World Cup 2010: Blatter sorry for disallowed goal

[Steven P. Administrators]

Fifa president Sepp Blatter has apologised to the Football Association over Frank Lampard's disallowed goal in England's World Cup defeat by Germany.

Lampard was denied a goal in Sunday's 4-1 last-16 loss, even though his shot clearly crossed the line.

Blatter said the debate on goal-line technology would be reopened when the International FA Board meets in July.

He also said sorry to Mexico after Carlos Tevez's offside goal was allowed to stand in Argentina's 3-1 victory.

Lampard's strike came during a spell of England dominance and would have levelled the score at 2-2.

"It is obvious that after the experiences so far at this World Cup it would be a nonsense not to reopen the file on goal-line technology," stated Blatter.

Full Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8771294.stm

Personally, I sort of agree with the argument that it could affect the speed and flow of the game, so why not just stick a man behind each goal, and then make it compulsory for high level events like the World Cup, Champions League, UEFA CUP etc? Then allow the respective leagues around the world to choose to implement it or not, as one concern in a few countries was also to do with the cost of doing it.

I can see it being a nuisance when the Lampard goal was made and the German keeper carried on as if nothing happened, in that instance the ref behind the goal could have stopped play OR the fourth official could have confirmed the video repeat of the event. I mean what is he there for otherwise, to keep managers in check and do the substitutions. Video refereeing could be done by the 4th official too?

The terrible decisions made every season and in every major tournament by referees hardly promotes "fair play", which they keep harping on about themselves.

[Brad.]

I completely agree with you Neobond, I heard someone on TV suggest that they implement it like tennis where each side would have 3 moments in which they could call for a video replay. Would definitely work well in my opinion. Players take so long to take set pieces these days, a video replay could easily be watched and judged in less time than that. The whole "it'd slow down the pace of the game" is utter rubbish, when there's a decision as clear as that the player's protest usually slow down the game enough.

[Kerm]

I emplore the officials to use video replays in that case of players diving. It could run whilst play continues and then simply inform the referee that,

yes, again, CHRISTIANO RONALDO WAS NOT EVEN TOUCHED AT THAT PREVIOUS SPINE SHATTERING TUMBLE AND 6 ROLL CRASH TO THE GROUND.

Red card.

[Crompee]

Personally, I sort of agree with the argument that it could affect the speed and flow of the game, so why not just stick a man behind each goal, and then make it compulsory for high level events like the World Cup, Champions League, UEFA CUP etc? The allow the respective leagues around the world to choose to implement it or not, as one concern in a few countries was also to do with the cost of doing it.

I can see it being a nuisance when the Lampard goal was made and the German keeper carried on as if nothing happened, in that instance the ref behind the goal could have stopped play OR the fourth official could have confirmed the video repeat of the event,. I mean what is he there for otherwise, to keep managers in check and do substitutions, video refereeing could be done by the 4th official too.

The terrible decisions made every season and in every major tournament by referees hardly promotes "fair play", which they keep harping on about themselves.

The goalline technology wouldnt affect the speed of the game, as its not what you think. Its not someone watching the replays of the event and then relaying the result to the ref, its that they place a microchip in the ball and inside the goalposts, then the ball can detect weither its crosses the line or not and then the ball relays it instantly to the linesman, ref or 4th official.

The current plan is to stick another official behind each goal, which is being implemented in the champions league next season.

[Steven P. Administrators]

Yes, football can be a very deceptive game and some players seem more talented at fooling the ref than outclassing their opponent in the run of play :/

This also annoys me a lot, but goal line technology would be a baby step to stamping out unfair decisions, at least.

[Brian M. Veteran]

They don't need goal-line technology - just do what they do in other sports - go to a video referee if theres ANY doubt whatsoever.

It works fine in other sports such as Rugby.

[Steven P. Administrators]

They don't need goal-line technology - just do what they do in other sports - go to a video referee if theres ANY doubt whatsoever.

It works fine in other sports such as Rugby.

Well thats why Rugby is 80 mins instead of 90, to compensate for all the stoppages lol.

[bdsams Veteran]

There was a news special on BBC about a technology that they use in hockey and tennis that would allow a signal to be sent to the on field ref if the ball crossed the goal line w/in a half second. For tennis, they actually make money by allowing a sponsor to, well "sponsor" the replay.

[Dapen]

As much as that goal was a terrible problem for England and probably didn't help our loss, we were still a very bad team in the 4 world cup games we played, we didn't deserve to get to the last 16 in my opinion, shame.

More to the subject of this post. Football now needs video technology in some form, perhaps a 4th referee, because if we at home can see mistakes then the referees should.

[e-berlin.org]

Of course it's absolutely no problem to judge each situation with today's technology and it's not going to take more that few seconds (less than a referee's decision). The thing is always about the hundreds of billions people betting on soccer games - the huge bookies want a corrupted person down there, so they can call him during halftime and control his decisions based on how much they gonna win or lose globally. Want a fair play? Stop betting!

[Argote]

I also think that coaches should have the option to review around 3 plays during the game or maybe use up a substitution if they called for a review and were wrong. Also make it valid only for refuting cards (not calling uncalled ones), reviewing is a goal was scored while offside (Think Mexico, no option to reverse a call if an offside was flagged) and check for goals (think England).

[+John. Subscriber¹]

Bit late though. I disagree with the comments that it will destroy the spirit of the game. No one is saying that the 4th Assistant would be there watching like a hawk. He would only be used if the referee decides that he isn't sure about the decision. Play won't be stopped every 2 minutes whilst everyone turns around and looks at the video screen to check if the player dived or not.

[Darth Laidher]

They would of lost no matter if that goal counted or not. The fact is no matter how many people want to big up the England team, they're not a world class team.Just because the premiership is the most popular league on the planet doesn't make the England team world class.The only world class player on the England squad is Rooney and even he didn't do well. Every time I hear how good England is and how good they're going to do but yet they flop every time. Maybe instead of telling the world how good England is going to do maybe they should start looking at their own team and ask themselves can this 11 really compete. I say no they can't at least not those 11.They need to go back to the drawing board and figure things out.

[leesmithg]

Sepp Blatter is a plank.

I never understand why such a moron is head of whatever he thinks he is head of ( I know it is f.i.f.a.) and why he gets the vote every time there

is an election he belongs on the White Elephant stall.

It works exactly the same as hawk eye, indications will ring in the refs ear if it is a goal or not.

England and the Mexican team should have left the field of play as they were cheated.

Same as 1986 when that moron hand balled the ball over Shiltons fist.

We need the replays, will hopefully stop diving, also tell if the foul was in the penalty area and also will tell if the ''whole'' ball passed over whatever line.

[MightyJordan]

Well thats why Rugby is 80 mins instead of 90, to compensate for all the stoppages lol.

What Sepp Blatter doesn't seem to realise is there's such a thing as stopping the clock if the ball goes dead, a feature that is used in pretty much every other sport; Rugby, Basketball, Ice Hockey, American Football (except in a certain situation, which I can't remember, as I don't know too much about it :p ), etc. Hell, even Cricket uses video technology, and look how much the game has improved since they introduced it!

We need the replays, will hopefully stop diving, also tell if the foul was in the penalty area and also will tell if the ''whole'' ball passed over whatever line.

I think they need to do more to stop diving. A yellow card, or a straight red isn't enough to deter them. Hit them in their wallets, and then they'll be less inclined to do it.

[protocol7]

Is he going to apologise to the US team for their disallowed goal? Or Mexico for Argentina's offside goal? Or Ivory Coast for Brazil's handballed goal?

It wasn't just this one incident. There were a string of bad decisions made by inept referees with no means of recourse for the affected teams. From the sounds of things, some of this goal-line technology will only answer the was-it-over-or-not issues, not the offsides or handballs. TV commentators can pick up in an instant if it's offside, a handball or over the line and can pull up the footage to prove it in seconds. It shouldn't take a ref any longer to do the same and it certainly won't interrupt the flow any more than players taking a dive.