Unless you are an American over the age of forty you probably are interested in football (soccer), so you must be as excited as I am to watch the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. But this World Cup has gotten some flak for poor officiating, and this is the topic of this quick-blog.
Yesterday, June 28th, Frank Lampard scored a goal for the English side that bounced off the cross bar down into the German goal. The ball continued to bounce – out of the goal to be recovered by the keeper and punted without a goal being called by the referee. Later that day, during a match with Mexico, Argentina’s Tevez received a clearly offsides pass from Messi to score early on. The goal stood.
Now, all sports have officiating blunders, but soccer has more than most. These are simply examples of all too common occurrences in international football. Bad calls change the pace of the game and the teams’ moral. Bad calls cost games. Bad calls give games away. Bad calls piss people off. The winners feel less good and the losers are irate. Furthermore, consider that the World Cup happens every four years and is enthusiastically, if not fanatically, followed by fans around the globe. It’s a source of national pride and international camaraderie. As far as sports go, it’s pretty important.
But it’s not only because the World Cup is important that the officiating should be top-quality, its also because it is so easy to make it better. In many other sports Video Instant Replay is used to sort out contentious calls. Giving each team a few challenges per game to review official calls with Instant Replay would avoid these kinds of unfair and reputation damaging calls.
I was watching Turkish television with my roommate Steve the other day. On one channel we saw oil wrestling, a traditional Turkish sport where two young men oil themselves up and wrestle in shorts, and I commented that it was funny that they were in an open field – no arena, no stands, no defined boundaries of any kind. After a minute of thinking, I continued by saying that all sports probably started in fields like this, but at some point you really need to embrace technology and chalk some out-of-bounds lines. I feel the same way about FIFA, stop ruining soccer.
-Charles P. Pearson
Here are a few articles on the subject:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8768743.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8771294.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/matches/match_52/default.stm
I am going to disrespectfully disagree. If your point is to advocate for instant replay, it just would not work. From the perspective of a player, we are trained to treat the ref as part of the game. This can be seen clearly in this years world cup with the most flamboyant dives and theatrics that the players are selling to the ref, who for the most part gobbles up. I believe they gobble it up because they have been told to ensure a fair safe type of play (thus their moto), so if it appears that a player is getting savagely brought down, then he must make the call, because they see what they see, which is a well practiced image of a savage tackle being received. With these fantastic super slow motion replays I am seeing this year, it is easy to pick out the things that you are hoping get repealed. But at the speed of life with these world class athletes, do you think you would catch everything? Your answer would clearly be “No” so you immediately think to have a 5th official staring at a super slow motion version of the game who would have some sort of super horn that when pressed, stopped the game, brought the whole progression of the game back to the moment in time when the foul was committed, because whatever happens after that point would be null and void(?). As could be seen with the latest Chile game, in about 8 seconds, the counter is on, and brasil has the ball in the back of the net, despite the enthused weyones of chile. So then do you take that goal back as well?
Did Frank seem to be too bothered by what happened in the game? For a brief moment, but no more and he got on with it.
Dont get me wrong, I was irate with the rest of the world, but if you are going to advocate a system of instant replays in a game where the point is to promote a continuous game without stops and whistles and encourage game changing moments in a matter of seconds, you better think a bit more of how you would want your system implemented and its repercussions.
Sure, hind sight IS 20-20
I’m a big fan of bringing technology in. That said I agree with Luke that IR would ruin the sport worse than poor officiating.
However, post game reviews of simulated fouls with yellow cards assessed, or red cards if the simulations resulted in a PK and goal, would hugely benefit the game. The present trend of flopping each time you lose control of the ball invites refs to tolerate more harsh tackles as much as reward actresses like Ronaldo. It also invites defenders to make the harsh tackles for which they will be sanctioned anyway.
I don’t know how often a play like Lampard’s happens, but it seems as though goal mouth tech would be relatively easy and instant but largely less necessary.
Finally, crappy officiating is part of the game, and the measure of a team is how well it bounces back from a lousy call, not how well their fans winge on about how we wuz robbed.
Eh… Im not convinced.
Luke, how does reducing error and discouraging diving by better officiating hurt the way players play? Imagine soccer without less dives in the box – now thats sport. Your idea of continuous play only exists in the unstopped clock, in every other way the sport stops as much as other sports – mostly for ‘actresses’ (well done Peter).
And will instant replay really affect the game that much? Look at other sports. For instant replay in basketball the referee runs off the court for a moment to stare into a screen for seconds before making a final call. Soccer wastes more time on feigned injury.
And Lampard’s goal or Tevez’s offisides – what would it have hurt to have a 10 second review and set the record straight? I’m not advocating IR on every play.
And crappy officiating being part of the game? I don’t even think FIFA would agree thats a good thing.
But would it Charles? Would it reeeeally encourage better officiating and stop players diving?
The players, referees, coaches, and crowd all watch the mistakes on the big screens already. Everyone can painfully watch a misplaced step destroy a world class athletes career with a gut wrenching ankle twist. Still no changes, if anything, I think it just makes everyone do their thing better, bette flops, more flamboyant showing of the red card, bigger boobs in the crowd.
After reading your articles (all from BBC makes me think you are being manipulated. also you should make them a link so they can be clicked on form the blog without copy paste), I think a hawk eye implementation at the goal mouth would be acceptable and helpful. Hawkeye is flawless in tennis and brings a certain amount of excitement watching the screen zoom in to the millimeter to see if the ball crossed the line or not. However, I would like it only if it rang a bell when the goal mouth was crossed. No opportunity for reviews should be given. As the dude form fifa says in one of the articles when hes sucking the dicks of Mexico and England, Football is “…uniquely fluid…” which is absolutely correct. To say the game stops as much as other sports is heresy and I will remind you of the salem witch trials, nazi germany, egyptian slaves, and coke vs pepsi wars that were all results of people trying to slander football and say it is like basketball.
You’re a soccer elitist. I bet you watch your soccer from your ivory tower talking about how the game was better back in the good ol days. Well, grampa, the good old days sucked; the ball was ob-long and players doubled as the clean-up crew. Get a grip!
As an ex-soccer player of sorts, I would have to agree with Luke on some points, Charlie on others and everything Peter said. I do believe that technology would be very beneficial to most sports. It is the point of contention for traditionalists and the orthodox sports enthusiast that technology will ruin the spirit of the game. However, it is the way in which the technology would be used that will be the determinant of benefiting or ultimately destroying the game. Every modern sport uses some aspect of video review for the benefit of the game, although not all sports are created equally.
Contention #1: Basketball
Basketball makes little use of the instant replay. It relies on 3 refs situated at strategic locations around the court in order to catch every piece of the game. Since the court is small enough for this, every violation can be “caught”. As we know, every violation is not caught, these refs are human and not only do they make bad calls, they can be more lenient on one team versus another, they also only use the instant replay in the last 2 minutes of the game, that’s it. The last 2 minutes. Seems trivial, but apparently James Naismith wrote down on a scroll somewhere that the last 2 minutes are the most important and Gatorade shall be present during ever match. The point is, it’s not used unless there is something that is in very hot contention or the last 2 minutes and basketball is about emotion, skill and supposed to be a quick paced game. Instant replay would literally kill the game.
Technology Use Rating: 3/10, +2 points for LeBron James and Shannon Brown hang-time.
Contention #2: Baseball
America’s past time. This sport has been proudly technology free for a thousand years, until the all powerful umpire union said home run instant replays would be satisfactory to their liking, then the commissioner of baseball paid his tithe and was whipped in the name of the Baseball gods. The officials are the is very reason why replay is kept out of the game. Com’on now, the game actually has an error category in the box scores. Although those are player error, you get the point. The sport is essentially human, and mistakes are as apart of the game, as hotdogs, beer, heckling and steroids. I don’t agree with the no use policy of technology in baseball and frankly I’d be terrified to go against the Umpire Union, but I respect the game for just fucking saying, “If we miss it, it didn’t happen…what are you going to do about it. Yeah? Well, you can’t play anymore baseball today, how do you like my call now?” Expletive, expletive, so on and so forth. It’s usually followed by shuffling dirt at one another and spitting sunflower seeds and chew. Does that make it right? No, but no one fights the powers that be.
Technology Use Rating: -4/10, 1 point is for the HR instant replay reviews, and -4 for Armando Galarraga’s perfect game being blown by Bud Selig on June 3rd 2010.
Contention #3: Tennis
As was commented on before, tennis makes full use of instant replays. And this is for good reason. It is a game of skill, technical skill and exact placement. In terms of technology use, tennis makes basketball look like a bunch of retards running up and down a street in power ranger costumes, beating their chests. Because of the nature and spirit of the game, the use of technology has caused a betterment in officiating and an increase in technique used by the athletes. Essentially, tennis + technology = better tennis.
Technology Use Rating: 8/10, -2 points for Federer and Roddick being old pussies.
Contention #4: Football
The second great game of the United States. The “real” football. The pigskin shuffle. The monster burrito. I’m not sure on that last one, but with the exception of tennis and its endlessness, football mixes the perfect cocktail of the technology at hand with the amount of time necessary to play the game (No ties, always sudden death). The field is huge and it’s full big guys that tend to get in the way of one another, which make calling the game something of a challenge sometimes. When a team thinks the ref is an idiot, they tell him with a little red flag. Bad calls don’t happen often, if anything, more calls are missed then called. (Who knows wtf happens at the bottom of those piles). However (this is huge) the official who makes the elusive bad call becomes ostracized by his professional co-officials, the teams, the league, his family, and ultimately Jesus. There is a high standard for these officials, and most calls are usually spot on. And as with tennis, there is no real rhythm to the game, its more of a set of mini confrontations. So technology fits perfectly in the downtime.
Technology Use Rating: 9/10, -1 point for calls that are still missed from retardation and for Bill Belichick being a fucking cheater.
Contention #5: Soccer
All the bloggers above had very valid opinions. I say that because it’s rude to call someone’s opinion stupid. Also, it’s bad debating. Soccer does suffer from its uniqueness from other sports; the free-flow of the game, the different types of playing styles from literally every nation on the planet, and the various levels of officiating from a diverse group of refs whose nationality itself is the cause for the way games are called and the biggest game in the world being 4 years apart. That shit makes or breaks a person. Realistically, a person gets 2, maybe 3 world cups in their lives. However, I feel that replays in soccer would kill the normal ebb and flow of the game. This doesn’t mean that an addition of a few technological advances would ruin the game itself. A goal line monitor, such as in hockey, would be a great addition for those goals that would be missed by the unobservant ref. As for the tumbles in the box, I feel it is the ultimate responsibility of the ref not to fall for the acting skills of some of today’s top players. The refs are in control of the game, they need to have the balls to not take shit from the prima donnas of the game. Tackling has a very rigid definition, foot on ball contact. If it’s obvious, then cool. Unfortunately, 90% of calls are not obvious.
In a few moments of some games, the refs do get agitated to the point of frustration with these guys who just fall. It’s up to the training of the officials to keep soccer clean. Let’s face it; every player in any game will take a call their way when given the chance. A hard-nosed ref along with a being more liberal with stoppage time and goal monitoring technology will allow justice into the sport. I could go into the some sport psychological points of why soccer is the way it is, but I won’t. It’s a long game with little in the aspect of reward structures. Frustration builds, and then players will do anything to find that ball in the other teams net.
Technology Use Rating: 1/10, +2 for potential of bettering the sport.
Conclusion: A little use of the great advances in sports tech for the game of soccer would be a benefit to all involved.
Eric, I am going to have to disrespectfully disagree with you too. Mostly in reference to your point that you cannot call other peoples opinions stupid. Your retort was very long, started strong, then began to waiver, and quickly trailed off. I will make the logical conclusion that it was technology that caused the downfall of your response. Had you not been distracted by all the “benefits” of technology, you would have finished off what you started with fervor. Now imagine this horrible situation deployed on the soccer field. I can just imagine christiano ronaldo starting to fake out his opponent in front of him, then get distracted by a high pitched tone emanating from his ear piece permanently lodged in his ear by FIFA, then with no warning, he just weeps, and starts walking off the field.
It will be a sad day indeed.
Yeah, I was feeling the trail off near the end. By the time I got to soccer, I think I stopped caring about the issue, also, I was distracted by the girlfriend. Pressing issues and such. That is neither here nor there. I did want to point out the use of technology in common sports today. I just should have stopped after basketball and tennis. However, I thought baseball fails in the same ways as soccer in the use of current tech improvements.
It was Peter who said goal monitoring. I like that and think it can work. No noise, just a light like the shot clock in basketball. Also, YOUR opinions are stupid! Remember that time England lost to Germany in the first stage of the knock-out round after losing the #1 seed in their group to the USA? That was cool.
I’ll keep my ramblings to a minimum next time. I have this tendency to make things longer than they should be.
Me too. I disrespectfully love you Eric and love the comments. Want to write a blog or maybe be our permanent heckler?
I actually think this years world cup was the worst EVER for various reasons ,I am also convinced that the whole game has been destroyed by far too much money being involved and the posers and wags culture,not to even mention the rival supporters hysteria.
I cannot even see the point in a World cup anymore,will it become as silly as the national song contest ? It already has to me .
Rather than get high tech. about it all I think if we are going to keep going for this madness lets actually bring back ‘the good ol days’ and have mobs kicking a ball from village to village,as well as each other ,so to speak, and anything goes,so much more fun.The prima-donnas would really have something to cry about then .I have totally lost interst in the whole sport now ,the only good thing about this last folly was that I actually won £50 for Spain winning,cheers Spain !