Lets see....one referee for 22 players on the field. That's absurd. Seven should do it - one behind each goal, one for each quarter of the field, and a main judge. Eight if you count the glorified 'referee' who screens the subs and adds time. FIFA can afford the miniscule expense of doubling the number of refs.
They can also afford either a video replay system for balls crossing the goal line, or some automatic system that detects when the ball has crossed the line.
Replay? A coach's challenge flag per half like the NFL? I know there are plenty of people against these options--arguing game spirit, too many ways that they could get in the way of the game, etc.--but COME ON. The momentum of both games today could have seen a significant shift had the English goal counted or the Argentine offsides goal not counted. That and I wouldn't find myself so annoyed at the refs.
Any true football enthusiasts out there have thoughts?
I would think a chip in the ball would be an easy fix for the error in the England/Germany game, but it's such a rare mistake that I'm not sure it's worth the cost. The offsides error in the Mexico/Argentina game is much more common, but tougher to solve. I'd be all for replay, though prefer that there be a replay official (not coaches challenges), who always reviewed certain limited situations (offsides on a scored goal, whether a ball was in the goal, etc.).
I agree the momentum shift could've been large had those decisions gone differently, but England was so outclassed by Germany (but for about 60 seconds in the first half), that I don't think it would've changed the outcome.
Agree on the game opinions--I definitely think the better teams came out on top today. It's a shame that poor refereeing has overshadowed the world cup this year.
I think Carmichael has it right. As for the goal line cost, it's the World Cup. It's held every 4 years. With the amount of money soccer generates, I think it's a bargain. If Wimbledon - Wimbledon! - can afford the kind of officiating it does, then FIFA can.
I mention Wimbledon because it's my favorite example of a stuffy organization (the All-England Lawn Tennis Club) going above & beyond to get things right. They have 11 officials (the umpire, plus the various line judges and replay officials), and they've got the technology.
Again, we're talking about the basic integrity of the game, here. If FIFA can't take the necessary steps, then they're just useless.
I'm not sure the poor refereeing is that much worse than in the past (the non-handball call on Germany in the quarters against the US in '02, the Hand of God, etc., not to mention all the problems with carding decisions), it is, unfortunately a part of the game. I don't think the errors have actually changed outcomes yet this time, but it is terrible. It doesn't keep me from enjoying it immensely, but it would make me much happier if they'd do something to reduce the opportunities for error.
"...<span>it would make me much happier if they'd do something to reduce the opportunities for error."</span>
Amen!
I must admit, this is the most "plugged in" to a World Cup that I have ever been, and maybe it's just the excessive amount of commentary on the refereeing that has me up in arms. I'm with you, though--overall, it's been a great ride so far!
The first time I really got up in arms about the refereeing was in 2002, when it happened to the US the first time while I was paying attention. After awhile, I realized nearly every country has their grievances, which causes me to get less outraged and just wish they'd find a way to fix it. Unfortunately, world soccer is run about as well and as honestly as the NCAA (or the NHL or MLB or the IOC, etc.), and so I'm not holding my breath.
Technically, there are already three refs, since the sidelines refs not only call offsides, but can call fouls, and can be consulted on the questions of whether a goal was scored.
Given the quality of technology, there's really no excuse for not having automatic video replay on goals. It's not like the game isn't delayed for 90-180 seconds for celebrations and resets after goals anyway, and a booth official can double-check and page the referee via headset.
Obvious flops should be an automatic yellow card. A successful flop resulting in a carding or penalty-kick that is obvious on replay should result in a post-game multiple-game suspension. I admired how the German players just refused to flop or whinge to referees when they fell down on a clean play.
That doesn't solve the problem of all the judgment calls on fouls and carding; you're never going to clearly solve the handball problem. That's just a fundamental problem with sports like football, American football, and basketball, where the speed and degree of legal contact means that there's always going to be fuzzy calls that could've gone either way.
Richard Epstein remarked about the poor structure of the foul and card and penalty-kick system in general, but I'm okay with the status quo there: Epstein's rule changes would create a different game entirely.
Separately, I liked the poetic nature of a 44-year-old makeup call in England-Germany. The injustice of the goal-that-wasn't this year doesn't come close to the injustice of the nearly-identical-non-goal-that-was in 1966.
Here are my thoughts. I know nothing about soccer/futbol.
As Strangeluck suggested, we need multiple officials on the field. There are four now, but three of them do absolutely nothing. Let's have three work the field, like the NBA does. There will still be a referee who works the majority of the field/pitch/whatever and the other two will be predominately responsible for the penalty area on each side. Four more, one for each sideline/goaline, to call out of bounds and goals.
Flopping (i.e., getting bumped in the chest, then grabbing your face and falling to the ground) = immediate red card. If penalty isn't caught during the game, then it is assessed after the game during a mandatory review by FIFA officials, and floppers sit the next match and the team plays a man down. I think that should stop all the fakery immediately that makes soccer only slightly more of a "sport" than the WWE, in my frustrated opinion.
All goals/shots on goal are immediately reviewed for incorrect calls, offsides, etc. If Univision can tell me when someone is offsides I assume FIFA can have someone watching the same feed and call it down to the field. Maybe you don't (and can't) do every play, but certainly every goal and shot on goal where the keeper makes a save near the goal line. (I mean, there are what, 2 goals per game max? Okay, 4-5 today, but still...)
And while we're at it, how about a half-court rule like basketball, so the team with possession can't pass the ball back past the midfield line?
I was stunned they don't have a goal judge like hockey, who's only job is to determine whether the ball went into the net or not.
Challenge flags a la the NFL is an easy fix. You have two per game, and the coach throws it when he feels his team's been hosed. You lose a substitution if you're wrong.
Not that this would have happened in a million years, but I thought at the time that the Best. Sportsmanship. Ever. would have been for Germany to own-goal themselves at the beginning of the second half.
A goal judge is the simplest fix. However, considering Blatter's statements I wouldn't be surprised if FIFA outlaws all technology and future games are played in empty stadiums. Court artists will be employed so game results can be released within 4-5 business days.
Easiest way is to get more than 1 referee on the field. The field is too big for 1 referee to handle, and seems to big even for the sideline referees who are just watching for offsides and who kicked the ball out of bounds. More eyes and less field for these referees to watch would help, especially for a World Cup.
Lets see....one referee for 22 players on the field. That's absurd. Seven should do it - one behind each goal, one for each quarter of the field, and a main judge. Eight if you count the glorified 'referee' who screens the subs and adds time. FIFA can afford the miniscule expense of doubling the number of refs.
ReplyDeleteThey can also afford either a video replay system for balls crossing the goal line, or some automatic system that detects when the ball has crossed the line.
Replay? A coach's challenge flag per half like the NFL? I know there are plenty of people against these options--arguing game spirit, too many ways that they could get in the way of the game, etc.--but COME ON. The momentum of both games today could have seen a significant shift had the English goal counted or the Argentine offsides goal not counted. That and I wouldn't find myself so annoyed at the refs.
ReplyDeleteAny true football enthusiasts out there have thoughts?
I would think a chip in the ball would be an easy fix for the error in the England/Germany game, but it's such a rare mistake that I'm not sure it's worth the cost. The offsides error in the Mexico/Argentina game is much more common, but tougher to solve. I'd be all for replay, though prefer that there be a replay official (not coaches challenges), who always reviewed certain limited situations (offsides on a scored goal, whether a ball was in the goal, etc.).
ReplyDeleteI agree the momentum shift could've been large had those decisions gone differently, but England was so outclassed by Germany (but for about 60 seconds in the first half), that I don't think it would've changed the outcome.
Agree on the game opinions--I definitely think the better teams came out on top today. It's a shame that poor refereeing has overshadowed the world cup this year.
ReplyDeleteI think Carmichael has it right. As for the goal line cost, it's the World Cup. It's held every 4 years. With the amount of money soccer generates, I think it's a bargain. If Wimbledon - Wimbledon! - can afford the kind of officiating it does, then FIFA can.
ReplyDeleteI mention Wimbledon because it's my favorite example of a stuffy organization (the All-England Lawn Tennis Club) going above & beyond to get things right. They have 11 officials (the umpire, plus the various line judges and replay officials), and they've got the technology.
Again, we're talking about the basic integrity of the game, here. If FIFA can't take the necessary steps, then they're just useless.
I'm not sure the poor refereeing is that much worse than in the past (the non-handball call on Germany in the quarters against the US in '02, the Hand of God, etc., not to mention all the problems with carding decisions), it is, unfortunately a part of the game. I don't think the errors have actually changed outcomes yet this time, but it is terrible. It doesn't keep me from enjoying it immensely, but it would make me much happier if they'd do something to reduce the opportunities for error.
ReplyDelete"...<span>it would make me much happier if they'd do something to reduce the opportunities for error."</span>
ReplyDeleteAmen!
I must admit, this is the most "plugged in" to a World Cup that I have ever been, and maybe it's just the excessive amount of commentary on the refereeing that has me up in arms. I'm with you, though--overall, it's been a great ride so far!
The first time I really got up in arms about the refereeing was in 2002, when it happened to the US the first time while I was paying attention. After awhile, I realized nearly every country has their grievances, which causes me to get less outraged and just wish they'd find a way to fix it. Unfortunately, world soccer is run about as well and as honestly as the NCAA (or the NHL or MLB or the IOC, etc.), and so I'm not holding my breath.
ReplyDelete"A modest proposal: Make the nets bigger."
ReplyDelete"Make the nets bigger?"
"You got a better idea?
"Yes. How about smaller nets and no goalie."
Technically, there are already three refs, since the sidelines refs not only call offsides, but can call fouls, and can be consulted on the questions of whether a goal was scored.
ReplyDeleteGiven the quality of technology, there's really no excuse for not having automatic video replay on goals. It's not like the game isn't delayed for 90-180 seconds for celebrations and resets after goals anyway, and a booth official can double-check and page the referee via headset.
Obvious flops should be an automatic yellow card. A successful flop resulting in a carding or penalty-kick that is obvious on replay should result in a post-game multiple-game suspension. I admired how the German players just refused to flop or whinge to referees when they fell down on a clean play.
That doesn't solve the problem of all the judgment calls on fouls and carding; you're never going to clearly solve the handball problem. That's just a fundamental problem with sports like football, American football, and basketball, where the speed and degree of legal contact means that there's always going to be fuzzy calls that could've gone either way.
Richard Epstein remarked about the poor structure of the foul and card and penalty-kick system in general, but I'm okay with the status quo there: Epstein's rule changes would create a different game entirely.
Separately, I liked the poetic nature of a 44-year-old makeup call in England-Germany. The injustice of the goal-that-wasn't this year doesn't come close to the injustice of the nearly-identical-non-goal-that-was in 1966.
ReplyDeleteHere are my thoughts. I know nothing about soccer/futbol.
ReplyDeleteAs Strangeluck suggested, we need multiple officials on the field. There are four now, but three of them do absolutely nothing. Let's have three work the field, like the NBA does. There will still be a referee who works the majority of the field/pitch/whatever and the other two will be predominately responsible for the penalty area on each side. Four more, one for each sideline/goaline, to call out of bounds and goals.
Flopping (i.e., getting bumped in the chest, then grabbing your face and falling to the ground) = immediate red card. If penalty isn't caught during the game, then it is assessed after the game during a mandatory review by FIFA officials, and floppers sit the next match and the team plays a man down. I think that should stop all the fakery immediately that makes soccer only slightly more of a "sport" than the WWE, in my frustrated opinion.
All goals/shots on goal are immediately reviewed for incorrect calls, offsides, etc. If Univision can tell me when someone is offsides I assume FIFA can have someone watching the same feed and call it down to the field. Maybe you don't (and can't) do every play, but certainly every goal and shot on goal where the keeper makes a save near the goal line. (I mean, there are what, 2 goals per game max? Okay, 4-5 today, but still...)
And while we're at it, how about a half-court rule like basketball, so the team with possession can't pass the ball back past the midfield line?
I was stunned they don't have a goal judge like hockey, who's only job is to determine whether the ball went into the net or not.
ReplyDeleteChallenge flags a la the NFL is an easy fix. You have two per game, and the coach throws it when he feels his team's been hosed. You lose a substitution if you're wrong.
Not that this would have happened in a million years, but I thought at the time that the Best. Sportsmanship. Ever. would have been for Germany to own-goal themselves at the beginning of the second half.
ReplyDeleteA goal judge is the simplest fix. However, considering Blatter's statements I wouldn't be surprised if FIFA outlaws all technology and future games are played in empty stadiums. Court artists will be employed so game results can be released within 4-5 business days.
ReplyDeleteEasiest way is to get more than 1 referee on the field. The field is too big for 1 referee to handle, and seems to big even for the sideline referees who are just watching for offsides and who kicked the ball out of bounds. More eyes and less field for these referees to watch would help, especially for a World Cup.
ReplyDeleteAll penalties should be resolved by adding 10-year olds to the aggrieved team.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/v/CyCZ3xk_Zek" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="170" height="140