Me, being who I am, loves watching a good soccer (I know it's called football, I'm gonna get a lot of hate for that) is really disappointed in the experience of the referees that are officiating the World Cup. What really gets me going in FIFA's total ignorance to technology to help them improve the game. I could name countless ways that they could fix this, but that's where you people come in. I want to know YOUR solutions of fixing goof ups in soccer.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What do you think of FIFA's recent goofs?
- Thread starter cciliberto33
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You said it yourself...use technology.
When watching it on TV the replays from different angles and computer renders come seconds after whatever happened. If the ref blows his whistle to stop play anyway, having another ref in a side room watching angles and replays would hardly be inconvenient or use up lots of time.Why this can't be incorporated I have no idea. Anyway, FIFA said they'll reconsider using some technologies....doubt it will happen though.
When watching it on TV the replays from different angles and computer renders come seconds after whatever happened. If the ref blows his whistle to stop play anyway, having another ref in a side room watching angles and replays would hardly be inconvenient or use up lots of time.Why this can't be incorporated I have no idea. Anyway, FIFA said they'll reconsider using some technologies....doubt it will happen though.
Personally, while I strongly agree that some kind of method to assist referees is absolutely needed and justifiable, I have a couple of caveats:
I think in this World Cup actually the offside decisions have generally been very good and accurate, with one glaring exception.
- It should be restricted to goal-line decisions only
- It should be camera-based, not sensor based
- A ball crossing a goal line is the only occurrence that can affect a scoreline. It is the be-all-and-end-all, the only thing that really matters.
- I don't think sensor technology should be used because I fear it would be the "thin end of the wedge". If sensors are in balls then the next step would be to put sensors on the players to determine offside situations or other decisions. The whole thing would quickly get out of hand and ruin the game.
I think in this World Cup actually the offside decisions have generally been very good and accurate, with one glaring exception.
This where FIFA's amateur roots get in the way. There's a massive difference between the World Cup and a pub side playing in a Sunday League. Other sports seem to manage using technology only at the higher levels of the game, why can't football?
When top players are getting over £200,000 a week and billion pound TV deals are involved the cost to the game is minimal in comparison.
While there's a lot of money in football, the vast majority of it is found with the big clubs at the very top of the game. Let's not forget that some smaller clubs are facing winding up orders over debts that could be paid off with a fraction of a top player's weekly wage.
Could a struggling club in, say, England's League Two or the Scottish Second Division afford to install and maintain this technology? There are an increasing number of them in severe financial difficulties and being forced to shell out for this equipment is a cost they really can't cover.
Also, what about semi/non-professional leagues such as the Blue Square Premier and North/South? Do they have to install cameras too? One could perhaps argue that as non-League clubs they don't but what then happens if they progress in a cup? One would think that a competition like the FA Cup would have to use the technology, but would non-league clubs playing at home be exempt?
I think the matter needs to be properly looked at, but there are some big questions that have to be answered on how these things would be properly implemented. Luckily, we can all trust FIFA to handle the matter in the proper fashion.
Oh.
Could a struggling club in, say, England's League Two or the Scottish Second Division afford to install and maintain this technology? There are an increasing number of them in severe financial difficulties and being forced to shell out for this equipment is a cost they really can't cover.
Also, what about semi/non-professional leagues such as the Blue Square Premier and North/South? Do they have to install cameras too? One could perhaps argue that as non-League clubs they don't but what then happens if they progress in a cup? One would think that a competition like the FA Cup would have to use the technology, but would non-league clubs playing at home be exempt?
I think the matter needs to be properly looked at, but there are some big questions that have to be answered on how these things would be properly implemented. Luckily, we can all trust FIFA to handle the matter in the proper fashion.
Oh.
Why does it have to be every match? I think actually the head of FIFA said the discussions about using technology will apply only to the World Cup.
Why not make it a requirement for the stadiums? "If you want to host a world cup game you need to have this installed in your goals". And an extra body? Bit OTT isn't it? Why not just train refs to watch TV?
I think some sort of goal line technology should be there but for only the World Cup. Maybe that way smaller clubs wouldn't need to feel obligated to carry on with the technology.
I don't see it as such a great constitutional problem. Remember, we are not talking about a 'rule'. A ball that crosses a line is still a goal, one that does not, is not.While there's a lot of money in football, the vast majority of it is found with the big clubs at the very top of the game. Let's not forget that some smaller clubs are facing winding up orders over debts that could be paid off with a fraction of a top player's weekly wage.
Could a struggling club in, say, England's League Two or the Scottish Second Division afford to install and maintain this technology? There are an increasing number of them in severe financial difficulties and being forced to shell out for this equipment is a cost they really can't cover.
Also, what about semi/non-professional leagues such as the Blue Square Premier and North/South? Do they have to install cameras too? One could perhaps argue that as non-League clubs they don't but what then happens if they progress in a cup? One would think that a competition like the FA Cup would have to use the technology, but would non-league clubs playing at home be exempt?
I think the matter needs to be properly looked at, but there are some big questions that have to be answered on how these things would be properly implemented. Luckily, we can all trust FIFA to handle the matter in the proper fashion.
Oh.
The point is that it is merely a technological aid for the official.
There are plenty of precedents. Earpieces for officials. Goal nets (imagine how many disputes there were before the introduction of nets!!), the fourth official (who again isn't present at all levels of the game) and I'm sure there are plenty more.
Cost wise, goal post/net manufacturers could easily incorporate cameras into the goal frame during production, this stuff is not expensive, relatively. The fourth official can be the person who has to review contentious decisions on a portable screen.
I really cannot see the objection.
While using technology to identify offsides is much harder to do (unless all the players wear shoes with RFID tags!), they have the technology NOW to track whether the ball has gone into the net.
After that embarrassing episode with the England vs. Germany game, small wonder why FIFA is open to suggestions for putting in a camera into the net to avoid these debacles in the future. I'd like to see them start using it for UEFA competitions such as Champions League and Europa League this upcoming season and at Euro 2012.
After that embarrassing episode with the England vs. Germany game, small wonder why FIFA is open to suggestions for putting in a camera into the net to avoid these debacles in the future. I'd like to see them start using it for UEFA competitions such as Champions League and Europa League this upcoming season and at Euro 2012.
According to the chap who runs HawkEye (the technology that is used in cricket and is cited as one of the preferred systems for football) the system would work by basing six cameras in the stands rather than installing them in the goal posts themselves this means that all possible angles can be covered and helps eliminate the risk that the ball may be obscured if only a couple of angles are used.
He reckons you'd be looking at a cost of between £125,000-£250,000 per ground to install and run the system. Now, he's confident that the cost to install it in the Premier League could be covered by sponsorship but this still leaves the big question of what would happen in divisions below the top flight. Would a sponsor be happy to cover the cost to install the technology at the 72 clubs that make up the Football League, for example? Based on the costs above you'd be looking at a minimum cost of at least £9 million to get it up and running.
He reckons you'd be looking at a cost of between £125,000-£250,000 per ground to install and run the system. Now, he's confident that the cost to install it in the Premier League could be covered by sponsorship but this still leaves the big question of what would happen in divisions below the top flight. Would a sponsor be happy to cover the cost to install the technology at the 72 clubs that make up the Football League, for example? Based on the costs above you'd be looking at a minimum cost of at least £9 million to get it up and running.
It's already been mentioned though that these sort of methods would most likely be implemented in things like the World Cup, where the stadiums used belong to the richer clubs who could afford it.
They don't use HawkEye in every cricket ground and for every tournament, just like they don't use it for every tennis tournament....so why would you have to implement it into every football stadium and tournament?
That wouldn't fix the biggest goof-up of all so far, which is the outcome of the France vs. Ireland game.
But yes, it would have given England a tiny chance against Germany, considering the potential momentum swing that may have occurred following 2 goals in 1-2 minutes.
That wouldn't fix the biggest goof-up of all so far, which is the outcome of the France vs. Ireland game.
But yes, it would have given England a tiny chance against Germany, considering the potential momentum swing that may have occurred following 2 goals in 1-2 minutes.
Indeed, it wouldn't have helped with France Ireland. The outcome of that was a real shame!
With England though, we would have gone into the second half 2-2. Massive moral boost, and I think the FT outcome could have been very different!
How would that affect the rhythm of the game, though? It's not like the NFL, where the umpires can call a time-out to go look at the video. I'm not entirely convinced that an eventual increasing of stoppage time to 10 minutes or more would go over very well.
The technology is available, use it. For those worrying about how it would affect the flow of a match... wouldn't you rather that the call be made correctly? Really, I don't even care if they decide that the best solution is to have another on-field referee (ex. Hockey)... put your referees in the best possible position to make a call. But to leave it in the present condition? That's just shameful.
Well in the case of an undecided goal, if play continues (as it did in the England game), then the players can continue while the extra ref watches replays to determine if it was a goal or not. If it was a goal play is stopped and the goal is added, if it wasn't a goal then no time or play was lost. I don't see how it would affect play at all.
My position entirely, although the implementation is very difficult. Perhaps FIFA needs to make a distinction between levels of play such that top flight leagues are required to use it, and it is required at all international tournaments.
If they're for tournaments such as the World Cup, then I'd expect the responsibility for paying for the technology would fall on the national FA hosting said tournament.
However, would the technology only be employed at the tournament finals or would it also be required during the qualification matches? Let's not forget that one of the major unspotted incidents this year (and one that provoked a lot of comments on the use of replays and stuff) was the handball by the dastardly Thierry Henry in the play-off against Ireland. If technology was only used in the finals themselves then Henry's handball would still have gone unpunished and in any case it wouldn't have been picked up by cameras deployed purely to help with goal line decisions...
I do not believe goal-line technology should be camera based. The same sensor used in tennis to see if the ball crossed the line could and should be easily ported over so it has the same effect.
the problem with costs is simply too big to swallow for the smaller clubs/ not so well off countries ...
when my hometown played fifa sanctioned 2. austrian league the club was forced to improve it's home ground including better lights for tv coverage, stands, security, etc. ... all in all costs of nearly 1 million euro which was more than the whole yearly budget in all the years before
and untill all was finished the clubs had to play at a different field which meant less money into the club pocket
after the year we went in the lower non fifa league again with the only difference being now that our club went from financial stable to being deep in debt and having all kinds of problems
this high initial cost leads to idoicies as in 3. austrian league where after this season the top 4 clubs refused promotion because they simply couldn't afford upgrading their playing grounds to FIFA regulation
what fifa should be doing instead is finally promote professional referees: every single referee even at this world cup is an amateur (Howard Webb's actual work: police man) and the leagues are not better
believe it or not some of those referee's have to take vaccations at their work place to be at this world cup
in 2010 that simply isn't acceptable in the top leagues and world cup that we don't get professional & well payed referees
my opinion: professional referees and extra goal-line assistants in fifa sanction leagues
i would also add an extra linesman on each side to cut down on offside mistakes but that would perhaps be too much officials i ntoo much short time
when my hometown played fifa sanctioned 2. austrian league the club was forced to improve it's home ground including better lights for tv coverage, stands, security, etc. ... all in all costs of nearly 1 million euro which was more than the whole yearly budget in all the years before
and untill all was finished the clubs had to play at a different field which meant less money into the club pocket
after the year we went in the lower non fifa league again with the only difference being now that our club went from financial stable to being deep in debt and having all kinds of problems
this high initial cost leads to idoicies as in 3. austrian league where after this season the top 4 clubs refused promotion because they simply couldn't afford upgrading their playing grounds to FIFA regulation
what fifa should be doing instead is finally promote professional referees: every single referee even at this world cup is an amateur (Howard Webb's actual work: police man) and the leagues are not better
believe it or not some of those referee's have to take vaccations at their work place to be at this world cup
in 2010 that simply isn't acceptable in the top leagues and world cup that we don't get professional & well payed referees
my opinion: professional referees and extra goal-line assistants in fifa sanction leagues
i would also add an extra linesman on each side to cut down on offside mistakes but that would perhaps be too much officials i ntoo much short time
My solution is low tech and cheap: buy glasses/spectacles for the Refs.
hahhahaha i chuckled.