Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.

Thierry thieves it... (enhanced)

by Frank Schnittger Wed Nov 18th, 2009 at 08:44:51 PM EST


France 1, Ireland 1.  France win 2:1 on aggregate

France controversially knocked Ireland out of the World Cup Finals tonight with a "goal" scored by Thierry Henry.  There were two French players off-side when the ball was played in, then Richard Dunne was fouled as he tried to head it away, and finally Thierry Henry handled the ball not once, but twice in plain view of everyone bar the referee and his officials before guiding the ball across goal for Gallas to score the winning goal.

Keane hits out at authorities - The Irish Times - Thu, Nov 19, 2009

Henry admitted the ball did strike his hand and claims he told the referee, who chose to allow the goal to stand.

The Barcelona striker said: “The ball hit my hand, I will be honest. It was a handball, you can clearly see it. (Sebastien) Squillaci went to jump with two Irish players, I was behind him and the next thing I know the ball hit my hand.

“It was a handball, but I’m not the ref. I told (the referee) but he said to

me the same: ‘You are not the ref.”’


The goal came after a colossal struggle where Ireland's journeyman professionals frequently outplayed their much more illustrious French counterparts and scored a fine goal through Robbie Keane. In truth, Ireland should have won the game anyway, creating several clear chances, and much credit is also due to an excellent performance by French goalkeeper, Lloris, from Lyon, for saving France from a humiliating home defeat - Melanchthon should be proud!

There is a history of Ireland being knocked out of major competitions by controversial referring decisions and some see in this a consistent pattern of Fifa favouring bigger soccer playing nations as a means of maximising their revenue from the game. The "goal" has renewed calls in the Irish media for "video referees" to be employed in Soccer - as in Rugby - to decide contentious issues like goal or penalty decisions.

Keane hits out at authorities - The Irish Times - Thu, Nov 19, 2009

And Keane claims Fifa president Sepp Blatter and his UEFA counterpart Michel Platini got the result they would have wanted last night. He said: “They’re all probably clapping hands, Platini sitting up there on the phone to Sepp Blatter, probably texting each other, delighted with the result.”

The Tottenham forward also criticised the late decision to seed the play-off ties when it emerged that established football powers such as France, Portugal and at one stage Germany could be involved. Keane said: “Germany had a chance of being in the (play-offs) as well. With two massive countries there’s no way in a million years is there going to be fair draw.”

Henry’s handball was another incident in support of video evidence being used during matches to support referees.

However, once made, those decisions cannot be altered, and so we must wish France bonne chance in the World Cup this summer. Cheating and diving is not exactly unknown in soccer and the frustration of Irish fans is directed not so much at Thierry Henry for doing what he did, but rather there is a certain incredulity that the referee and both his linesmen could have missed seeing the rather obvious infringements leading up to the goal.

Irish domestic soccer is going through very hard times at the moment with several clubs broke or on the verge of going broke. Missing out on the World Cup will cost the Football Association of Ireland several million Euros which it badly needs to keep the domestic game solvent. Virtually all of Ireland's international players play in the English professional leagues but very few play for the top clubs which have any chance of winning anything. For many of them this is probably their last chance of playing in a World Cup or making a lucrative move to a more successful club.

Nobody claims that this Irish team has many particularly skilful players (unlike the team which made it to the World Cup quarter-finals in Italy in 1990) and so they probably would not have done all that well in the Finals. However they played their hearts out tonight and, on the balance of play, deserved to win against a nervous and disorganised looking French side. Defeat is so much harder to take when you have worked so hard to play above your natural level of ability.

Soccer is a minority sport in Ireland - behind Gaelic Football, Hurling and Rugby - and whilst the Rugby team are the reigning European Grand Slam Champions and have genuine pretensions to world class, Soccer is nearly always going to be the poor relation. However the Irish public have taken this team very much to heart and this defeat will not help the national mood of despondency.

Many people attribute the start of the Celtic Tiger era, in part, to the success of the Soccer team in the 1990 World Cup finals, and there is no doubt that sport plays a huge role in the Irish psyche. We don't want to go back to the years of "moral victories" and conspiracy theories for defeats, so only real success on the playing fields matters now. France had better watch out when the Irish Rugby team come to Paris on February 13th. They will be on a mission to avenge their wronged soccer cousins!

Display:
I didn't see all the match, but France were (almost) total rubbish from what I saw. Ireland deserved to win, and it probably is down to one of those last-minute favour-the-big-side (and home country last night) refereeing decisions.

It's no consolation for the Irish, but winning is a poisoned chalice for France. I'd have preferred to see them eliminated, Raymond Domenech at last ejected, and a new French team built with a real coach instead of a con man.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 01:53:08 AM EST
France seemed to get it together in the extra time and were finally playing like a team that was trying to win.  I would have preferred to see penalty kicks. Also, where was Benzema???
by paving on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 07:21:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
European Tribune - Thierry thieves it...
there is a certain incredulity that the referee and both his linesmen could have missed seeing the rather obvious infringements leading up to the goal.

A long, long time ado, I remember my mother getting outraged by the blatant shenanigans on Saturday afternoon TV wrestling.

The shenanigans - presumably - continue, joined by reliable tales of match fixing in the UK and US.

Is it hard to imagine that referees and some of the players might throw a match like this?

One of the reasons I don't follow football is because as theatre, it's just not that convincing or well-acted.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:59:33 AM EST
No conspiracy. Error is human.
Some of the Irish players were crying after the match. It was a real fight & I seriously doubt that fixing accusations hold any water.
Don't forget that just minutes before, the referee had annulled a goal scored by France because of an off-side. The pressure was high & he made a decision in a split second... which turned out wrong. That's all there is to it.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:05:27 AM EST
I didn't mention the referee by name because overall I thought he was quite fair on the night.  It is possible that neither the referee or the two linesmen saw the incidents leading up to the goal and it was late in extra time and so he might have been tired and having difficulty keeping close to the action.  Television replies didn't show his position relative to the handball incident although they indicated that the far linesman (who also missed the off-side) should have seen it.

Overall I'm not inclined to believe the conspiracy theory - perhaps, at most,  the unconscious bias of favouring the home/bigger team as referees depend on the powers that be for future appointments.  There has been a pattern  of Ireland losing to controversial or wrong refering decissions at the final hurdle to qualifying for big tournaments, so I can see why some would harbour notions of conspiracy.

For instance Fifa changed the rules for the play-offs AFTER the eight teams in the pay-offs had been decided - from an open draw to a seeded draw - which meant the lower ranked teams like Ireland won't meet a higher ranked team like France, and the higher ranked teams couldn't meet each other.  In any other sphere of human activity, such a late changing of the rules to help the bigger players would be actionavble in the courts especially as it has revenue implications of many millions of Euros.

Fifa admitt5ed afterwards it had "made a mistake" in changing the rules after the teams had qualified - but it makes those sorts of "mistakes" all the time in order to maximise its income.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:36:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Frank Schnittger:
which meant the lower ranked teams like Ireland won't meet a higher ranked team like France, and the higher ranked teams couldn't meet each other

Should have been "would"

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:44:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In any case, the Irish played a better quality game - especially in the 1st half. 2nd half was closer. The French really got their stuff together in over-time. It was a highly charged match! I had a great time. Sorry for the leprechauns.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:46:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
were you at the match?

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:48:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was indeed. At home in front of my TV set with my son. No beer. No chips. No peanuts. Just the game.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:49:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think the linesman was on the far corner from Henry, so it is entirely possible that he didn't see it - there were at least the goalie and Gallas between Henry and him, as well as Hanry using his far hand and raising his leg at the same time.

The one thing I would like to see come out of this is the long overdue ability to judge based on real-time video footage. There's been a 4th referee off the pitch for, what, 15 years now? Time for FIFA to change the rules of the game to allow the use of video to make calls.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:54:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Irish TV replays showed a graphically enhanced slo-mo which appeared to indicate the far linesman had a clear line of sight with Henry facing him and Gallas only arriving a split second later.  However when these things happen in real time 30 Metres away, it may be altogether less clear.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:25:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Don't forget that just minutes before, the referee had annulled a goal scored by France because of an off-side.

Forgetting that referee errors go both ways -- standard procedure :-) (Also see South Korea-Italy, 2002.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:05:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course they do, but no one is claiming that the referee made any mistakes in favour of Ireland and I specifically said the ref (and the German ref. for the first leg) was very fair apart from that incident.  That goal, too, was offside.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:18:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
no one is claiming that the referee made any mistakes in favour of Ireland

I thought vladimir did just that, and the fouler of Anelka got no card either.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:42:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think there was a foul. Anelka tried to get a penalty kick but the keeper is sliding perfectly along the ground.

Admittedly, Lloris got sent out and conceded a penalty kick for even less than that against Serbia, but then France complained.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:45:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Actually the referee did make a mistake when he issued a yellow card to Florent MALOUDA in the 88th minute.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:55:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There was also another occasion in the 2nd half where the referee was lenient on the Irish team... he could have easily given the French a penalty kick as there was an Irish foul in the box.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:52:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You mean when Anelka dived and didn't get a yellow card?

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 01:40:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
.
Referee perhaps missed a few fouls - BYU vs New Mexico Girls Soccer. Seemed the girls weren't complaining, took matter into their own hands.

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

by Oui on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 02:43:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't want to overplay this, but there are parts of the world where the Henry incident would have given rise to rioting and perhaps even deaths.  I think the conduct of the players and supporters was exemplary - as always - as witnessed by the incident where Lloris made a brilliant and very brave save at Robbie Keane's feet just as the latter was about to shoot.  It could have led to a nasty injury.  Robbie Keane patted Lloris on the head and congratulated him on a great and brave piece of goalkeeping.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 02:51:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
.
Death threats for Urs Meier. Just love those fans hooligans.

I'm still a referee in field hockey with two matches each weekend, not for the federation but at highest club level. It's fun and always a great challenge. The level of abuse throughout the years is a wave pattern of increase and a reversal. A lot of effort is made in awareness of sportsmanship by the youth. Usually the problem lies with coaches and parents.

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

by Oui on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:10:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
They won, but I don't know if they took matters into their own hands.  Clearly NMSU is dirty.  The coach ought to get a huge fine, and this was nasty enough that I wouldn't mind seeing the NCAA suspend people for the remainder of the year.  The fact that ponytail girl was still walking after the game shows some serious class on BYU's part.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Sat Nov 21st, 2009 at 06:27:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Keane hits out at authorities - The Irish Times - Thu, Nov 19, 2009

Robbie Keane hit out at the presidents of Fifa and Uefa following the Republic of Ireland's World Cup exit, claiming they would be "delighted" that France had gone through thanks to a hugely controversial winning goal.

Striker Thierry Henry clearly handled the ball before squaring it across goal for William Gallas to net the winner after Republic skipper Keane had levelled the aggregate score in the first half of the play-off second leg in Paris.

And Keane claims Fifa president Sepp Blatter and his UEFA counterpart Michel Platini got the result they would have wanted last night.

He said: "They're all probably clapping hands, Platini sitting up there on the phone to Sepp Blatter, probably texting each other, delighted with the result."

The Tottenham forward also criticised the late decision to seed the play-off ties when it emerged that established football powers such as France, Portugal and at one stage Germany could be involved.

Keane said: "Germany had a chance of being in the (play-offs) as well. With two massive countries there's no way in a million years is there going to be fair draw."

Henry's handball was another incident in support of video evidence being used during matches to support referees.

He added: "He (Henry) nearly caught it, so it's a bit of a killer. When you see the reaction of the players, (goalkeeper) Shay (Given) especially, he's two yards away from it.

"You don't get a reaction like that if he's not sure it's a handball. He almost caught it and ran into the net with it."

Henry admitted the ball did strike his hand and claims he told the referee, who chose to allow the goal to stand.

The Barcelona striker said: "The ball hit my hand, I will be honest. It was a handball, you can clearly see it. (Sebastien) Squillaci went to jump with two Irish players, I was behind him and the next thing I know the ball hit my hand.

"It was a handball, but I'm not the ref. I told (the referee) but he said to

me the same: `You are not the ref."'



notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:53:42 AM EST
Frank Schnittger:
Henry admitted the ball did strike his hand and claims he told the referee, who chose to allow the goal to stand.

...

"It was a handball, but I'm not the ref. I told (the referee) but he said to

me the same: `You are not the ref."'

WTF?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:59:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If Henry told the referee, kudos to him, but that makes the referee's decision totally incomprehensible

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:09:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I suppose it depends on when he told the ref.  Refs are very reluctant to change their minds once the have made a decision.  The most obvious thing would have been for him to signal to his hand to the ref the moment the goal was scored - and that didn't happen according to the footage I saw.  

However in fairness to Henry - players cheat and dive all the time and if they succeed in fooling the referee it is (almost) considered fair game - although the "anglos" like to get sniffy with the "Latins" claiming they have brought this to a fine art and undermined the spirit of the game.

One of the reasons I prefer Rugby is that there is a lot less play-acting going on - it is against the players code of honour - although it has been creeping in a bit more of late as the game gets more "professional" - witness "bloodgate" in England when Harlequins used artificial blood to simulate an injury in a critical match against Leinster.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:18:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Once the referee blows his whistle to signal a goal, the deal is done. He can choose to not "call" the goal, pending analysis - including video footage. But this referee "called" the goal & that's that.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:47:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The referee blows the whistle to stop play, and then he calls the goal or not. So there is always time for the decision to be reviewed before play is resumed.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:19:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
.
Referee may change decision before restarting the game.

FIFA Laws of the Game

The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are fi nal.

The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or, at his discretion, on the advice of an assistant referee or the fourth official, provided that he has not restarted play or terminated the match.

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

by Oui on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:34:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
From what I read, it should read "I told (Richard Dunne)after the game, but he said..."

So, he didn't tell the referee during the game, but an Irish player after the game.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 07:26:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You call it soccer in Ireland?

English is simply too confusing.

PS. In South Africa I always talked about football; it seems the dominant use.

by Nomad on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:59:26 AM EST
It depends on the context.  Football is the shorthand if everyone knows what's involved.  But in Ireland that could be confused with Gaelic Football and in this case I was writing for a non-sports orientated (and significantly US) forum and I wanted to make the context clear.  In the US football is American football?

I suspect soccer is always called football where soccer is the dominant form of football.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:08:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
足球 is literally "foot-ball"
by wu ming on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 10:12:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So how are French newspapers and TV news reporting this?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:24:42 AM EST
Roselyn Bachelot (Sarkozy's minister for sport and health) tells Domenech to "shape up"... says the French team performed poorly... the game was too close for comfort...

Article on Irish press reacting negatively to the referee's call... injustice, stolen match, etc.

Thierry Henry says: I did touch the ball, but I'm not the referee.

France qualifies without glory...

Synthesis: the mood is NOT a party.

by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:47:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
FIFA.com - Final four win through in Europe

France 1-1 Republic of Ireland (first leg 1-0)
Goals: William Gallas 103 (France); Robbie Keane 32 (Republic of Ireland)

The story of the game
Hosts France were kept completely quiet in the first half by an Ireland team burning with passion, conviction and the desire to battle for every ball. Robbie Keane's strike not long after the half-hour was just reward for the efforts the visitors had put in and it took heroics from France goalkeeper Hugo Lloris to limit the damage to one goal. Les Bleus came into the contest after the break but remained vulnerable to Irish attacks, meaning the tie had to be resolved in extra time, when William Gallas equalised to send his team through to their fourth consecutive finals.

The key moment
After 180 hard-fought minutes, the fate of both teams was decided by a moment of drama in extra time. The outcome remained in the balance until the very last second, and when the final whistle was blown the disappointed Irish could hold their heads up high.

The man of the match
France have long been looking for a successor to Fabien Barthez and they have found the perfect candidate in Hugo Lloris. In this game, as in the opening leg, the Lyon No1 bolstered his burgeoning reputation with a string of top-class saves.



Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:50:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Fantastic performance from Hugo Lloris. What a champion.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:53:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, he's still second to Frey, but since Domenech has long decided not to pick the best possible keeper (possibly for astrological reasons -he has been known to do that on many occasions) Lloris is indeed a very good second choice.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 07:21:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/internationals/8368100.stm

Irish Justice Minister Dermot Ahern has joined the furore over French captain Henry's handball by demanding a rematch in the interests of fair play.

"They probably won't grant it as we are minnows in world football but let's put them (Fifa) on the spot," the minister said.

"It's the least we owe the thousands of devastated young fans around the country.

"Otherwise, if that result remains, it reinforces the view that if you cheat, you will win.

"Thierry Henry has admitted handling the ball, claims he told the ref he handled it.

"Millions of people worldwide saw it was a blatant double handball - not to mention a double offside - and we should put the powers that be in the cosy world of Fifa on the spot and demand a replay."


by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:04:05 AM EST
I would support a replay but mostly because I expect France would destroy Ireland.
by paving on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 07:30:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
.
Always wonderful to see them play and honor to many greats in Irish soccer history. Loved the period when coached by the Giraffe. Luck wasn't with the Irish yesterday, but I admire their exemplary sportsmanship. Thierry Henry did what comes natural on professional level of sports, looking to gain an edge in play. It's the referee and linesmen to be focused on the play, however when the area is filled with so many players and the speed of the game, extra officials or multi-angle views from cameras are needed for instant replay analysis. Although Henry admits the handball, the more famous cheater of them all is of course Maradona and the Hand of God.

VIDEO - Henry Handball takes Ireland out of World Cup finals

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

by Oui on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:22:16 AM EST
This is the kind of thing that makes me accept the instant replay rules in American football, even if it's annoying as all get out when the refs occasionally take too long.

And, anyway, don't get mad.  Get even.  There are ways to deal with cheaters.  Christ, can't any of you nanny-staters across the Pond throw a proper chop-block?

(kidding, of course)

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:49:59 AM EST
Instant replay in American and Canadian football - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In American and Canadian football, instant replay is a method of reviewing a play using cameras at various angles to determine the accuracy of the initial call of the officials. An instant replay can take place in the event of a close or otherwise controversial call, either at the request of a team's head coach (with limitations) or the officials themselves.

There are restrictions on what types of plays can be reviewed. In general, most penalty calls or lack thereof cannot be reviewed, nor can a play that is whistled dead by the officials before the play could come to its rightful end. Examples of plays that cannot be reviewed - even if replays would show an incorrect call was made - include a quarterback fumble recovered by the defensive team that is ruled an incomplete pass and thus whistled dead, or a player ruled downed or out of bounds when in fact he was not.

American and Canadian football leagues vary in their application and use of instant replay review.



En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:51:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Now if you really want to make your head hurt, look up the Tom Brady Reacharound "Tuck Rule".  A "rule" I've never heard invoked since.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:02:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The 4th (off-pitch) referee was introduced at the 1994 World Cup organised by the US. The reform didn't go far enough back then.

FIFA's excuse has always been something ridiculous like wanting to preserve the "human element" in the game.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:53:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Preserving this "human element" ensures a subject for lively debate at least...

And hence it keeps the masses distracted from what truly matters... </tinfoil hat>

by Nomad on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:01:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
But do we want the game permanently stopped for every review, like in American football and hockey?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:04:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It almost never stops for more than a minute or two.  Usually it's more like 20 seconds, because they have another referee upstairs who can do reviews while the next play sets up.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:05:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That's enough, especially if it happens every few minutes. (And I think asking and even playing for it would become a tactic like putting on off-side and diving is now.)

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:07:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It doesn't happen every few minutes.  In fact, I don't think it's happened at all in the last several weeks I've watched.  If you challenge -- and I think you're limited to one challenge per half -- and the call on the field is upheld, you're penalized by losing a timeout (so you'd better be pretty sure it'll be overturned).

I'm not saying FIFA should allow it as much as American football.  That'd be stupid.  But missing a call like this is pretty outrageous, and I think you could have a review rule that wouldn't interfere with the game too much.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.

by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:12:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's that rare? Sorry, I was misinformed.

If you challenge -- and I think you're limited to one challenge per half

That would definitely not be enough in football.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:50:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, you'd keep your right to an appeal if vindicated of course.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:54:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Because of the nature of [soccer] football, reviewing an off-side call after play has stopped is pointless. What review can do is decide on possession when game resumes.

You could make the review really restrictive. There's nothing lost from making it automatic every time the referee stops play by blowing the whistle. This includes goals, penalties and free kicks. I am at a loss trying to find instances where a team could ask for play to be stopped for review.

Thinking about offside again, play should generally continue. If the offside play results in possession for the defending team, nothing is gained by stopping. If it results in a corner, possession can be granted to the defending team if there was off-side (again, ample time for the 4th referee to decide this while the corner is set up (after all, it requires a blow of the whistle to resume play). If it results in a goal, there should be an automatic review and there is again ample time.

The only case I can think of not covered by this is off-side not called resulting in a side throw (not a corner) for the attacking team.

There's the issue of reviewing when play is stopped for a minor foul which doesn't grant a direct free kick. This should happen very seldom and I don't like it when the attacking team executes this in haste to catch the defenders flat-footed anyway.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:18:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In rugby it happens if a ref isn't sure whether a try has been scored - and for disciplinary issues after a match.  Sometimes refs over use it as a CYA tactic, but generally it only takes less than a minute and happens perhaps once a match.  

What is sometimes forgotten is that there may only be one camera angle that clearly resolves the issue, and it is conceivable that the TV company might not make that angle available for viewing - it puts the TV company in a quasi-judicial position.

In soccer - where diving is rampant - it could also be used to adjudicate on penalty decisions - as that is almost tantamount to awarding a goal, and hopefully it would reduce the incidence of diving.

Extending it to offside could become intrusive, as offside calls  are made on a regular basis - although admittedly the offside rule is so difficult to referee that mistakes happen almost every match.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:31:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What TV company? You should have one "official" camera at each corner of the pitch. TV footage can help but it shouldn't be necessary.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:35:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Don't forget that soccer is played at all levels and age groups and it would only be viable to have "official" cameras at the top level.  

However TV coverage is becoming more pervasive - sometimes with only one or two cameras at the lower levels.  There is also a lot of skill and technology involved in the camera work - moving cameras along the touch line, overhead cameras, close-ups at the right time etc.  It is a very skilled task for a cameraman to follow the action accurately.

However I don't think it would be beyond the ability of Fifa to draft a regulation as to require the availability of footage from every TV camera at the ground - they're all linked to one editing suite in any case - and usually all belong to one sports/news organisation/channel.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:46:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Frank Schnittger:
Don't forget that soccer is played at all levels and age groups and it would only be viable to have "official" cameras at the top level.  
And that is different from American Football, how?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:58:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
American football has replay in college.  More restrictive rules than pro, but still.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:17:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
...adding: But college football is obviously a big thing in America, so it's viable.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:20:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The argument deployed by FIFA against the deployment of Cameras is that they wish to make the refereeing identical at all levels of the game, so as sunday league play  cannot afford cameras etc, then they wont apply it to Professional and international games.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:21:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Sure, because each Sunday league game has 4 official referees involved, with someone calculating the length of extra time. Each game I ever played had that. Promise.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 12:07:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You must be a top player - any game I ever played barely had a referee - but then I don't have a left foot...

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 12:38:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Mmm I thought that my sarcasm was blatant enough. Obviously not.

I've only occasionally had a neutral referee, and I played at a decent level as a keeper or -indeed- left-footed striker.
It's clear that the FIFA argument is spurious.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 01:35:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
When making parallels between soccer and other sports, one should indeed compare the relative levels, and relative opportunities for, fouls (and foul-looking unintentional mishaps).

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:47:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There's the issue of reviewing when play is stopped for a minor foul which doesn't grant a direct free kick. This should happen very seldom

Why?

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:45:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Just don't allow teams to request a review of that, especially not the defending team which would be the one with an incentive to foul to interrupt play, and to delay by challenging.

In other words, if the call doesn't result in a change in possession or a free kick, don't review it.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:03:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah, that. Then I understand the previous better, but disagree with

There's nothing lost from making it automatic every time the referee stops play by blowing the whistle.

Except every stop would be lengthened by several seconds, especially free kicks far from the goal.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:24:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You're referring to free kicks where possession has passed to the defending team on their own half of the pitch.

As this interrupts an ongoing attack in the defending team's pitch, the attacking team would want a review and should be granted one. How many seconds are we talking about here?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:38:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The NFL made similar excuses years ago before instant replay.  The "human element" (what the hell is that?) wasn't lost, and the calls have been fairer ever since.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:04:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
FAI demands rematch - The Irish Times - Thu, Nov 19, 2009

Having considered their position, the FAI today confirmed that they will lobby world football's governing body for the game to be replayed.

"Conclusive video evidence of a deliberate hand ball by Thierry Henry, which led to France's additional time goal, has been seen by millions of football fans worldwide," the FAI said today.

"The blatantly incorrect decision by the referee to award the goal has damaged the integrity of the sport and we now call on Fifa, as the world governing body for our sport, to organise for this match to be replayed."

While the chances of Fifa ordering a replay are slim, football's governing body do have the power to demand a rematch and have done so in the past and the FAI have cited that example.

In the qualifying campaign for the 2006 finals, Uzbekistan's World Cup qualifier with Bahrain was replayed after Japanese referee Toshimitsu Yoshida made a technical error.

When Uzbekistan had a penalty disallowed for an attacking player encroaching, Yoshida awarded a free out rather than calling for the penalty to be retaken. Upon reviewing the incident, Fifa called for the game to be replayed in its entirety.

"There is precedent for the invalidation of such results," the FAI explained. "In 2005, the Bureau of the FIFA World Cup organising committee reached a decision to invalidate the result of a World Cup qualification match between Uzbekistan and Bahrain on the basis of a `technical error by the referee of the match."



notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 10:54:30 AM EST
This isn't going to fly.
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 11:00:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]
My guess: FiFa announce commission to consider video evidence for world cup in future but announce they cannot allow reply for a "non-technical" issue because of the precedent it would create.

(5% chance) - Fifa announce once off replay for this world cup - pending above commission report -  and citing "special circumstances" of pay-off format.

  1. To make lots of money
  2. Because they feel guilty about changing rule re: seeding when it became clear France would be in play-off
  3. Because Blatter/Platini are Swiss/French and will not want to be seen to favour their own countries


notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 11:21:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
... here we go again :(
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 11:14:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
would France not have done the same if the positions were reversed?

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 11:22:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 11:12:10 AM EST
by vladimir on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 11:17:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
FAI counting on French goodwill not Fifa's - The Irish Times - Thu, Nov 19, 2009

Taoiseach Brian Cowen said he would raise the disputed goal with French president Nicolas Sarkozy on the fringes of this evening's EU summit, adding that the Government will support the FAI's call for a rematch.

"I think that fair play is a fundamental part of the game and I think the official complaint they have lodged will be supported by us," Mr Cowen said as he arrived at the summit in Brussels.

"Our Minister for Sports actually will write to Fifa in support of that complaint and look for a rematch."

Asked whether he would discuss the matter with Mr Sarkozy, the Taoiseach said "we'll probably have a chat about it away from the table."

Asked if he would raise the question of the French having to agree to rematch, Mr Cowen said: "I want to acknowledge the sense of fair play of the French public who have been making it clear in great numbers that there would be a lot of disquiet about the manner of the goal. But I'm not going to raise it to that high diplomatic status."

He added: "I just want to see dealt with on the basis of the regulatory bodies of football, making sure that fair play is upheld here."

French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said it was not up to either government to get involved in Fifa decisions.



notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:01:24 PM EST
I saw Cowen on TV, looking like a sick calf. He's just riding this for what he can get. As if he and Sarko can decide on a replay.

Ireland were robbed, it's true, but other teams have been robbed before -- including France, btw.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:16:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's a great chance to play the populist "man of the people" card.  Cowen has nothing else going for him right now.  There have been instances of matches being replayed where both parties agree and I think the ideal outcome - for all sides - would be a replay with France winning fair and square, plus a commitment to lock at having a video referee for goal/penalty decisions for this world cup only on  a trial basis.  I doubt the French Federation would take the risk as the financial implications are huge.  If they had a decent manager France would win 9 times out of 10, but with Domenech, who knows?

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:31:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ribery (where are the accents?) might well be healthy then.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
by Crazy Horse on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:30:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You mean like Argentina-England in 1986 (Maradona's original God's hand), OM-Benfica in 1990 or France-Germany in 1982...

AFAIK those games were not granted a rematch. Ref mistakes happen, always have, always will.

by Bernard on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:32:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]
All the more reason to introduce video evidence for difficult decisions on goals/penalties - technology - and other sports have moved on since then.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:37:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That would of course be better.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I was thinking of France-Germany in 1982, where it wasn't just a hand, it was a player knocked out with a cracked vertebra.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:42:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How about Tassotti breaking Luis Enrique's nose in a world cup quarter final?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:58:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
This poll by Le Monde suggests that 90% of voters don't think France deserves its qualification...

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:33:50 PM EST
on over 100,000 votes. (How many from Ireland, I dont know)

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:39:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]
866 after I voted.
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:51:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The interesting point here is that even without the Henry "goal" the tie was still drawn and would have gone to penalties if no further goals were scored.  So technically Ireland cannot claim to have been robbed of qualification - merely that they were denied a fair opportunity to do so.  France, in my view, were still in the driving seat as they have a superb goal-keeper and technically adept penalty takers.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 03:41:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, forgotten in much of this is that fact as well as the clear result earlier in the week, where France beat Ireland at home 1-0.  If Ireland had actually won their game I'd be more sympathetic.
by paving on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 07:34:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well without the disputed goal, France would have lost at home too, so how does the fact that Ireland lost at home make them any less deserving of sympathy?

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:07:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thierre Henry's story makes it sound like ball to hand. As always, the more critical error is the offside - they really need some little transponders in their shoes or something for the big games.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:06:49 PM EST
That's bullshit (understandable, but still bullshit).  He actual used his hand to prevent the ball going over the dead ball line and guide it onto his foot.  I'm not sure how the trigonometry works, but the TV replays appear to give an accurate graphically constructed line showing the offside line (simulating a view across the pitch in line with the last defender) without the need for transponders.

The technical difficulty with the offside rule is that it applies at the instance the ball is kicked up field - not at the instant a player receives it.  So you have to know both the relative positions of all the players and the precise moment the ball was kicked toward them.

This is a very difficult rule to implement because a linesman has to be literally looking at the player passing the ball (who could be 50 metres back) and across the line of the last defender at the same time - i.e. in two different directions at the same time.  A player can be 10 yards past the last defender when the ball actually arrives and still be onside provided he was parallel with the last defender when the ball was kicked up field.

A camera angle (far from the pitch) which can take in both the passing and the receiving player at the same time is required, and TV Companies have become adept at providing this AND also providing a graphic representation of the offside line as if the camera was exactly in line with the last defender.  Presumably there is some fancy program which works out the math based on the exact position (at the instant the ball is passed) of the passing player, the receiving player, and the camera itself.

It is arguably a rule which can ONLY be accurately enforced with the aid of cameras and computer technology.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 04:21:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The technical difficulty with the offside rule is that it applies at the instance the ball is kicked up field - not at the instant a player receives it.  So you have to know both the relative positions of all the players and the precise moment the ball was kicked toward them.

This is a very difficult rule to implement because a linesman has to be literally looking at the player passing the ball (who could be 50 metres back) and across the line of the last defender at the same time - i.e. in two different directions at the same time.

The linesman only has to be looking at both passer and attacker if he or she has no other way of telling the timing of the pass. Hence the transponders, and a beep in the ear when the ball is struck toward that linesman's goal line.

Of course, a player could head or chest a ball to the attacker, but they would not normally be so far back.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:23:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
How can a transponder tell the timing of the pass?  A player could be kicking another player, the ball could be deflected off another player (attacking or defending).  Trust me - the current TV/Computer triangulation methods seem to work - and its damn hard to get it right all the time if you are a linesman without recourse to video technology.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:34:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Please note also that only players actively influencing play can be deemed offside and there can be an awful lot of interpretation as to exactly what that means...

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offside_%28association_football%29


notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:41:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
In the end the conclusion is that the offside rule can only be applied after game has been stopped "naturally", to decide on ball possession or possibly a goal.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:00:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
My view would be that video adjudication should only be allowed where a "goal" has been scored or a penalty awarded and the ref isn't sure  - so he gets a second opinion from the video ref.  - which can include a consideration of whether their might have been an offside leading up to the goal/penalty whether or not it was flagged by the linesman.  In other words where the ref considers a linesman may have flagged an offside in error, or where he may have failed to flag an offside in error, and a goal/penalty award depends on the outcome.

In other words the video ref will only very occasionally be called on for an opinion.

Where an offside is flagged or an alleged offside is not flagged in normal play but where there are no immediate major consequences the ref/linesman should just make the decision as they do now without anyone having recourse to the video ref.  Of course there may be some wrong calls made in that instance, but where there are no major consequences it is best to just let the play carry on immediately as now.

The major problems in soccer are :

  1. Goals which are not allowed which should have been

  2. Goals which are allowed which should not have been

  3. Penalties which are awarded when a player actually dived or simulated a foul

  4. Penalties which are not awarded where a foul actually occurred in the penalty area.

  5. Players wrongly yellow/red carded or not carded when the ref was unsighted/unsure

The video ref should only be called on to improve the accuracy of decisions in those important and contentious circumstances and thus hopefully improve the fairness of results and the incidence of players diving/cheating/feigning injury to get other players sent off or undeserved penalties awarded.

In rugby, the decision to consult the video ref is at the discretion of the ref and is done when the ref is not sure about what the correct decision should be.  It only applies to tries although video footage can also be used in disciplinary procedings afterwards for yellow/red card offences which may or may not have been spotted by the ref at the time.  There is an independent "citing commissioner" who reviews the video footage and decides whether any incidents occurred which warrant disciplinary action or investigation.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:22:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
It's impractical, when the majority of problematic offside errors are when they are called wrongly, yet the game is stopped before a goal has been scored (or at any rate the defending team can claim to have stopped playing).

If you pass the ball to the striker who will be one to one against the goalkeeper, the odds are that he will score. But he has not, yet. If he's called offside, wrongly (very common), he won't have a chance to show he was going to score.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 03:15:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Therefore the game should be allowed to stop naturally and then reviewed.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 04:02:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, then the keeper will make a desperate dive in the striker's legs and get injured, and you'll get complaints that an obvious offside should have stopped play.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 05:04:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Do you play keeper? I do. I say let play continue and review if there's a goal.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 05:31:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I say give the option to the ref to do so, but it shouldn't be a requirement.

If you're certain there's an offside, call it.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 10:55:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And, by the way, the honest answer was "I used to".

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 10:56:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In Rugby the use of the TVO (TV official) is purely to review whether a valid trey has been scored if the ref isn't sure.  It happens maybe one in three tries scored.  It is not used if the ref is happy a try has been scored, or to review play leading up to the try - other than in the second or so before the actual touch down to check for a knock on or other offence the ref might have missed.

I do not think the TVO should be brought in other than at the request of the ref (NOT by team players or managers), and only if the ref has doubts about whether to award a goal, penalty, or perhaps a sending off.

Otherwise soccer is a game played by humans, for humans, with all the mistakes and errors of judgement that entails on all sides - which, unless there is systematic bias, will generally even themselves out more or less over the course of a 90 min. match.

The problem with soccer is that goals, penalties and sending offs are relatively rare and can profoundly influence the course of a match without sufficient chance for the normal random process of mistakes favouring both sides having time to equalise matters.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 05:31:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
.
Association Football Rules - History and development

Football ruling body is a conservative group of (elderly) people who prefer to keep the game unchanged. One of the biggest changes was to allow two and later three substitutions (1965). My personal experience as referee in field hockey, the sport has evolved with many changes of the rules to account for new artificial pitches and the speed of the game. The off-side rule was banished which provided for ease of umpiring and a great increase in goals scored. For substitutions, hockey has the interchange rule which results in full match action. The game has always been covered by two referees, responsible for one half field and an imaginery diagonal to support each other in difficult situations in the penalty area. The most recent change adopted, after a year of experiments, is the self-pass. You can dribble with the ball as soon as a foul was called. This has further increased the speed of the game and decreased the possibility for players to start a discussion with the referee, because play has already resumed.

For football rule changes I would go for two referees, two linesmen, two goal guards and a video team. Banish the off-side rule, perhaps with the exception one cannot score a goal in off-side position. For a yellow card, send the player to a penalty box for 10 minutes. A free kick should be taken almost instantly and banish the formation of a wall of players which delays play for many minutes. Be tough on verbal abuse/harsh criticism towards referees during the match and afterwards in press comments by players and coaching staff. The FA should take responsibility when a referee makes too many bad calls.

The Association of Football Statisticians (AFS)

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

by Oui on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 02:34:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... it discriminates against linesmen which are hard of hearing, and with the pool of linesmen already limited to those who are half blind, further restricting it to those with excellent hearing might make it difficult to staff the position.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:32:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
hearing can be a problem when there are 80,000 supporters roaring their team on, and the linesman is within 5 feet of some of them.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 05:40:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... in which case headphones for the ball passing signals would be an occupational health and safety improvement as well.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 at 10:34:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
rugby official are wired up for sound do they can talk to each other and the TV match official

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 at 01:29:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... (rugby league in Commonwealth English).

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 at 05:21:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
by Oui on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 06:14:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... that it's only a game?
by Pope Epopt on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 08:52:16 PM EST
Bill Shankly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that."


notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Thu Nov 19th, 2009 at 09:29:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Just be glad it wasn't Brazil and Argentina.

Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
by Drew J Jones (pedobear@pennstatefootball.com) on Sat Nov 21st, 2009 at 06:09:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
... that soccer is an effete game played by multi-millionaire actors in a corporate context that renders the content of the game irrelevant.

Contrast this with France's excellent start to the international rugby football season - both stylish and physical, while enjoying the benefits of video playbacks to ensure fair decisions.  

Ireland weren't half bad against Australia, either.

by Pope Epopt on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 06:27:34 AM EST
Pope Epopt:
Ireland weren't half bad against Australia, either.

And has a "try" disallowed by the video referee because there was no camera angle which could conclusively show the ball being grounded.  An entirely fair and proper decision even if the ball had been grounded.

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 07:13:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Henry says replay 'the fairest solution' - The Irish Times - Fri, Nov 20, 2009

France captain Thierry Henry has admitted replaying the World Cup qualification play-off against the Republic of Ireland would be "the fairest solution". The Barcelona forward has also spoken of his "embarrassment" at the manner of Les Bleus' victory over the Irish in Wednesday's game in Paris.

"Naturally I feel embarrassed at the way that we won and feel extremely sorry for the Irish who definitely deserve to be in South Africa," said Henry, whose handball in the build-up to William Gallas' equaliser on Wednesday night enabled the French to go through 2-1 on aggregate.

"Of course the fairest solution would be to replay the game but it is not in my control."

Earlier today, Fifa moved to dash hopes of a replay of the match. FAI chief executive John Delaney had formally requested a replay but the world governing body ruled the result cannot be changed and the match cannot be replayed.

Fifa's statement read: "Fifa has today 20 November 2009 replied to the request made by the Football Association of Ireland (FAI) to replay the 2010 Fifa World Cup play-off match held on November 18th, 2009 between France and the Republic of Ireland in Paris.

"In the reply, Fifa states that the result of the match cannot be changed and the match cannot be replayed. As is clearly mentioned in the Laws of the Game during matches, decisions are taken by the referee and these decisions are final."



notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 10:17:06 AM EST
Henry should get off it already. After "it was handball but I'm not the ref", "there should be a replay but I'm not FIFA".

How about not cheating on the pitch next time?

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 10:39:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, yes of course.

But once the cheating has been done, I find that more honourable than Maradona's insistence that he had not used his hand.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 10:54:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
He insists he didn't cheat.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by DoDo on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 02:49:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
French minister breaks ranks with Sarkozy to call for World Cup replay | International Football - Times Online

Yesterday the prime ministers of both countries became involved, with Francois Fillon warning Brian Cowen to keep out of the scandal after the Taoiseach said that he would discuss his call for the Ireland-France match to be replayed with President Sarkozy. Mr Fillon said that neither government should interfere in the decisions of Fifa, world football's governing body.

Mr Sarkozy later attempted to defuse the row by expressing sympathy for Ireland's plight, but Christine Lagarde, the French Economy Minister, has poured fresh fuel on the flames this morning.

"I am obviously very happy that the team is in the World Cup but I think it's very sad to have qualified on this, well, on this cheating," Lagarde told France's RTL radio. "And I think that Fifa would do well to look at the rules because I think it would be good, in such circumstances, to decide maybe to replay the match."



notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 02:10:33 PM EST
.
A few years back, I recall a Bundesliga referee failed to see the ball hitting a supporting rod in the back of the net and bouncing back into the field. It was a clear goal and video was available. What surprised me at the time, the Football Association in Germany (DFB) allowed the goal on appeal. I can't find any link on the Internet, perhaps it will surface in a few days.

"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."

by Oui on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 02:42:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Early Doors - Your morning briefing blog - Yahoo! Eurosport UK

Cheatgate, day two, and the sheer scale of the plot to deny Ireland a place at the World Cup becomes ever more apparent.

There are so many guilty parties, a millipede would struggle to point the finger at all of them.

Blame Thierry Henry for handling the ball then refusing to fess up (but didn't he show lovely technique to kill the ball dead with his first touch, then caress it onto his right foot with his second?).

Blame William Gallas for not 'doing a Paolo Di Canio' when the ball came across to him (no, not a fascist salute, that thing where he caught the ball and stopped play).



Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Fri Nov 20th, 2009 at 05:55:19 PM EST
Thierry Henry - Jeu de main - Le Jeu !
Thierry Henry : Qualifiez la France avec les mains !


Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
by ceebs (ceebs (at) eurotrib (dot) com) on Sat Nov 21st, 2009 at 05:07:20 AM EST
Domenech blocked replay - Soccer, Sport - Independent.ie

Sunday November 22 2009

Raymond Domenech was the sole obstacle to Ireland's game against France being replayed, the Sunday Independent has learned.

Domenech refused to allow the French Football Federation to agree to a replay of France's game against Ireland despite the overwhelming backing of the French squad, the French public and key figures within the federation.

The FAI yesterday conceded that there was no chance of a replay following the statement from the FFF on Friday night. Yet it has emerged that the French were close to agreeing but Domenech, who would have been fired if France had been eliminated last Wednesday, insisted there should be no second chance for Ireland.

During several discussions on Friday, Domenech would not back down despite the increased pressure following the statements from Thierry Henry and Arsene Wenger, who both called for the game to take place again, probably on Wednesday week.

The French public were overwhelming in favour of the game being replayed but the views of the French squad were even more influential and on Thursday night and Friday morning the feeling grew within the team that the game should be replayed.

If Domenech had relented, the FFF would have agreed to the Irish request and the FAI had been privately assured that FIFA would have allowed the game to take place and, in fact, they would have welcomed the chance to demonstrate that their commitment to fair play and integrity was more than just rhetoric.

"We regret that despite our best efforts for a replay, which would have restored the integrity of the game in front of a world-wide audience, our calls appear to have fallen on deaf ears at the French Football Federation," said chief executive, John Delaney.

But Domenech -- once seen as Ireland's best chance -- was the chief obstacle. The players are understood to have been confident they could beat Ireland in a replay and remove the sense they had qualified unfairly for next summer's tournament.

Domenech saw it differently, however, holding privately to his public view that there was no need to commit "hara-kiri" and allow a replay.

The FAI believed that the game would have attraction a global audience and influential figures in FIFA also held this view, seeing it as a way to restore the reputation of the game. Yet they could not act unless the FFF agreed as FIFA would not overturn a decision -- or non-decision -- made by a referee.



notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 at 04:10:20 PM EST
Oh my...

This guy is an absolute disgrace. He's the main reason why France had to go through those two games, the main reason why they struggled in them, but he will cling to his high paying gig by any means possible, though never doing anything useful in it.

Now, of course I don't know whether that report is true, but if it is it should be reason enough to sack him.

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 at 04:16:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I think Domenech is a useless coach and a fraud, but giving him the part of the only one who stood in the way of a replay sounds dubious to me. Beware stories in Sunday newspapers?
by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 at 04:21:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That's how I read the story - it kind of suits everyone now to blame Domenech - particularly those French administrators and players who would like to get rid of him in any case but who can now claim they were entirely agreeable to doing the honourable thing.  Equally the FAI can claim not to have been completely off the wall in seeking a replay in the first place if only one unpopular person actually opposed it.

Personally I would be astounded if any football team manager, however (un)popular, had the power to make or block that decision.  If the French FA wanted the match to be replayed, it would have been, Domenech or no Domenech.

notes from no w here

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Nov 22nd, 2009 at 04:38:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]