against Ireland. For it to be allowed after such a blantent and deliberate handball by Henry is disgraceful.

It unbelievable that neither the referee or his assistants saw it, where the hell were they looking. It didn't just hit his hand, he shoveled the ball ffs. When are they going to a introduce video replays, they are in so many sports and for football not to have them is stupid. They could have a challenge system like in tennis.

France might well have qualifed anyway but for this to happen just leaves a bad taste.

To be in any powerful position within the FIFA, one has to be, according to FIFA rules, severely mentally handicaped.

Hence, there will never be proper TV-umpiring.

[Lt. Killer M]

Originally Posted by Stapel

To be in any powerful position within the FIFA, one has to be, according to FIFA rules, corrupt.

Hence, there will never be proper TV-umpiring.

corrected that for you.

[Stapel]

Originally Posted by Lt. Killer M

corrected that for you.

Though true in itself, the corruption should not stop the introduction of a TV-umpiring system. Even better, TV-umpiring-system manufacturers could easily bribe FIFA officials to pick their system.

In this case it is incompetence, rather than corruption. OTOH, these two go hand-in-hand!

[Robi D]

You don't need that much of a system, there is more than enough TV cameras brought by various networks at major sports to cover almost every angle.

What it would do is make it hard to do "little" favour such as this for the big name teams of the world. It not like it would have to interupt the game that much, just give each coach 1 challenge a half that way it wouldn't be used for every minor incident.

[Shabbaman]

I agree with Stapel. But I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories like Robi's pointing at, I have to say. These errors lead to outrages in vocal communities, but I doubt similar errors in matches of countries like Liechtenstein would get broadcasted worldwide. Referees make errors. Referees are sometimes presumptuous (with players like Robben or Davids, for instance), but even then it's at least based on something that's actually happening (for instance: a foul misjudged as a dive).

[Matrix]

I think Stapel and Killer are right, in general. To become a FIFA bigwig your points of view should be well known, and if you're in favour of using video for referees you don't have a lot of chance.

The FIFA is not democratic enough for their importance.

[Stapel]

Originally Posted by Shabbaman

I agree with Stapel. But I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories like Robi's pointing at, I have to say. These errors lead to outrages in vocal communities, but I doubt similar errors in matches of countries like Liechtenstein would get broadcasted worldwide. Referees make errors. Referees are sometimes presumptuous (with players like Robben or Davids, for instance), but even then it's at least based on something that's actually happening (for instance: a foul misjudged as a dive).

A very common way of acting presumptuous is actually favouring the favourite. I guess that is just human nature.
But I garee there is hardly a reason to think there is conspiracy.


On TV-umpiring: It's usually a bit tougher than some think. Not every kind of situation can be solved! Any football fan knows the kind of foul where analists say: a penalty kick could or could not be given. With tennis, it's a lot easier.

Then again, in cricket, which has a fair share of 'one-of-those-decisions', a lot of effort is made to steadily increase the use of technology, to decrease the obvious errors.

In football, the will to improve is non-existant at the (corrupt & incompetent) top.

Blatter once declared that umpiring errors are essential for the game....., as these errors are the actions most remembered...... 'Nuff-said....

With the same logic one might argue diving (Schwalbes, in proper Dutch ) is essential.

[Lt. Killer M]

and who cares about Blatter blather?


I personally think that limited TV umpiring should be done. Limit it to game-breaking stuff: red carding, counting goals, penalty kicks, off-side with following goal. OK, some 5% of instances will still not be clear, but how often have we seen situations where the umpires simply overlooked a guy breaking offside? Missed the kick to the crotch? Missed, even, the fist to the nose?

[socralynnek]

Originally Posted by Shabbaman

Referees are sometimes presumptuous (with players like Robben or Davids, for instance)

Right. Robben strictly had to be sent off in last match for hitting the opponent after a foul was called. But the referee thought: "Hey, we have a superstar here, and I don't want to scare him away from Germany" and gave him only a yellow one.

Mmmmh, I guess, with presumptuous, you meant it the other way round...

It's a shame that the ref didn't see that handball from Henry. It was very obvious. In the end, another referee (goal referee like in UEFA Cup) might have been enough. And I think that would be doable in such important games.