Option 14
Goal line technology is apparently still on FIFA’s to-do list, or rather on it’s to-talk-about-maybe-possibly-doing list.
We’ve been pretty firmly in the “long overdue” camp with regard to goal line technology for a while here at UF. Saturday night’s USMNT team game was somewhere around exhibit FF in the case for.
But pardon us if we’re only slightly joyed to hear that FIFA is still looking at its options. From Sports Illustrated: “FIFA is studying 13 different goal-line technology systems which could help match officials make more accurate decisions. FIFA said Monday that all the project proposals were presented last week, and will be further discussed at an Oct. 20 meeting of its rule-making body, known as the International Football Association Board.”
Let’s be clear here: They are currently only studying the proposals. Those options will then be discussed further in just over a week. Then pending the outcome of those discussions they may or may not appear on the agenda for the annual meeting next March when the laws of the game can be changed. At which they could decide not to change anything.
Boy there’s a lot of hurdles that FIFA can fail to clear there. And if we were betting people, we’d bet they gladly fail at least once, which is all they need.
And it looks like they’re already giving themselves that out. From the same piece is this little nugget: “The panel also is scheduled to discuss worldwide trials using additional officials behind each goal to help referees rule on goal-line judgments and penalty area decisions. IFAB has scheduled the experiments to continue in competitions including the Champions League until June 2012. It could then approve the five-referees system for elite competitions instead of opting for technology.”
Okay, first, pardon the ignorance, but they are they really already doing this in the Champions Leauge? We hadn’t noticed. Second, why?
What could be more useless than putting an official behind the goal? He’d have the same lack of proper perspective as an official standing between the six at the 18. If there is a dispute on whether a ball crossed the line (like there was on Saturday) what good does an official behind the goal even do? Shouldn’t he (or she) be standing along the end line so they can look down the plane of the goal line? Or does that make too much sense?
God, FIFA, sometimes we don’t understand what you do besides collect sacks of money and try to ruin the very game that provides you with said sacks. Ugh.
@ PR: And as you noted in the US/Poland friendly, the linesman was out of position, so what’s to keep any extra officials (regardless of where they begin standing) from finding their ways out of position as well? Technology is our friend/so says my robot overlord
My only memory of the 5th officials in the Champions League this year is of watching them watch Defoe clearly handle the ball at the Lane during the play with the Young Boys.
–
13 ideas though? I don’t know if I could even think of that many. One has to be cameras on the goalline, another has to be electronic sensors, a third could be the 5 ref scheme. Beyond that though, I’m pretty much out.
@Ryan: Just come up with one more basic proposal, and then 4!=24.
I’m thinking Sepp is lying. No clue why I think that, mind you.
There have been 5 officials in the Champions League, and they do stand to the side of the goal. The side of the goal that is opposite the linesman in that half.
In regards to their positioning, those refs dont really move much, just a few feet in either direction, so theoretically they should be well positioned to see the goal line, as well as help the main official make calls involving infractions int he box.
sorry those links didn’t work. try this one. seriously awesome halloween pictures of messi and ronaldo!
http://www.soccerfanatic.com/blog/soccer-randomness/trick-treat-ronaldo-messi-freak-zombie/
I’m in the more refs camp.
Shadowy multi-national controlled by secretive bureaucrat located in Swiss Alps? I’m in the send-in-Jason-Bourne-to-fix-the-problem camp. Bye-bye Sepp.
More seriously, I vote for more refs also. Rules to aid offensive players, more stringent enforcement and two refs helped in hockey (although not as much as the Olympic ice sheet would). Obviously, American football has numerous officials who can call infractions and have specific responsibilities and focus within the field of play.
-
I think two refs – one with the play/ball and one trailing – with equal authority would cut out a lot of shenanigans; goal judges to help, umm, judge goals; and, 4 linesmen (2 per sideline each patrolling from end line to mid-field) would allow for better coverage and increased likelihood of being in the proper position for offsides calls.
On the fifth official, Broadfoot’s should’ve-been pen at OT was ten yards in front of the HR, ten yards of front of the 5-O, and was still missed.
.
@Wedel: We’ve done the two HR bit before. Doesn’t work. Neither wants to blow up a foul the other should’ve seen and they cancel each other out. Three officials is plenty, a camera with some fancy new-age technology that allows one to review the previous portion of play would be amazing. If only modern science could give us such a thing.
I hate the plan for more referees, at least of the on field variety. If you want to put more behind or on the goal line, by all means put an entire gaggle of them back there. But I think by adding more referees to the field of play, you only invite more inconsistency.
^^^^^^^^We have a winner.
.
More referees creates more opportunities for a call to be blown, not fewer.
@Ryan, @Shane: I fully understand what you’re saying and think that’s true under the current thinking. If you went out there tomorrow with a full crew, it would an absolute clusterf*ck. Diffusion of responsibility would ensure that no one ever blew their whistle.
-
There would have to be retraining involved and I think, like for internationals or the NFL, there would need to be crews of officials that worked together on a regular basis and viewed the game similarly.
-
There’s always going to be some inconsistency between crews/refs, but I think more eyes catch more stuff. With proper training and equal authority, the calls would become more accurate over time.
I think there should be one referee per player on the pitch. What could possibly go wrong???
Well, see the real problem is that refs are not as fit as butchers’ dogs. If all refs were of said fitness, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
@Wedel: Well, have you seen those European refs? They are. SAF told us so.
Hmm, maybe. But imagine if each PL game needed two officials. That’s 20 refs needed each weekend, while I would say there’s barely 10 decent ones in England. Also, which leagues would use such a two ref scheme? Would it go all the way down to League 2 or the Conference? Because then you basically have to double the amount of referees in England.
Also, for internationals, would both officials be from the same country? If not, that could lead to inconsistency, no matter how well they work together. You get a guy who refs the PL every weekend, he’s going to view challenges differently than someone who refs in La Liga.
Maybe that’s one of the issues that FIFA needs to address. Where by “FIFA” I mean “FIFA, were it competent and trustworthy.”
@all: How about the Brit-leagues open up to international ref’s like all the other major leagues have. That way, instead of drawing from a set and rather diluted talent pool they could pick from the best of the world. Aspire to have the greatest players in the world in your league, you should aspire to have the best officials also.
@Ryan: Again, no argument here that refs aren’t doing a good job. But I’d say if they only had to cover half the ground, they’d miss less stuff. And, at least in theory, could work twice the number of games, covering the same amount of ground.
-
It would increase ref employment opportunities, thereby aiding economic recovery! Assuming that refs typically ref the level of play commensurate with their experience, it might be possible to find double the refs at each level of play, but I simply don’t know how feasible that is – you’re right.
-
I do think the crews should all be from the league (they don’t have to be the same nationality, but they should be seeing the same style of play on a weekly basis, in my opinion.
-
I have no problem with a Spanish crew seeing things differently than a German crew. To me, national differences in the game are great and add to the uniqueness of European nights. I don’t care so much for the international game (i.e., national teams), but I do enjoy Big Cup and other regional club comps.
@Shane: Completely agree per my third point above. As long as the crews worked the same for the same FA and saw the same style each week, I think consistency would improve. No reason for the ref’s union to be a nationalistic closed shop.
@wedel: I don’t think we need yet another discussion of English xenophobia, so we’ll leave it as enough said.