Dismal England
by Sweet science on Jun 28, 2010 12:49 PM BST
Email
PrintOutplayed, out thought, outclassed.
I was so sure, like most England fans I daresay, that England would prevail, beat the old enemy. They had nothing that would hurt us too much, they were over rated after their 4 - 0 win against 10 men Australia. And we were just warming up after much improvement against the "world class team" that is Slovenia
A false dawn it was. England were poor, apart from 10 minutes before half time.
And what a 10 minutes it was. After Germeny had just gone deservedly 2 - 0 up after tearing through our defence at will, Upson hung in the air for an age to head home a Gerrard cross. less than a minute later..... well you don't need me to describe what happened.
Sepp Blatter in march said that Referee mistakes is part of the game, that fans love to debate them. Well what is there to debate about this, how far it was over the line? It was a disgraceful descision. How the linesman couldn't have seen it is beyond me. And by the way im a qualified referee, not just a biased fan. Yeah Sepp, im loving this debate, loving it!
He has said that implicating goal line technology the world over would cost too much. How much income does Fifa generate from this World Cup alone? And technology isn't even needed. How about if the 4th official has a camera. Ref stops the game, in about a minute the goal would be awarded. Easy!
I hope England's second half collapse doesn't mean this gets sweeped under the carpet and forgotten. Its too big to forget.
As for the second half, England were far too naive. At 2-1 we committed far too many players forward for the corner. All we needed was 1 goal, and with 15 - 20 minutes left, we left ourselves far too exposed. The 4th just rubbed salt into the grave wounds.
I don't know weather Cappelo has to resign. If he continues with 4-4-2 then yes I believe he should. It is a dying formation at the top level. He is too set in his ways. Also, why bring Heskey on when you need a goal, and SWP when Lennon is on the bench. Poor descisions.
If he does go, then I think Ry Hodgson would be the man. He gets the best out of players. And that is what we need, because England are not good enough. He will make us "over achieve". Look at what he did with Fulham. Enough said.
This FanPost represents the view of the member who posts it and does not necessarily reflect the views of The Busby Babe or SB Nation.
31 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I don’t support video refs, but I do support two more men behind or near the goalposts to look at stuff in the penalty box.
I’m the conservative type. Everything else has video refs and while it does make calls 99% right, at the cost of what? I think football will slow down to all oblivion. Other sports can incorporate and it’s 99% great, but I don’t think soccer needs it.
For instance, let’s say video refs take care of offsides. If so, I presume that linesmen and the ref allow play to go on and don’t blow the whistle. If a team scores, check the video, then confirm. All fine with me but what if the game has a lot of offsides runs? Netherlands v Slovakia, 5 offsides called. 3 goals. That’s a minimum of 8 times to go to the video ref.
Another case in point, the Lampard non-call against Germany. After the ref played on the Germans themselves almost scored. When do you check the video? Stop the game after the shot? Stop after the German attack? What if the German’s did score then? 22 players either all celebrating at once. Dumb in my opinion.
Just have an official upstairs view the replay, then radio the correct call down to the referee. “That ball crossed the line”, or “Number 10 was offside”. Shouldn’t take more than a minute or two.
Wayne Rooney, 1/27/10: Cometh The Hour, Cometh The Man
Green and Gold Till the Club is Sold- LUHG
See I’m not concerned with the minute or two. It’s part of the problem, but not the huge part.
Let’s say someone scores from an offside position, the video ref calls it back at whichever time and says, “that’s offside, that’s not a goall”.
Now let’s say a player is in a scoring position after a run but gets pulled back due to the linesmen. He incorrectly calls it offside. What happens? Is it fair that all goals get checked via video but not non-goals? And to continue on with the debate, what if we just let the player play on? See what happens next and then check the video. Sure, you’ll get the correct call 99% of the time but now our linesmen are basically just checking for throw-ins. Heck, that will get taken away from them too.
This is my problem: we can’t check goals without raising questions about every other offside call.
I see what you're saying
There is a similar issue with replay review in the NFL. If a player fumbles the ball and the referee incorrectly rules that the player was already down, he blows his whistle and the play stops. You can’t overturn that play and rule it a fumble because the play was stopped halfway through. What seems to be happening is that NFL referees lean toward allowing the fumble because that call can be overturned. They basically ignore their own judgement and it leads to more blown calls!
So I really don’t have a solution for this. Unfortunately I can see a scenario where referees just allow every play to continue (offside or not) and just rely on replay, and that wouldn’t be good at all.
Wayne Rooney, 1/27/10: Cometh The Hour, Cometh The Man
Green and Gold Till the Club is Sold- LUHG
Speaking of the NFL....
a solution would be challenges. It would only stop the game when the manager feels his side was done wrong. Give them 1 per game and if they are correct they get one more. I thought it sounded cheesy when it came about, but I think it works well now.
Definitely not
no replays and no challenges. Just goal line technology that tells the Ref when the ball crosses the line. It just buzzes or vibrates or something. Or put a guy behind the net. I don’t want replay and I don’t want the game changed in anyway. Just need to raise the standard of the reffing, it’s been pretty good in the WC for the most part, domestically and make sure goals are always awarded when they are scored.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Jul 7, 2010 2:11 AM BST up reply actions
PRETTY GOOD?
You have been on holiday too long. I’m not a ref basher but this has been very poor.
I am not advocating replay but if it were to happen I think that form keeps it as free flowing as possible. Allows few, if any, interuptions.
There have been a few high profile mistakes, but unfortunately when a referee has a good game nobody talks about it.
Wayne Rooney, 1/27/10: Cometh The Hour, Cometh The Man
Green and Gold Till the Club is Sold- LUHG
Ref yesterday was outstanding and Uruguay-Netherlands was good too.
That said, they are supposed to get it right.
So they shouldn't get credit when they do?
You can’t slate them for every bad call and not applaud them when they get the very difficult decisions correct.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Jul 8, 2010 7:46 PM BST up reply actions
Come on
it’s a tough job and they should be expected to do it well but when they do we should praise them even if it is their job. I sure hope you aren’t someones boss if you aren’t willing to praise people for a job well done and only pound on them when they make mistakes.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Jul 9, 2010 12:08 AM BST up reply actions
Please give me an example of an exceptional referee.
My ideal is one that gets all of the calls required correct, like I noted above. What is there to praise other than good job on not screwing anything up?
Comparing a job to refereeing is apples to oranges. They don’t relate at all.
Howard Webb
Wayne Rooney, 1/27/10: Cometh The Hour, Cometh The Man
Green and Gold Till the Club is Sold- LUHG
Yes, Howard Webb is very good.
I meant to say point out a good refereeing performance. A great job as referee is getting all of the calls correct and not making a huge mistake. Its tough to praise them when the bar is set so high but that’s the way it is.
by nolefansam on Jul 9, 2010 8:22 PM BST via mobile up reply actions
OK well I think this
has gone as far as it’s going to go. Referees will never get every call 100% correct in a match. That just isn’t realistic. What is realistic is that they get the major decisions right and do their best to allow the players to play and the game to flow. If they do that they deserve praise.
And if you don’t think doing your job, whether it’s as a referee or a burger flipper, well deserves praise then we have no middle ground to further this discussion.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
"He's got a man deep..wait, no that IS Mandeep!!" - Don Taylor
by Section 312 on Jul 9, 2010 10:39 PM BST up reply actions
Referees have a lot of discretion to keep a game clean vs. to allow it to flow freely – to exert authority and control without becoming the central player. That will ALWAYS be a skilled job. Having some kind of technology make sure mistakes aren’t being made on goals seems like it removes one of the elements from the refs job that humans are just not good at, and allow them to focus on the parts they ARE good at. i.e.., was a challenge legal, was a shirt pulled too much, is a player diving.
I’m sorry this is super long, probably could’ve been a fanpost but here’s another thing. We can’t have the video ref check everything. If you do that, football is screwed.
If you wanna check just certain things, like those in the box, then maybe, just maybe, it’s acceptable. But that can be done by extra human eyes anyway. But if you want to check fouls outside the box, throw-ins, and all the hullaballoo, well, I’m not onboard with that.
I want change in the game. But I think two extra refs and a judicial system should be the first step before videos are introduced. When I say judicial I mean match reviews by officials. They watch the game again, send a report to the respective associations and clamp down on diving and horrendous tackles that they missed out on. It’s sacrilege the way people get away with diving. If they aren’t caught before the game, at least catch them after the game. 10-match ban, who cares?
you good points
But the technology should only be introduced for goal line disputes, not offsides because then, like you say the game will slow down far too much.
It doesen’t even have to be video, you could use hawk-eye like in tennis and cricket (not sure if you are familiar with cricket if you are in Nort America).
But for the Video, the 4th official could just check it without the game being stopped. If the ball goes out of play, then yeah stop the game, check it. But if not the 4th offical can just check it, get a message on, to the Ref and your sorted.
We need something to help the Refs with goal line incidents. It is almost impossible for the Lino and ref to keep up with the ball with a long shot and be in a position to see if it is a goal or not. (the lino on saturday was in a good position, but prehaps he just blinked at the wrong time).
Yes, I like the chip and hawk-eye. Does the buzzer in ice hockey go off if a goal is scored? I’m not sure if the buzzer is triggered by the puck or it’s something else.
And yea, I watch cricket. Anything like that is good. I just would hate for us to bring video now, before we even try extra officials or chips, and then open a can of worms and start video-ing everything.
I watch rugby league and I love the game. When video came in everyone thought it was a good idea. They started referring to the video ref for everything. Now though, they’re scaling back. It stops the game way too much. Some things aren’t checked via video ref anymore.
North American here.
The buzzer in hockey is activated by an announcer sitting directly behind the goal. There’s currently no technology placed directly on the puck to activate the siren when the puck crosses the line.
by Vancouverguy on Jun 29, 2010 10:40 PM BST up reply actions
Ah damn. But, yeah I want something like that.
Or like in a chip in the ball that triggers fireworks to come out surrounding Old Trafford when we score. Something of the sort.
Offsides wouldn't be an issue.
Only use it for goals wrongly given when a player is not called offside(Tevez vs Mexico). The referee confers with the linesman anyway so it wouldn’t be an issue.
This implies checking every goal. Which will almost certainly lead to questions like why shouldn’t every play be allowed to go on, offside or not, and then referring to the video ref?
Of course it implies checking every goal because we check every goal anyway.
How many times have you ever watched a game where they kickoff following a goal without getting to see at least 1 if not 3 replays? I will answer, 0. Following a goal play is halted and we see a replay everytime prior to kickoff. Its not hard to have the 4th official watch it too.
I would not like to see play halted to check replay(except goaline replays) or wrongly judged offside because of the problem with the following action. If a replay is checked and it is determined Messi was onside and 1v1 with the keeper, how would you remedy that issue? A freekick? A penalty? Its a pandoras box if it gets taken too far.
And how many goals are there in a game?
Just set up a rule where if a goal goes in (or if it highly uncertain whether it did a la Lampard), the video ref take a quick look and see if it went over, was offside, a handball, etc. You don’t need to check every potential offside, only ones where the ball went into the net, where, as you say, play is stopped anyway. If someone is offside but fails to score, who cares if an incorrect decision is made about that, they didn’t benefit by their rule breaking, and no harm, no foul.
It wouldn’t interrupt the flow of the game at all, it would just skim out the errors leading to the most egregious outcomes (i.e., falsely awarded or denied goals). Everything else would be up to traditional referee’s discretion, and they can go on making their debatable mistakes elsewhere, just without the most game-wrenching of cock ups.
I also like the idea of having people review tape of the game afterwards and suspending the divers for multiple games at a time. But that’s a whole other story.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
