Sepp Blatter Appologises To England and Mexico

Tummy said:
Point out, why it wouldn't "ruin" football.

Technology would only offer benfit to the top clubs, the ones you watch and Sky promote, the Premier league. Who's going to pay for technology for the league 2 sides?

Whats going to happen when Chelsea go down to a league 2 side in the F.A. Cup and there are no replays because the F.A. / Sky won't pay for them to have it?

Football is a fast, flowing game, why stop it to "replay" mistakes? They've always happened and football has done quite well without it so far in its history.

Who's going to pay the extra official to sit in front of a television? Should we just have Andy Gray do it?

Debate would be killed, Football fans love to talk about the offside decision that shouldn't of been given.

Are FIFA going to pay for technology in all the leagues?
Football isn't as slow or stop start as other sports that have technology.
It would create a have V have not in regards to tech. Rich clubs have money, skint clubs don't but on the pitch they can't change decisions.
Click to expand...

The clue is in the name, 'debate'. You cannot debate whether something is offside or whether the ball is over the line. They are clear cut rules that state you are either on side or off. The ball is either over the line or not.

Look at the amount of money that is involved in football and have a think as to whether they could afford to implement this. The comment about lower leagues is irrelevant as well. Go watch wimbledon and then go watch a local county match. Notice the difference?

Every sport has managed to survive since it started without the technology we have today but most are intelligent enough to realise that it is a good thing. We should ban the top players from wearing £200 custom boots as well maybe. We did ok for a good while in the old massive ones.

Sports change and most people realise that it is usually for the best.
 
Robbie G said:
Shouldn't we at least make absolutely sure by trialling the technology?
Click to expand...

Was it not tested a few seasons back at a youth competition in Germany? The ye old chip in a ball.

The extra officials has been tested over two competitions so far.

@ WeeBull, You'd be creating a difference on the pitch with technology, While I agree in part that football at different levels is off different quaility its the same rules and the only real difference is money at the clubs. You put technology in and things change.

Video replays would have to be for every decision, it would be unfair to just have them for the "debateable" ones.

Football did indeed manage "quite well" without those rules, but I wouldn't put them on par with the introduction of Video replays.

We only hear about bad decisions in the top level and it's normally Sky leading the cry for technology. I'm sorry, Football would suffer, I'm more then happy to test it, but I would want it for every proffessional club, not just the Premier League.

If wanting football, to remain with the human error that refs make then yeah I'm a luddite :) Players make mistakes, Terry and Upson did quite well with that goal from the goalkick. It's not their fault though, it's all because we don't have technology to spot that mistake of the ref :p

Seriously, how many decisions do you get a season in a league like the one you had V England? Does it warrant the millions upon millions to introduce it at every level. You get a few every weekend I'd imagine, IF that, nobody really cares about the lower leagues.

It's part and parcel of football, you get decisions for and against you.

I don't like money in football, I dislike technology for one and not for all more.
 
fez said:
The clue is in the name, 'debate'. You cannot debate whether something is offside or whether the ball is over the line. They are clear cut rules that state you are either on side or off. The ball is either over the line or not.
Click to expand...

Actually, offside is debatable, but not because of the issue of where you at any given time. Offside is subjective, because you have to be taking advantage of your offside position in order for it to be an offence.

Of course, if you are scoring a goal then you clearly have been taking advantage.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Neither the Mexico offside nor the England non goal changed the game nor caused the better team to crash out.

THe less England make of the whole thing and try and kid themselves into thinking we might have won the cup but for one shoddy decision the better
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone (perhaps a very small minority i.e. Rio Ferdinand) is suggesting that England would win the WC had that goal been allowed to stand, the way I see it we were outplayed by Germany and deserved to lose. Based on what I've seen from England lately I don't think they would be good enough to win another 3 matches even if they had overcome Germany.

If we take an abstract/subjective view of the situation there is a very real case for implementing some kind of GLT, this 'goal' has just highlighted it on the world stage again, people want things changed because they want to see better decisions being made by officials, not because they are bitter at getting knocked out.

Of course we do need to see a lot of debate around the issue, where to draw the line, the logistics of how it is to be implemented. I'd favour a 'challenge' approach similar to how it works in Tennis, although obviously thought would need to go into how it works in cases where the ball doesn't go out of play for long periods (e.g. say Lampard's shot comes back out the goal, the germans pass it round for 30s, then go up the other end and leather one in the net, start celebrating, then England's appeal is looked at and all of a sudden instead of it being 3-1 it is 2-2, would be quite bizarre....) So actually maybe it should just be some guy looking at a screen and letting the ref know the instant he is sure.
 
Last edited:
Tummy said:
@ WeeBull, You'd be creating a difference on the pitch with technology, While I agree in part that football at different levels is off different quaility its the same rules and the only real difference is money at the clubs. You put technology in and things change.
Click to expand...
As I said though, there's just as much a difference in the degree of refereeing standards too though. The best refs go to the higher divisions, the rubbish refs get moved down. That's not particularly "fair" to lower leagues either, is it? But it happens.

Personally, as I said, I'm in favour of making it as much about the actual play on the pitch as possible. Teams losing via unseen illegalities is just plain unfair.
 
I think that technology does have its place in football but at the same time it needs to be balanced.

I'm a firm believer of everything in moderation and this would be no exception. Something like the "Hawkeye" technology used in other sports to determine if the ball crossed the line on something important like a goal would be an excellent start.

Having an official with a instant replay available for major decisions at referee's discretion should be implemented. (I.E - Was it a penalty? Ref/Linesmen not sure - he can check with the replay ref). It doesn't take two seconds to get a replay of what happened as demonstrated in the Argentina / Mexico game. The replay can be seen/decided on by the time the players have even begun to start moaning at the ref.

I'm all for keeping the flow of the game going and not stopping every 5 seconds to see who's throw in it is, for example. I think 95% of the time the ref/linesmen are correct but in the rare moments that they are unsure they should have the fallback of technology to help keep the game as fair as possible.
 
It would be awesome. Billions of people around the world would be able to see it was a handball but it would still be given. The biggest match in football being ruined is the only way Blatter and co will do anything about it.
 
Most people know that England are **** and that Argentina are better than Mexico, the point is the better team doesn't always win and to have vital decisions go against the underdogs makes it all the more difficult for them.

As mentioned earlier most other sports have embraced technology and are all better for it, to suggest football would be different has no basis unless you're just fearful of change like Sepp Blatter.
 
An even more high-profile cockup, like one in the final, would indeed be good for making technology's case heard, but can't one league just decide to go ahead and implement their own system? Do they have to have FIFA's backing before they can try anything?

If the Premier League is worried about damaging their product/their international reputation or it has to appease FIFA then fair enough, but why couldn't the Championship trial it? I can't imagine it has a massive audience abroad, the standard of football is still high, and there are cameras at every game each week, it wouldn't involve a huge deal of investment to set it up, maybe just one extra official per game. People are so backwards-thinking and reactionary when it comes to change. Something could quite easily be sorted out tomorrow with a few hours' discussion.
 
In terms of video replays, I'm not sure there are enough cameras at Championship games. You need high-wire ones for offside checking, a goal-line camera at each end, and say four more at each corner, to check for fouls/handballs and the like. As far as I'm aware, Championship games only tend to have one or two cameras, and more "complete" viewing angles.
 
Rather tenuously related, but:

Guardian match report for Jap vs Par said:
FOR GOD'S SAKE. Andy Townsend has just, without irony, opined that Fifa are "lucky this sort of thing hasn't happened in a World Cup final". You simply could not script it. And nor would you want to.
Click to expand...
Ahahahaha.
 
Technology is just fine and is needed. All this "it will slow the game down" is just **** what takes more time - looking at a video replay for 5 secs or Terry and Rio shouting at the ref for 2 mins because they felt a decision went against them.
 
Spawn said:
Exactly what i have been saying to my deluded England mates who are fans of England....whether that goal stood or not...fact is Germany would have still ripped us to shreds.
Click to expand...

Oh would they??? That's a fact? Prove it?

If that goal had counted, it would have been 2 - 2 at half time. So how do you know that Germany would have scored more than England in the second half? Surely, it would be more realistic to say that seeing as they each scored 2 in the first half, a similar result would be expected in the 2nd half? But no... Its somehow a FACT that Germany would still have ripped the England team to shreds. And lets not forget, England had more possession, and were quite easily ripping the defence apart for the 10 minutes or so before half time. I'm not saying England would have won, but to say its a certainty the Germans would still have got through is a fact is stupidity.

Tummy said:
Germany, were better then England in every aspect and in every postition on that pitch, one mistake by the linesman doesn't change the out come imo.
Click to expand...

Yes, it very easily can... Would you play as defensively if you were a goal behind with 30 minutes left as if you were even? No

And then, there's also the fact that 1 team has a goal they shouldn't (or doesn't have a goal they should)

vonhelmet said:
It's pure speculation that we would have fared any better if that goal had been allowed. No one can possibly know either way. At 2-2 we might have been complacent and gone on to let 3 more in, who knows.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, England might have fared better.... Best to eliminate the uncertainty, no?
 
I agree it was no way a Guaranteed FACT that Germany would have won with or without the goal. Yes odds were in Germany's favour but it was far from guaranteed. It would have been 2-2 with us having more possession. Going into the half with the upper hand heads up high with the Germans a little worried. . I think its just because its england. If it was any other team going into the 2nd half after just coming back 2-0 to 2-2 people would be saying that the comeback team would have the momentum.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom