Phantom goal should lead to video technology
Columnist By Mike Tuckerman, 28 Jun 2010 Mike Tuckerman is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- 2010 World Cup, disallowed goal, England, england vs germany, English Premier League, EPL, Fabio Capello, FIFA, football, Frank Lampard, Germany, goal-line technology, John Terry, Lukas Podolski, Manuel Neuer, Miroslav Klose, Sepp Blatter, video technology, Wayne Rooney, World Cup
Related coverage
- Football news
- EPL - English Premier League news
- World Cup Favourites news
- World Cup Roar of the Crowd Competition news
- Football World Cup - South Africa 2010 news
Germany goalkeeper Manuel Neuer looks at the ball that hit the bar to bounce over the line during the World Cup round of 16 soccer match between Germany and England at Free State Stadium in Bloemfontein, South Africa, Sunday, June 27, 2010. (AP Photo/Alessandra Tarantino)
Yesterday, June 27, 2010, a date which will live in infamy. Mark it in your calendars, for it’s the day that will go down in history as the one in which FIFA were finally forced to concede that video technology must be introduced at the highest level of the game.
Regardless of how impressive Germany’s rapid-fire football was in the second half of their 4-1 dismantling of England, the fact is that the complexion of the game changed thanks to one key moment in the first half.
Six minutes before half-time, England midfielder Frank Lampard sent a looping half-volley over the head of German goalkeeper Manuel Neuer and on to the underside of the crossbar.
The ball clearly bounced down over the line, yet the ‘goal’ was missed by both the referee and his so-called assistants.
It won’t have been missed in England – you can thank the ravenous English press for that – and just days after FIFA supremo Sepp Blatter once again dismissed the notion of video technology being introduced to the game, pressure must be brought to bear on the governing body for continuing to make decisions which, contrary to their grandiose declarations, are clearly not “for the good of the game.”
It’s a shame that a refereeing blunder will prove the major talking point, because it takes away from an excellent performance by an impressive German side.
I’m not quite sure why English fans were so confident going into the game – had they spent as much time thinking about Germany’s obvious counter-attacking abilities as they did spouting the usual clichés and dredging up the same old tired war songs – they might not have been, but in the end their confidence was clearly misplaced.
My fellow FourFourTwo.com columnist Andy Mitten recently argued that “England are the Aston Villa of football,” suggesting that an international team with so little depth has no chance of winning the World Cup.
And how coach Fabio Capello must look back and rue Robert Green’s howler against the USA – a goalkeeping error which cost England the chance to top the group and thereby avoid a Round of 16 clash against their arch-rivals Germany.
Yet Green is hardly the only villain of a mediocre campaign, and his 39-year-old replacement David James must be wondering how players of the calibre of Ashley Cole and John Terry can be made to look so ordinary by the likes of Lukas Podolski and Miroslav Klose.
I can give you one good reason: the English Premier League is the most overrated league in the world, and several members of the England squad would never have got a look in at some of the top international teams.
Whether there are too many foreign stars in the Premier League will once again come under scrunity, but a German side bristling with Bundesliga talent ultimately tore Capello’s men to shreds.
They were helped by a ludicrous goal on the twenty minute mark, as Neuer thumped a goalkick which Terry and the beleaguered Matthew Upson let bounce, allowing Miroslav Klose to use all his predatory instincts to poke home a simple opener.
Germany’s second was just as simple, and by the time English hearts had been broken thanks to their contentious disallowed strike just before the break, a second-half onslaught from the Germans was always on the cards.
So it is Joachim Löw’s side that marches on to a richly deserved quarter-final appearance, and in the form they’re in, it would take a brave soul to bet against Germany reaching the final in Johannesburg.
You can bet that video technology will be in use by Brazil 2014 as well.
On a night in which Germany proved their World Cup pedigree with a thumping win over the old enemy, Fabio Capello won’t be the only one having nightmares about the replay, with FIFA once again set to be bombarded with calls for video technology to be introduced at the World Cup.
Postscript: The Argentina-Mexico round of 16 match also had a controversial decision when Carlos Tevez scored the first goal of the game for Argentina from what was a clear offside position.
Referee Roberto Rosetti allowed the goal to stand despite the anger caused by a replay of the incident on the stadium’s giant screens.
Rossetti initially consulted with the linesman, seemingly seeking a second opinion, before ruling the goal legal, as players from both teams protested furiously. The goal stood and Argentina went on to win 3-1. Full details of the match HERE.
Recommend this story.
Follow Mike on twitter @Mike_Tuckerman
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
June 28th 2010 @ 8:28am
whiskeymac said | June 28th 2010 @ 8:28am | Report comment
regarding touch line technology – and gettting away from England’s massive loss – FIFA like to pretend or deny anythings wrong – they only now admit the jabulani is awful – and this debate has been around a long time.
i enjoy the “human” element that FIFA espouses as being fundamental to the games character. i like the controversy it generates but at the same time realise that for some parts of the game – and anything in the 18 yard box – video technology shld be seriously considered. there is scope in the game for both the human folly Zurich idolises and video replay that the rest of the world wants to have a part in the game.
June 28th 2010 @ 8:50am
Towser said | June 28th 2010 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Since when has it been any different for England. What frustrates me as an expat is that the expectation never lives up to the hype.
I always wonder why. Lack of bottle/self belief on the world stage comes to mind. The same fear of foreign mentality that comes from living on an Island? I dont know,but its a paradox that a nation where football dominates cannot measure up on the world stage at International level. . Sure you get one or two exceptions,but generally England underacheive when stepping off the Island. Mr Yorkshire puddin himself Ar Kevin or sophisticated Italian Capello makes no difference,same crap results. In fact maybe Ar Kevin wearing his heart on his sleeve like Diego would do better.
June 28th 2010 @ 9:03am
Cpaaa said | June 28th 2010 @ 9:03am | Report comment
It was not long ago that “hawk eye” said they have the answer to balls crossing the line. Seppo once again said that he is in favour of technology as long as the information is held only with ref officials.
So an ear piece with goal message would be enough, so one thought.
here is article from espn regarding technology, hawk eye inventor Paul Hawkins, and Sepp Blatter
September 29, 2009
Sepp Blatter has been openly defied by an inventor of goal-line technology, Hawk-Eye’s Dr Paul Hawkins, who has written to the FIFA president informing him that he is wrong to reject an innovation the entire world of football wants because the system is not good enough. Sepp Blatter has been FIFA chief since 1998. Dr Hawkins, managing director of Hawk-Eye Innovations Ltd, has set out to attempt to expose a Blatter myth that the new technology is not ready for the professional game – while Hawkins counters that it has been successfully trialed at Reading and that the Premier League are backing it.
ESPN Soccernet has the open letter to Blatter in its possession, in which Hawkins takes great exception to Blatter answering a question raised by John Terry about goal-line technology. The England and Chelsea captain is in favour of it, but Blatter suggests the technology still needs to be refined before it is acceptable.
That has caused a fired-up Hawkins to launch a passionate plea to Blatter to re-consider as he feels goal-line technology is “good for the game”, and that his system works perfectly.
Hawkins also reminds Blatter of his declaration that he is in favour of goal-line technology, providing it is “real time, accurate, reliable, only for goal-line decisions and only for use by officials.”
Then Hawkins goes on the attack: “However, as you are aware, the reasons you have given as to why Hawk-Eye could not be approved do not accord with the facts. From tests conducted at Reading, the Hawk-Eye system was shown to be a very viable option and provided the correct result in 100% of the tests conducted.”
Hawkins concluded: “If you believe that football is better off without goal-line technology, then please use this reason when justifying your decision rather than making a scapegoat out of the technology providers and incorrectly damaging their reputation.
“If you believe football would be better off with goal-line technology, then please embark on a fully transparent, scientific process so that technology providers are able to deliver a system which meets your requirements.
“We very much hope that this letter enables the discussion over goal-line technology to be debated from a more informed standpoint, and that no further action is required to protect our name or set the record straight. We would very much welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you in more detail and we look forward to your reply.”
FIFA have tested goal-line technology at a number of tournaments in recent years but announced in March 2008 that they had decided to “stop tests in this area until further notice”. Instead, FIFA approved the use of two additional assistant referees, one situated behind each goal, which has been used in the Europa League this season.
June 28th 2010 @ 9:12am
Cpaaa said | June 28th 2010 @ 9:12am | Report comment
I think the only way to convince seppo and fifa is if all countries make a stand and say we want the technology.
The big clubs and countries to go on strike, (no doubt led by England), and not play international matches until a trial period is put forward. Even better the entire premier, spanish, german, Australian and U.S leagues to use it.
June 28th 2010 @ 9:27am
Towser said | June 28th 2010 @ 9:27am | Report comment
May not be as far fetched as it seems. Generally evolution takes care of change.
But when the feeling for change felt by the people becomes a tidal wave & those at the top refuse to act on that change in feeling,then revolution occurs.
June 28th 2010 @ 9:18am
Towser said | June 28th 2010 @ 9:18am | Report comment
I agree on FIFA,masters of denial against the general feeling of football fans. Unlike diving simulation where you can argue it is cultural & often debatable regardless,offside, ball over the line incidents are clearly right or wrong.
I also understand the FIFA mantra of keeping uniformity in a game as widespread as football(Although I could quote occassions when that is flawed) but when you are presenting the pinnacle of a sport where teams ,coaches,administrators & most of all fans have poured blood sweat & tears into support over a 4 year period,then getting it right is just reward for that support.
What pisses me of the most is that video technology is inevitable. The fact that it has been invented means that it will be absorbed into every facet of the way we live. History dictates that this is so. With every invention that was initially resisted by sceptics who believed they were protecting their own fiefdom, it prevailed eventually.
A referee in my eyes is like the players on the pitch to serve/represent us the fans ,the same way as players once they step onto the park. at professional level.
Both are accountable to us the fans as is FIFA Or anybody else involved in the professional game.
The ref for me is part of the overall theatre of football. Part of that theatre is getting it right as accurately as possible,mistakes kept to a minimum.
The ref as it stands now in FIFA’s eyes is getting it right even though he is wrong as indicated quite clearly for the world to see by instant technology. He(ref) in order to be accountable to us the fans should therefore be assisted by technology(it exists because humans invented It) at tournaments like the World Cup.
June 28th 2010 @ 9:21am
MVDave said | June 28th 2010 @ 9:21am | Report comment
England were poor and deserved to be 2-0 down but after 35 minutes and their first goal momentum had changed…then Lampard’s ‘goal’…England have the run and at 2-2 the dynamics of the game are very different. England then wouldn’t have to push forward so heavily as they did on the 2 Germans break away goals…dont forget Lampard had hit the cross bar again in the 2nd half. After the 3rd German goal England were spent, having been the better side for the first 20 minutes of the 2nd half.
Goal line technology a must…as England can rightly feel to have been robbed of a goal and if that was given…as it should have been…who knows?
June 28th 2010 @ 9:31am
ItsCalledFootball said | June 28th 2010 @ 9:31am | Report comment
Why do England always attract such controversy every time they play in a WC?
Who knows what happens if the second England goal is given, but . . . Germany were fitter and better.
The England team lacked any cohesion and they seemed to be constantly arguing with each other and blaming each other for bad passes and missed opportunities. They weren’t fighting for their lives.
Anyway, we’re as good as England letting in 4 goals against the Deutsche.
June 28th 2010 @ 9:45am
OneJayBee said | June 28th 2010 @ 9:45am | Report comment
Mike,
Generall agree entirely with your comments, not the one about the premier league being overrated. I don’t think it is, but it certainly doesn’t help the English cause given the ‘proportion’ of their players who are in the leading clubs…
I made some comments about the use of technology but they are worth repeating (at least I think so!)
Isn’t it ironic given the events of 66. I don’t think Germany would have been beaten last night but 2-2 would certainly have given the game a different momentum albeit briefly.
I definitely believe technology must be used to clear up instances like this, AND rescind clearly innocent people being booked or sent off (as has happened in the cup) and suspend the divers. No one expects the ref or linesman to be perfect – but we have the technology to cover if they are mistaken (or even worse, conned).
Blatter has bleated that video usage will slow down the game. HELLO. How about the five minutes it takes every time some prima donna rolls around for a free kick / yellow card, gets on a stretcher then has a miraculous recovery? Let’s do a deal – don’t stop play when someone goes down (unless it is clearly real (ie bleedingly obvious, literally and metaphorically) – it might discourage players taking a breather to kill time – if they did that maybe I could live without video replays…
It’s 2010 not 1950 – use what’s available… they use current technology for boots, shirts and balls, why stop there?
June 28th 2010 @ 10:00am
Art Sapphire said | June 28th 2010 @ 10:00am | Report comment
“Phantom” goal should not detract from limitations of English football. The English public yearn for success but the won’t get it as their football industry is based on making money for the EPL clubs and not making successful national teams.
The English attack was led by some one in desperate need of a holiday who plays in a league where there is no winter break and where only 34% of the players are local.
End result – The English end up getting played off the park by a 20 and 21 year old.
P.S – Sepp, if you don’t want to introduce video replays then introduce goal line officials like UEFA did in the Europa League last season. Just do something.
June 28th 2010 @ 10:29am
yossarian said | June 28th 2010 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Onejaybee, completely agree…I have a little idea to stop this…if a player is sooooo injured that he requires treatment, I think that out of concern for his wellbeing we should insist that he spends the next five minutes on the sideline being checked to ensure his recovery is complete. Watch how many players bounce straight up.