Problems ON the pitch

[david in sweden]

It seems that some problems are pretty international. Similar incidents we've seen in English league football have also made headlines over here.

 

Swedish media are featuring two soccer stories. Firstly the "goal that never " was in the game Gothenburg v. Mjällby ...when Mjällby keeper is clearly seen (on TV playback) swiping the ball BACK INTO PLAY when the ball is clearly a foot over the line - but ref. says ..NO GOAL ! (where was he ?). Gothenburg striker Selakovic went ballistic and was lucky he only got a yellow card for his protest. Result 0-0.

 

The Swedish FA are now considering even more referees to ajudicate over the penalty area and goal-line decisions. How many refs. do we need ..when one person sat in front of a TV monitor has a better view than the three that we have on the pitch ? What we have now is pure "Hollywood " with the ref. making up the script as he goes along...and Man.Utd always get a happy ending - whilst Wenger is the "bad guy " who always ends up the loser (his version maybe) ...but not without cause sometimes.

 

There's no chance of real justice whilst Platini & Co. refuse to use visual technology that has been long accepted in many other sports. FIFA's apology to the Irish is no compensation for the fact that the cheating French are going to the World Cup instead..but then Platini was never going reverse that decision - was he ?

 

Gothenburg are also agrieved because their pitch has been declared to be "unplayable " by the Swedish FA. It really is in a bad state and after a bad winter isn't likely improve unless they re-lay the entire pitch. With memories of Saints game at Colchester ..where someone wrote ..they had a rugby game on the pitch the day before...why don't the FA have stronger rules about the state of the pitch. If it were waterlogged or ice-covered its obvious, but football is a ball game - not without skill - and being forced to play on a bad surface reduces the whole thing to the level of beach football.

Edited 5 May, 2010 by david in sweden

[The9]

Blatter's the only one to blame for not using technology, and I'm with him on it.

 

All of the evidence from "additional refs" in the Europa League this season has shown that they are an absolute waste of time, they never make rulings on the very thing they're supposed to anyway, and 95% of the time they're not involved.

 

Frankly I'd rather the game went on with 3 competent officials. That kind of stuff would happen from time to time but so what ? The problem is people trying to deliberately cheat, not the officials failing to detect it.

 

The second you put football ruling in the hands of technology you give it to the big money self-interested parties at Sky (or the international equivalents) forever.

 

Who's going to pay for the World Cup qualifiers in, say, Kiribati to have goal-line technology ? If no-one, who's going to judge which games should and shouldn't have it ? And how is that fair to the smaller countries/clubs, who can then still be cheated (and in the same competition) in a way big business can't ?

[david in sweden]

Blatter's the only one to blame for not using technology, and I'm with him on it.

 

All of the evidence from "additional refs" in the Europa League this season has shown that they are an absolute waste of time, they never make rulings on the very thing they're supposed to anyway, and 95% of the time they're not involved. Agreed -waste of manpower

 

Frankly I'd rather the game went on with 3 competent officials. That kind of stuff would happen from time to time but so what ? The problem is people trying to deliberately cheat, not the officials failing to detect it.

The second you put football ruling in the hands of technology you give it to the big money self-interested parties at Sky (or the international equivalents) forever. For every player who " dives" and gets away with it , theres' at least one who is fouled and the ref. refuses it -or worse gives him yellow . You've seen it this season and so have I. I'd use whatever technology is available SKY or anyone else.

 

Who's going to pay for the World Cup qualifiers in, say, Kiribati to have goal-line technology ? If no-one, who's going to judge which games should and shouldn't have it ? And how is that fair to the smaller countries/clubs, who can then still be cheated (and in the same competition) in a way big business can't ?

If the problem exists at that level then the game should be modernised. Not that Kiribati are ever likely to qualify for the WC,but at the highest level it should be available. (Some years ago I think) ..Kidderminster were refused League status because they didn't have a ground that met FL standards - for my money a CC TV system available for the fourth official to view isn't so much to ask when it comes to winning championship or being relegated. See how you feel when one team will LOSE the world Cup Final when TWO BILLION people will see the " real game " and the ref. makes a wrong decision and someone loses because of it. Just say "hard luck old man - thats football" ?

 

Football is still living in the 20th century. If Ice Hockey, Rugby and Cricket can use modern technology what is so "holy" about a game that is reliant on the attention span and the eyesight of one man - sorry not in my book.

 

If a team scores a goal - they deserve to get the credit for it.

Edited 6 May, 2010 by david in sweden

[JustMike]

i am all for hawkeye style technology in football but thats it. none of this extra ref stuff. The other thing id like to see introduced is the rugby style refs with mics on, instantly explain the decision etc.

[hughieslastminutegoal]

It seems that some problems are pretty international. Similar incidents we've seen in English league football have also made headlines over here.

 

Swedish media are featuring two soccer stories. Firstly the "goal that never " was in the game Gothenburg v. Mjällby ...when Mjällby keeper is clearly seen (on TV playback) swiping the ball BACK INTO PLAY when the ball is clearly a foot over the line - but ref. says ..NO GOAL ! (where was he ?). Gothenburg striker Selakovic went ballistic and was lucky he only got a yellow card for his protest. Result 0-0.

 

The Swedish FA are now considering even more referees to ajudicate over the penalty area and goal-line decisions. How many refs. do we need ..when one person sat in front of a TV monitor has a better view than the three that we have on the pitch ? What we have now is pure "Hollywood " with the ref. making up the script as he goes along...and Man.Utd always get a happy ending - whilst Wenger is the "bad guy " who always ends up the loser (his version maybe) ...but not without cause sometimes.

 

There's no chance of real justice whilst Platini & Co. refuse to use visual technology that has been long accepted in many other sports. FIFA's apology to the Irish is no compensation for the fact that the cheating French are going to the World Cup instead..but then Platini was never going reverse that decision - was he ?

 

Gothenburg are also agrieved because their pitch has been declared to be "unplayable " by the Swedish FA. It really is in a bad state and after a bad winter isn't likely improve unless they re-lay the entire pitch. With memories of Saints game at Colchester ..where someone wrote ..they had a rugby game on the pitch the day before...why don't the FA have stronger rules about the state of the pitch. If it were waterlogged or ice-covered its obvious, but football is a ball game - not without skill - and being forced to play on a bad surface reduces the whole thing to the level of beach football.

 

..ah, cue Sweden pushing it as the next Olympic sport... dress in speedos and a short vest...would have been right up Frank Worthington's street.

[david in sweden]

..ah, cue Sweden pushing it as the next Olympic sport... dress in speedos and a short vest...would have been right up Frank Worthington's street.

 

 

Olympics.?...it's already there as an event, but no competitors from Sweden .

No summer ..No sand !