Inexplicably bad defending lead England to a 1-0 deficit against the Germans which was then doubled by a swift attack that exposed the frailty England had in defense again. 2-0 before the game felt like it had fully started and the small gang of Englishman at the Power & Light District were pretty well resigned to the defeat we expected going into the game. Matthew Upson pulled one goal back quickly and all of a sudden there was hope, England were pressing forward and then Frank Lampard unleashed a shot which cannoned downwards off the cross bar and over the line. It was a goal, we celebrated and then the sickly realization that it had not been given set in.
Inevitably the conversation turned to “England getting screwed” and then “we need video technology” to help prevent these things happening. Did I feel aggrieved? Yes, but as the game played out and Germany ran away with it it was also obvious that England were in over their heads and the better team was going to win.
I felt no anger towards the referees when the game was over, more a deeper conviction that the blame for the defeat lay squarely at the feet of the players sporting the Three Lions badge. They were simply not good enough.
Later that afternoon I watched Carlos Tevez score a goal for Argentina that was offside. I really didn’t see the offside until the commentators watched the goal again in slow motion and mentioned it. Mexico just got screwed. Right? And the Republic of Ireland by France with Thierry Henry’s hand ball. And England in 1986 by Diego Maradona’s “Hand of God”. And Germany by England in the 1966 World Cup final.
We remember these famous episodes, and yes in an ideal world they would never happen but expecting referees to be perfect is a foolish notion and to play devils advocate I think expecting that introducing instant replay into soccer will somehow cure the game of injustice is also foolish.
Goal Line Instant Replay – to see if a ball crossed the line is one of the most commonly requested new tools for referees that the scorned and aggrieved turn to. The reality is a tiny minority of the good goals that are not allowed to stand are those where we argue over if the ball crossed the line. Meanwhile in the Premier League, Seria A, MLS and leagues around the world scores of good goals are struck off every week because of blown off-side calls. As high as this number may be, as many goals are scored that are the result of an offside call that is not given. Headers are scored or missed because of shirt tugs. Corner kicks are unjustly won and lead to goals. Throw ins are taken from the wrong spot. Referees play the advantage only to have the team given the advantage lose the ball and a goal thirty seconds later.
In a fluid game like soccer a poor call in the opposing penalty area can lead to a goal at the other end of the field. In short, to fairly apply video technology to the game that we call “beautiful” every refereeing decisions given or otherwise would have to be subject to rejection. I just don’t think it can work. To have technology to disprove or approve Frank Lampard’s goal as a specific scenario would not have helped the USA with their two good goals that were not given during the 2010 World Cup. When you can point to scenarios where justice can be served, while others scenarios are left to the officials cries of foul play will persist.
Technologically imposed fair play brought to its ultimate conclusion would punctuate a game that is already suffering with simulated fouls, inconsistent refereeing and negative defensive play.
Nearly a half century after Geoff Hurst’s controversial goal I am left wondering if those decisions that are too close to call would not still be bitterly argued about. This certainly happens in the NFL, and ultimately instant replay is still in the hands of humans, and that human factor will never change.
They key to changing the game to make it more just, lies in more officials on the field. This was tested in last seasons Europa League and is being extended to the Champions League on trial. Basically goal line officiants at either end monitor the goal line and watch for foul play in the boxes. More eyes on the field takes the pressure off referees to keep up with a game that is ever increasing in speed. It has not been infallible, but then no system ever will be and at some point you just have to take the shit sandwich you have been handed and admit it just wasn’t your day.



Sorry I took a break from here for a bit bc I didn’t realize you were back on the horse. Good stuff. I agree more refs is probably the only answer. Hawkeye might work on the rare occasion of an England-Germany situation but that could probably only be implemented in the biggest tournaments.
A more off-the-wall suggestion would be to add an additional center referee. One stays in each half. They stay fresher and there’s an extra set of eyes.
The only major problem I see is two whistles on the field. One blows it for a foul, the other waves the “get up” motion. They cant really stop the game and converse – maybe it’s not doable.
Goalline referees at international competition seems like the minimum at this point. I don’t think another WC marred like this one was would be a good thing.
Comment by szazzy — July 5, 2010 @ 2:29 pm