- Views
- 1033
- Comments
- 62
- 02/08/2012, 09:59AM ET
FFTI II - Should FIFA add video replay for goals?
BBK II said 02/08, 09:59 AM
Without question the answer is yes.
The 2010 World Cup in South Africa will be best remembered for one thing; the horrible officiating. Referee mistakes on goals cost England in the knockout round against Germany, in what would have tied the game at 2-2. England instead went on to lose 4-1. The Uruguayan referee had this to say about the goal.
"It was unfortunate, a very fast ball that we couldn't see as it went into the goal despite my positioning being correct." Instant replay would've completely corrected that problem.
Then of course there was Malian referee Koman Coulibaly, who disallowed the go ahead goal for the US against Slovenia; a match that ended in a draw. FIFA had this to say about that blatant error:
"???FIFA is determined to keep refereeing standards high and does not want high-profile mistakes."
You know how to prevent high profile mistakes FIFA? Use instant replay for goals. It's a travesty that on the largest sports stage in the world, we still have such costly mistakes. It's completely unacceptable to continue to allow entire nations to be robbed of the correct ruling, when the technology has already been created to completely fix the problem.
Mr. Jolly said 02/09, 09:56 AM
Soccer is embraced, worldwide, b/c of several reasons, some of which are threatened by modernism in an endless struggle to perfect things that can't be perfected.
My answer is no.
There is certainly a "flow" to soccer that is not shared by many sports. With this "flow" comes shifts in momentum and expressions of endurance and strategy that most sports on this planet don't share. Many of those who follow soccer are discouraged at the thought of adding replay to any facet of the game, because of it disturbing this flow.
While you're only arguing the use of replay for controversial goals, there is a mindset that a domino-effect can be created by introducing this element to the game in any way. It would only be a matter of time before those would say "logic" dictates that a variety of other "questioned" calls go under the microscope.
All of this for replay, that in and of itself, in not infallible. Mistakes happen in replay too.
Plus, have we played out all our options? There are often 4/5 officials governing about 78K of sqft. Why not add a couple officials to solely govern goal shots? This would also increase the accuracy of goal rulings, with less flow disruption.
BBK II said 02/09, 10:18 AM
So you're argument against replay is that "many who follow soccer are discouraged....because of flow", and the slippery slope argument.
In a recent FoxSports poll that asked fans if they preferred FIFA to move to replay or not, 94% of the responders answered in favor of replay. It would seem that your "many who follow soccer" argument is severaly misguided. The fans want this, and they want it by an overwhelming margin. Soccer is also the only sport that has a time adjustment built in for delays in the game, and the delays replay would cause are minimal.
The slippery slope argument has been trotted out for every sport that has added replay, and it hasn't been true even once. Not only is the slippery slope a misguided logical argument, but as we've seen time and time again, it's fears are never realized.
As for adding referees, I'll simply requote from above:
"It was unfortunate, a very fast ball that we couldn't see as it went into the goal despite my positioning being correct.". More refs won't help that
There is a very simple solution to this problem. The solution is readily available, and has been proven to work every in every sport that's used it
Mr. Jolly said 02/09, 04:55 PM
No need to summarize my TDs, BBK. I have faith in FN's ability to read :)
FoxSports is just 1, mainly American, site. 1 only needs to scour the web for the numerous columns about this issue and scan the comments to realize there is a sufficient number of fans who disagree with you.
Are you kidding with the slip/slope response? I'll give you the "once" you're asking for in a timeline w/ the NFL:
* Limited in 86' where it was only going to be used in the rare time that Big Brother needed to step in.
* Repealed in 92' because, GASP, fans didn't like the delays.
* Brought back in 99' in the form of challenges (flow favored over constant attempts at perfection).
* 3rd challenge added in 04', in the rarest of cases where it seems the world is against 1 team.
After we review any "odd" goal shot with that flawed replay system (go in any bar and try to get concensus on replay calls), what's next?
Flops? Red Cards? Use of hands? All with expensive tech not all levels of the game can afford?
Here's another quote:
"His position wasn't focused on solely watching the goal area" - Mr. Jolly
Maybe we should put a couple guys in, to do that, before we jump to cameras.
BBK II said 02/09, 06:26 PM
Did you just quote yourself?
I'm glad you brought up the NFL. The NFL was a pioneer of instant replay, and it is still widely used in the game today. It was repealed in 1992 (though owners voted 17-11 in favor of it) because it's implementation was poor. There weren't enough cameras always present to capture the correct looks. Fortunately for soccer, it's 20 years later and the technology already exists, and is being used that will prevent FIFA from having any of those issues
Addias already developed a ball with a microchip in it, that alerts the official when the ball crosses the line. HD cameras exist that take 600 frames per second, and can easily determine whether or not a ball has crossed the line. The NFL has already laid the groundwork; as has the NHL, and all FIFA needs to do is use the technology that exists to the detriment of nothing. Rulings on goals will be within minutes if not seconds with today's technology.
Complain about the minute and half all you want, but it will allow the correct outcome to be determined, which is the ultimate goal of sports. There is no excuse with the technology readily available why controversy should continue to be a part of FIFA.
Mr. Jolly said 02/10, 01:53 PM
FIFA has the ability to confront this issue with tech that doesn't involve IR and won't disrupt the flow of a soccer game or threaten future actions that would further disrupt the game's flow.
Football is not an applicable comparison, b/c football already had a natural aspect of stoppage involved. Football was more open to the invitation of replay and to its specific needs, it has helped.
Soccer is different. Flow can't be easily dismissed. Consider the vast number of $ that soccer has ignored from pressures by advertisers and networks to create TV timeouts and stoppages. The embrace of soccer's flow is integral to the sport. They've bent over backwards to protect it.
Adding 2 officials to solely concentrate on goal areas, along with continued improvement of goalminding technologies (along with Cairos & HawkEye like devices), will not only improve the accuracy of goals, but won't pose the threat to flow. Everybody wins here as oppossed to 1 side of thought.
Lower levels that can't afford the tech still have an option of 2 officials and won't be held hostage to not having the $ to also address the issue. Soccer is a world sport and the whole world should be able to play.
Leaderboard
| Fan | W | L | T | Win % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | (Un) | 101 | 18 | 8 | 82.7% |
| 2 | Darth Maim | 80 | 20 | 6 | 78.3% |
| 3 | DO_WORK... | 76 | 31 | 13 | 68.8% |
| 4 | :CubanM... | 63 | 27 | 7 | 68.6% |
| 5 | Olderth... | 86 | 35 | 17 | 68.5% |
| 6 | JimJ77 Can't make it up | 130 | 53 | 26 | 68.4% |
| 7 | Marlins Fan | 151 | 66 | 33 | 67.0% |
| 8 | HOOTZ | 31 | 14 | 11 | 65.2% |
| 9 | Argos. | 177 | 103 | 27 | 62.1% |
| 10 | Schad - Notorious Deadbeat | 71 | 43 | 9 | 61.4% |
Truth & Rumors
MOST POPULAR
-
1
LeBron lacking key champion component
- Views
- 3937
- Comments
- 1382
-
2
Cavs coming up empty for top-pick deal
- Views
- 7533
- Comments
- 707
-
3
Yankees suddenly need ... A-Rod
- Views
- 14667
- Comments
- 219
-
4
Youkilis headed in reverse
- Views
- 9505
- Comments
- 217
-
5
Marchand accuses Shaw of eye-gouging
- Views
- 7561
- Comments
- 126
Most Active Users
Comments + Blog Posts + Throwdowns
Blogs
-
Stack Attack's Blog
"The Stack" 6-18-13
Not too much in "the stack" for today. But The Stack doesn't…
- Views
- 50
- Comments
- 0
-
808LakerFan's Blog
The Spurs lost the Series last night
"Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, and Manu rides off into the NBA retirement…
- Views
- 30
- Comments
- 2
-
For the Record
Ten years after 9/11
<!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Cambria; …
- Views
- 17544
- Comments
- 62
Fantasy Plus
- Fantasy baseball Roundtable: Dissecting Myers, Wheeler debuts
- Fantasy football focus: Mendenhall among top 30 running backs
- Fantasy baseball Pitching Report: Bartolo Colon's monster year
- Fantasy baseball Injury Report: Tigers ailing as Sanchez, Avila hit DL
- Fantasy baseball Waiver Wire: Joyce's hitting lifted Rays
TM & © 2013 Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
FanNation.com is part of Sports Illustrated Sites
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines, your California privacy rights, and ad choices
Comments (62) Add A Comment
agree with replay
kook583
Hoboken , NJ
Total Comments (1365)
I don't follow TD's much, so please excuse my ignorance. What does FFTI II stand for?
Unknown:
Total Comments (8122)
Yes, but the replay official needs to be able to make the call without the on field ref having to run to a video monitor. Have the replay official be the guy who decides and sends his call to the on field ref to speed the process up.
Nobody expects…
Total Comments (13391)
Funke Family (group name) Tournament Invitational - Two.
We did FFTI I last year.
Grue
Total Comments (21383)
Grue
Total Comments (21383)
The England call was sort of a make-up call for 1966.
Bayern
Total Comments (13144)
^ factually correct.
Geezus
Stranded Between Md And, VA
Total Comments (10065)
Engerland got no more than they deserved after 1966. Look it up.
CU Tiger
Washington, DC
Total Comments (8773)
Yes.
Assassin: Simile…
Total Comments (32925)
with video technology where it is today, instant replay is feasible in any sport without holding the game up too long. If baseball can do it, soccer can too.
Geezus
Stranded Between Md And, VA
Total Comments (10065)
Holding a grudge for 44 years.... Typical German.
Hudson St
Azteca Of The North, OH
Total Comments (5064)
Although this topic is instant replays the technology FIFA is currently considering is a tracking, or monitoring system that would be able to tell if the ball crossed the goal line. For those of you who don't follow the sport the entire ball must cross the line in order for a goal to count. ONe problem with the technology is implementing it not only in World Cup matches, but also in qualifying conditions. For some countries this would be cost prohibitive. For example, every country has the ability to compete for the WC, but a country like Haiti might have a difficult time installing this technology.
Unknown:
Total Comments (8122)
I suppose the point of replay would be primarily for the billions that already enjoy the sport, though. Not sure making policy changes based on people who think the sport is already boring would be entirely logical.
Bayern
Total Comments (13144)
Since soccer is the most popular sport in the world, shouldn't baseball be trying to be more like soccer?
Zarco
Texas, TX
Total Comments (1221)
That depends if you describe baseball as a sport. Most would call it a past time or leisure activity. Like camping or going on a picinic.
Bayern
Total Comments (13144)
I get soccer games and gay pride rallies confused.
Outlaw...
Ball Ground, GA
Total Comments (39929)
Haha, I'll help you out. You've been going to gay pride rallies. If you'd been to a soccer match you'd know there are no gay people there. At least not any of the matches I've been to.
Bayern
Total Comments (13144)
Comment
Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.