Article

2010-06-28 -Short Attention Span Theater-

Armed guards for World Cup referees after yet another officiating mistake

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by gromky 2010-06-28 00:01|| || Front Page|| [11138 views ] Top

#1 4-1 in soccer is a blowout. Each goal has as much weight as, actually more weight than, a touchdown. More like a touchdown in overtime. The whole game is played as if it's overtime, with one goal enough to strike fear of losing in the opponent.

Posted by lex 2010-06-28 01:12|| 2010-06-28 01:12|| Front Page Top

#2 Referees have far too much influence on the outcome of games. The same infraction will result in a game losing freekick/penaltykick/sending off or be ignored in different games. And this can happen many times in the same game.

The problem with off-field video referees is that the referee intervenes pretty much every minute of a soccer match. And reviews would slow down and make soccer even duller as a sporting contest.

And serious penalties (sending offs) are for 'intentional' infractions. How are you going tell if something was intentional, quiz the player involved?

The heavy influence of the referee results in a complete absence of sportsmanship in the game. In a cricket match, a player who knows he is out will walk off without waiting for the verdict of the video referee. In last nights game none of the Germany players indicated a goal had been scored even though many could clearly see it had.

Frankly, soccer sucks as a sporting contest.

Posted by phil_b 2010-06-28 01:56|| 2010-06-28 01:56|| Front Page Top

#3 The US and England are the two least popular countries in the world. We spend our time going to war and vetoing any attempt to stop us in the UN.

The US had two perfectly good goals disallowed for no reason in this tournament. England had one, which was critical.

Neither the US or England were good enough, but it wouldn't matter if they were because there is not a chance in hell that the rest of the world would miss the once-in-four-year opportunity to cheat us and then give us the finger knowing there is nothing we can do.

I'm pretty sure Uruguay must have a warship to sink or some airplanes to shoot down?

Posted by Blighty 2010-06-28 02:47|| 2010-06-28 02:47|| Front Page Top

#4 Watching the FIFA adverts on the tely is most interesting. None of them depicted white contestants. Bafana Bafana and all that Zulu chanting...more rubbish, along with Cup 'hip hop' theme song here.

There's a message in all of this, make no mistake.

Posted by Besoeker 2010-06-28 04:21|| 2010-06-28 04:21|| Front Page Top

#5 I'm against video evidence. Once you introduce it for checking up on goals there won't be any stopping, and this would kill the game. It would become boring (yes I know you U.S. guys find it boring anyway but for once your opinion doesn't count here).

I'm not saying this because England was robbed of a goal and Germany benefited. I would have preferred to have England awarded the goal.

Very often wrong referee decisions energize the faulted team and its supporters. A send off is often extremely dangerous.

Discussing wrong ref decisions is part of the fun. Losing teams have comforted themselves for ages blaming the ref.

I don't want the game to stop every two minutes for video evidence (guess who will plaster the screen with ads?).

Soccer (football for the rest of the world) is not baseball. You don't see people eating chicken wings and chatting when the game is on.

Once you introduce video evidence to decide whether the ball has crossed the line, the next step is to introduce it for offside situations that lead to goals.

Then it's over. Because an offside decided by a ref stops the attack all the time. No video evidence could reverse the situation. But an offside NOT given by the ref and then decided by video would.

Let's keep football "human". Introduce two refs who just watch the goal line. That should do it.

""Let it be as it is and let's leave (soccer) with errors." Yes, they actually said this. Morons."

I loathe FIFA officials with all my passion. But they have a point here.

And think about it: No video evidence would have solved the Wembley mystery. How long should we have waited for a decision? And how controversial would such a cold blood decision have been?

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 05:19|| 2010-06-28 05:19|| Front Page Top

#6 A workable system could be devised that only allows for the most egregious errors to be corrected. But, as they said above, FIFA officials think that mistakes are cool and part of the game, sort of like vuvuzelas. They're simply not interested to devise such a system.

A strange thought, a game with no referee mistakes considered 'boring'.

Posted by gromky 2010-06-28 05:33|| 2010-06-28 05:33|| Front Page Top

#7 Well that's not quite what I meant. Rather a game interrupted every 2 minutes in order to check up on ref mistakes.

"that only allows for the most egregious errors to be corrected"

Sounds reasonable BUT who gets to decide when such an error would qualify?

Certainly the English goal is one. But what about the Argentinian offside goal?

And what if a ref robs a team of a clear goal because he wrongfully decides an offside? (This happens far more often than the goal situation we had yesterday.

No, introduce 2 extra refs who stay put at the goal line.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 05:42|| 2010-06-28 05:42|| Front Page Top

#8 Btw God bless the English sense of humour:

"Don't mention the four" (The Sun)

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 05:45|| 2010-06-28 05:45|| Front Page Top

#9 Tell me again why soccer doesn't have instant replay?

Because it allows the FIFA to decide who will win the World Cup.

Posted by JFM 2010-06-28 06:13|| 2010-06-28 06:13|| Front Page Top

#10 That's a fallacious "slippery slope" argument. There is a workable middle ground between the current "horribly flawed" system and a hypothetical "stop every ten seconds for video replay" system. In football, there are rules by which some calls are subject to challenge and some are not. For example, pass interference, a notorious judgment call, is not subject to challenge. The ref has 60 seconds to review the call and must overturn it if there is "incontrovertible visual evidence" - this would have worked in the England/Germany game. There are penalties to discourage abuse of the system. There is instant replay in Aussie rules football, too, and it works just fine. Instant replay could be made to work in soccer, if they wanted. They don't want to! FIFA likes the world-shattering mistakes and thinks that they are part of the tradition of the game. To my mind, this is totally fucking retarded, but whatever. It's just one of the many baffling things that I just don't get about soccer and soccer fans - it's right up there with deadly stadium stampedes and people running around in organized groups beating the shit out of each other.

We have the technology, we have had it for over twenty years and it works just fine, but the will to implement it is just not there. Contrast the view below with FIFA's stance:

"Our goal is to take advantage of advanced technology to create the most efficient replay system possible," said NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue. "We believe we have developed that type of system. It uses advanced technology, but it is simple to operate."

Posted by gromky 2010-06-28 06:14|| 2010-06-28 06:14|| Front Page Top

#11 We don't need video decisions.
We need better referees for sure.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 06:27|| 2010-06-28 06:27|| Front Page Top

#12 "Because it allows the FIFA to decide who will win the World Cup."

No. This is nonsense. No FIFA official could know in advance what situations could arise and how they should be decided.

(I rather bet that FIFA would love the U.S. to win the Cup as this would give soccer a ,ost lucrative boost in the U.S. Yet ref decisions were clearly against the U.S. teams on several occasion).

The Uru ref actually did say thgat he was quite dismayed after watching the vid. No ref in his right mind would disallow a goal like that. Obviously he didn't see the first bounce for what reason ever and then got influenced by the second bounce (which was not behind the line). Shit happens.

What would we discuss without Wembley or Maradona's "hand of God"?

I see far more problems with video evidence which happens to be less clear than the one we saw yesterday.

As I said, you can't take back a wrong offside decision that robs the attacking party of a legit goal.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 06:35|| 2010-06-28 06:35|| Front Page Top

#13 Soccer.

Posted by no mo uro 2010-06-28 06:55|| 2010-06-28 06:55|| Front Page Top

#14 Shit happens

Rarely against the "big country".

Posted by JFM 2010-06-28 08:44|| 2010-06-28 08:44|| Front Page Top

#15 Soccer Officially Announces it is Gay

Posted by Beavis 2010-06-28 09:09|| 2010-06-28 09:09|| Front Page Top

#16 "Let me remind you that sixty-five years ago, we defeated you in your favourite sport."

Posted by Eric Jablow 2010-06-28 09:26|| 2010-06-28 09:26|| Front Page Top

#17 I agree with EC -- no video replay in soccer.

For all FIFA world level events, one should have a 'goal linesman' for each net, suitably positioned to judge whether the ball is completely in or not. That linesman would also help with the egregious fouls that occur in the penalty area on free kicks and corner kicks.

I don't think soccer needs video, but it does need a couple sets of eyeballs since the referee simply can't look at everything.

Posted by Steve White 2010-06-28 09:27|| 2010-06-28 09:27|| Front Page Top

#18 I was quite frankly embarassed by the over paid poncy twits . We got stuffed , and even if that goal was allowed , ze germans would still have beaten us . The English team performance was lack lustre , slow and weak . These prima donnas should just quit and let hungry young reckless youth play .

As regards the .... ooh never mind , they were just lame beyond comprehension .. I hope theres a group at Heathrow to eggs and cabbages at them .

Posted by Bravo two 2010-06-28 10:26|| 2010-06-28 10:26|| Front Page Top

#19 Sensors in the goal frame and something they can sense (a wire loop or three?) in the ball.

Posted by Glenmore 2010-06-28 10:31|| 2010-06-28 10:31|| Front Page Top

#20 Bullcrap. You can and should have video replay on all goals & ONLY FOR GOALS. Just like hockey. It wouldn't slow down the game that much and you already have additional time to account for that if it did. Couldn't be any worse than some of these "grown men" taking faux-dives on the field and waiting for a stretcher they don't need - totally gay & wastes everyone's time -- did you guys see the end of US/Ghana? Also, it's not just Americans that want replay - english footballer Steve McManaman and German legend Jurgen Klinsmann are both big advocates for electronic review of goals. I trust their opinion on this matter more than FIFAs. No one is advocating any replay system for corners, goalkicks or fouls etc - only on goals. This is a good middle ground, end of story.

Posted by Broadhead6 2010-06-28 10:42|| 2010-06-28 10:42|| Front Page Top

#21 What does "only goal" mean? To decide whether a ball has crossed the line?

Actually those situations are extremely rare, but if you can do it with sensors, ok, no biggie.

But most offside goal situations aren't that easy to decide as the one Argentina scored. Sure with replay you eliminate some real bad decisions.

But you open a can of worms.

Agree with Steve White on more linesmen who stay put and watch the penalty area.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 10:56|| 2010-06-28 10:56|| Front Page Top

#22 Of course things get absurd when the public sees an instant replay in the stadium and the refs have to ignore it.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 11:00|| 2010-06-28 11:00|| Front Page Top

#23 How popular a country is influences the referees.
I thought this whole gathering for sport was supposed to be beyond that.

Better to not give the ref crew the tools it needs, whether replay or extra linesmen.
I guess we do not want to hurt the feelings of the beneficiaries of poor calls; how comforting for the other team. A bounce on the line or a shoelace on/off side is a judgement call, a bounce 1 meter in goal or that far offsides is an egregious error.

Poor officiating is a great comfort blanket for the losers.
Its one thing to gripe about calls. Its quite another to get screwed.

What would there be to talk about if there wasn't so many bad calls.
Charming. Guess the game does not stand on its own merits then?

US opinions do not matter in this case.
I see. Last I checked the US had a team in this tournement.

This is the pennicle of the game and there are not enough good crews to officiate all the games, or is it because of inclusiveness that some crews are turned down in favor of a crew from some other region. Sounds like rule by lowest common denomenator. Want to talk about deserve to win, I want to talk about all teams deserving to have a level field to play. An outmatched team playing their hearts out and winning is called an underdog story out this way. The US/Ghana game had great officials, where is my comfy blanket? Who gives a shit, Ghana won that game fair and square and no complaints other than the normal chair coach stuff.

But hey do not let this criticism by some, ugh american, damage the veneer of the pretty little game's appearance over outcome. Obviously my mindset of legitimate competition is well off the mark from the pagent reality.

Posted by swksvolFF 2010-06-28 12:29|| 2010-06-28 12:29|| Front Page Top

#24 All I need to know about soccer I can figure out from which parts of the world it's popular in.

Yes, it's the most popular sport in the world, and the world wears it's ass as a hat. Therefore, it's not much of a sport.

Posted by Mike N. 2010-06-28 12:45|| 2010-06-28 12:45|| Front Page Top

#25 Re #21: The players would all have to wear those Invisi-Fence dog collars or something in order to do remote-sensed off sides. So it could be done, but...

If they DID do that, the referee might be able to issue a brief, but memorable "correction" in lieu of cards. I dunno... thinking outside the 18-yard box, I guess.

(Actually I wouldn't mind seeing another pair of assistants on the field: one behind each net to watch out for all the shirt grabbing.)

Posted by Grenter, Protector of the Geats 2010-06-28 12:52|| 2010-06-28 12:52|| Front Page Top

#26 I thought this whole gathering for sport was supposed to be beyond that.

As Clauswitz said, soccer is the continuation of war by other means.

Posted by SteveS 2010-06-28 13:55|| 2010-06-28 13:55|| Front Page Top

#27 swksvolFF

"(yes I know you U.S. guys find it boring anyway but for once your opinion doesn't count here)."

The idea was that U.S. guys who find soccer boring do not count here because the rest of the world definitely doesn't find it boring.

A debate about instant replay is totally legit. I happen to be against it, that's all. Because it would change the game.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 13:57|| 2010-06-28 13:57|| Front Page Top

#28 Guess the game does not stand on its own merits then?

We finally have an American who understands soccer!

Posted by Frozen Al 2010-06-28 14:19|| 2010-06-28 14:19|| Front Page Top

#29 Soccer is not only a dull sport but the players are drama queens, faking getting hurt and all. I last about 30 seconds and then I have to change. As far as the discussion on videos go, find good refs, not camera's. Base ball has done a pretty good job of officials, some mistakes but over all good calls. Part of the game is the officials. My vote is to let EU have soccer, France, and the Euro. I will keep my base ball and beer.

Posted by 49 Pan 2010-06-28 15:09|| 2010-06-28 15:09|| Front Page Top

#30 I have predicted that in 50 years soccer will be the most popular sport in the U.S. as well.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 15:44|| 2010-06-28 15:44|| Front Page Top

#31 " I have predicted that in 50 years soccer will be the most popular sport in the U.S. as wel"

Why is America going to go that stupid that quickly, and fall for a game where the Refs frequently determine the outcome for better or worse, acting is valuable because faking a fall gains you advantage (repeatedly), there is little scoring, hand eye coordination is not required (you play ONLY with your feet) and even the timekeeping isn't public or precise. Its 30 seconds of excitement packed into 90 minutes on the field.

Not going to happen. Its a children's game and will stay that way here.

Posted by No I am The Other Beldar 2010-06-28 16:06|| 2010-06-28 16:06|| Front Page Top

#32 With all respect but you have no clue what you are talking about.

Of course some matches are boring but others are thrilling.

No eye coordination? Did you watch Germany against England? Didn't you notice how well players coordinated their moves, their passes?

Re drama queens. Sure they exist but most fouls are REAL fouls and hurt like hell. Just look at the injuries.

I have played in the highest German amateur league and I know what I'm talking about.

When I watch some fouls I rather find it amazing how fast a fouled player is able to get up again.

No, I stand by my prediction. Easy one. Just look back where soccer stood in the U.S. 20 years ago.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 16:42|| 2010-06-28 16:42|| Front Page Top

#33 EC may have a point there. The qualifier US vs. Mexico in Houston looked more like an away game for the US, minus the trash and flares thrown onto the field.

Getting kicked by someone who has spent 4+ years of their life doing nothing but learning how to kick hurts like a summbitch, anything short of grieves only helps. I have come back from some games looking like I lost a thai boxing match. Anyone who has learned the hard way that you must get completely over the hurdle knows that falling down at full sprint tickles a bit, even if on nice spongy grass.

Ya got a system which one ref and a handful of assistants try to keep track of a large field and 22 players with no overhead view, its not fair to the ref or the teams.

Posted by swksvolFF 2010-06-28 17:41|| 2010-06-28 17:41|| Front Page Top

#34 HAND Eye coordination. Not feet. You know, hand-eye coordination, the thing that sets us humans and primates above the other species? The ability to grip, manipulate swing and throw? Soccer is so limited it CAN be played effectively with your arms tied round your back. Especially if you can fall down convincingly every time the ref is looking your way.

I can see how this is popular in Europe, You've been fooling yourselves for decades that Statism is good and wanted. No surprise that "Football is the greatest sport" is another delusion of yours as a continent. You just don't understand the alternatives.

We have a larger number of, and frankly better, more entertaining alternatives than Europeans.
Soccer is big there because you don't have really anything else. No NBA, NFL, Major League Baseball, College basketball and football, and even no equivalent to the NHL except in a few cultures.

Its a children's game and will remain so, on the fringe, in the US as long as it continues to be the game that it is. Stupefyingly boring, paying off acting that would get you booted off a soap opera, inexactly timed, and ineptly refereed on a consistent basis. Nothing you said changes any of that. Its an inferior product that will not displace the others sports above it in the US.

Posted by No I am The Other Beldar 2010-06-28 17:46|| 2010-06-28 17:46|| Front Page Top

#35 Like religion, most people love what they grew up with. Therefore, most Americans will never be interested in watching professional soccer or cricket... and most of the rest of the world will find the baseball and ice hockey pointless. Let us resolve each to be amused by the other, and leave Clausewitz to his own devices. (Very well put, SteveS!)

European Conservative, thrilling is in the eye of the beholder. I promise you, based on my equal inability to see thrilling things in American football, basketball, baseball, ice hockey, cricket, and most popular music concerts, there is absolutely no way to translate that thrill to someone who did not previously grasp why he should care.

Posted by trailing wife 2010-06-28 18:02|| 2010-06-28 18:02|| Front Page Top

#36 Personally I think usenet / network / rantburg flamewars should be a recognized 'sport'.... that way even the geeks have a chance to win (and whine..).

Posted by CrazyFool 2010-06-28 18:34|| 2010-06-28 18:34|| Front Page Top

#37 @trailing wife

I like ice hockey very much, I like American football somewhat (but watching a game with 50 interruptions spiked with advertising ruins it for me) and baseball leaves me totally cold.

Of course what you watch and play as a kid is most important. That's why I find it somewhat amazing that actually a lot of American youngster DO play soccer before they switch to baseball or American football.

"Soccer is big there because you don't have really anything else. No NBA, NFL, Major League Baseball, College basketball and football, and even no equivalent to the NHL except in a few cultures."

Nonsense: At school we played handball, basketball, volleyball, but when the semester of soccer was declared we would joyfully storm out in winter to play on a frozen field at -15°C. (Must be our stubborn love for "statism")

And it's not just Europe. It's ALL Latin America (except Cuba and the Dominican Republic), it's all Africa, the Arabs love it, the Iranians, the Japanese, the Koreans.

To call soccer "static" is simply nonsense.

Another thing I found amazing. In Japan, in Brazil, in Argentina and in South Africa, but also in other countries, people could name at least 5 or 6 German players they admired (of course also Brazilian, Argentinian or Italian players).

How many U.S. baseball fans can name a Japanese or Korean player who does NOT play for an U.S. team?

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 18:57|| 2010-06-28 18:57|| Front Page Top

#38 Actually the real world series of baseball is literally Little League with winners from Mexico, Japan, Taipei, South Korea, Venezuela, and Curaçao.

Posted by Procopius2k 2010-06-28 19:09|| 2010-06-28 19:09|| Front Page Top

#39 I have nothing negative to say about baseball. It just leaves me cold. But that's not a reason to put it down like many Americans chose to do with soccer.

Posted by European Conservative 2010-06-28 19:19|| 2010-06-28 19:19|| Front Page Top

#40 I have nothing negative to say about soccer. It just leaves me cold. But that's not a reason to put it down like many Europeans chose to do with our national pastime, baseball.

Games are good exercise for the young in lieu of war. Adults should stay out of them.

And how come nobody talks about the fastest game on two feet, lacrosse?

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-06-28 19:48|| 2010-06-28 19:48|| Front Page Top

#41 I have nothing bad to say about womyn's beach volleyball, it just leaves me........

Posted by Besoeker 2010-06-28 20:05|| 2010-06-28 20:05|| Front Page Top

#42 Badminton is a very popular sport worldwide. Personally, I enjoy table tennis and bowling. Billards and darts are great too. Motorcycle sidecar racing is AWESOME!

Soccer, baseball, basketball, etc., I can do without.

Posted by Scooter McGruder 2010-06-28 20:07|| 2010-06-28 20:07|| Front Page Top

#43 I have nothing negative to say about baseball. It just leaves me cold. But that's not a reason to put it down like many Americans chose to do with soccer.
Posted by European Conservative

We put it down partly because of the way some poncy twits react. It's amusing. And, of course, we put it down because it is a girls game.

Posted by Secret Asian Man 2010-06-28 20:41|| 2010-06-28 20:41|| Front Page Top

#44 EC: " I have predicted that in 50 years soccer will be the most popular sport in the U.S."

EC: "I stand by my prediction. Easy one. Just look back where soccer stood in the U.S. 20 years ago."

well, i honestly don't think the pussification of our society that has happened in the last 20 years will be enough of a lasting trend to make soccer the #1 sport in 50 years as the massive dumbing down and indoctrination of "i am the universe" that the US education system has been putting out continues to gains steam, our primidonas who are too spoiled to share the field and play as a team and will not take time away from their self edification to watch someone else in a spotlight.

Of course, if we continue to allow the millions of illegals to flood in, that might balance out. but then it wouldn't be the US but rather a province of Mexico where your prediction came to pass.

on the Instant replay: The system in NHL hockey works great.

Posted by abu do you love 2010-06-28 21:57|| 2010-06-28 21:57|| Front Page Top

#45 That made a funny thought, how long would it take to get the game going again if a futbol player was hit by an inside fastball?

Nimble, because few people are badass enough to play lacrosse. Watch, when basketball takes over Europe in 10 years. Whatever is wrong with the NBA happened to soccer 50 years ago so it should fit right in.

The goal sport genre from toughest to least IMHO:
Lacrosse
Hockey
Water Polo
Basketball
Soccer
Horse Polo

I find track and field boring, but every 4 years I look at my childhood medals again and flip on the olympics. Checkers has a good flow to it. Chess, all that starting and stopping, especially the Chinese version - wheres that cannon a goin' now?

Football, Baseball, Hockey, basketball, all have given their refs the tool of instant replay and it has nothing but helped the officiating crew and has not slowed those games down any noticable amount.

Posted by swksvolFF 2010-06-28 21:59|| 2010-06-28 21:59|| Front Page Top

#46 EC could be correct based on immigration alone. If the lack of popularity increase that resulted from getting that Beckman guy is any indicator, immigration is the only way it will get big.

Posted by Mike N. 2010-06-28 22:13|| 2010-06-28 22:13|| Front Page Top

23:24 Asymmetrical
22:42 Barbara Skolaut
22:17 Mike N.
22:13 Mike N.
22:11 JosephMendiola
22:09 rjschwarz
22:06 CrazyFool
22:01 Nimble Spemble
21:59 swksvolFF
21:57 abu do you love
21:53 bigjim-CA
21:49 JosephMendiola
21:46 tipover
21:31 miscellaneous
21:30 abu do you love
21:11 JosephMendiola
21:02 JosephMendiola
20:57 JosephMendiola
20:48 Eric Jablow
20:42 DMFD
20:41 Secret Asian Man
20:25 Mike
20:13 Penguin
20:07 Scooter McGruder