FIFA = EPIC Fail

[fishwater99]

Now they are not going to even show replays on the screens in the stadium anymore. You know the officials are bad when this happens. This year has been a huge example for some type of instant replay in the soccer.

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/world-cup/story/_/id/5335440/ce/us/fifa-censor-stadium-replays&cc=5901?ver=us

 

[JohnDawg]

There's a reason thelaws of the gamehaven't changed in almost 150 years. It's the world's beautiful game.

 

[Sutterkane]

and not ever use it to overturn calls

 

[RebelBruiser]

In football, you have about 35-45 seconds between the end of one play and the start of the next at the college level and around 30-35 at the pro level. In baseball, you have time between pitches. In basketball, the refs can stop play and choose to go to the monitor to review a 3 pointer if the shot went in.

The clock never stops in soccer, even for injuries, and the officials are simply in charge of keeping up with a guess of the amount of stoppage time to add on at the end. Would you stop the clock for a replay? Would someone from a review booth send down a signal and stop play in the middle of the action? Take the two calls in question from the other day, the offsides goal by Argentina and the goal/non-goal by England. They could replay the Argentina call and send down a signal because play was stopped for the goal celebration. What about the England game? Germany already had the ball and was clearing it out. What if it was a quick clear like in the US-Algeria game that was going to lead to a goal on the other end? Would you stop play in the middle of the action? No, you couldn't do that.

Soccer isn't built for replay to be a viable option in most cases, and you'd have to amend the stoppage time rule in some fashion to accomodate it.

 

[RebelBruiser]

and have 60 year old men with failing vision review plays on non-HD monitors (since the SEC has no need for that new technology - says Rogers Redding) so that week after week they continually blow review calls that everyone at home with their 52" LCD TV screen can see easily.

 

[dawgstudent]

could not be used on goals only.

 

[Sutterkane]

[No message]

 

[o_1984Dawg]

Hell I'll say I think UEFA will put it in for 2012 and FIFA will follow suit for 2014.</p>

 

[Original48]

someone flails wildly to the ground like Nancy Kerrigan after being bumped. Can't remember the game but it should have been used when the guy got the red card because the other guy ran into him...subsequently falling to the ground holding his face in the dramatic fashion only a spoiled 5th grade girl could appreciate. That guy should have been suspended for two games.

 

[RebelBruiser]

All because Rogers Redding thinks an 18" standard def TV is just fine for replays. That still gets me. It's no wonder that everyone in the television viewing audience can get a call right, but the SEC replay officials can't. They have lesser technology than anyone else.

That this conference is so rich yet can't afford to buy twelve 60" LCD or Plasma screen TVs to install in the replay booths still gets me, especially seeing us on the wrong end of so many replays.

 

[Uncle Leo]

Soccer is unique in that there is constant "action" (most Americans would disagree) and I'd be against anything that disrupts the constant flow of the game. The referees use headsets to communicate with each other. There could be some system that would beep in the center ref's ear when the ball crosses the line (such technology exists but, to date, FIFA has rejected it). That would be instantaneous with no interruptions.</p>

 

[o_1984Dawg]

Look at Robbie Findley's 2nd yellow card. Glad he got it, but there's no reason FIFA couldn't look at it and say it wasn't even a handball, shouldn't have been a yellow.

Now when you start talking about suspending players for things reviewed post-game you're taking things a bit further, but I think for blatant offences, that should be done as well.

 

[o_1984Dawg]

There's no reason FIFA can't have an extra official sitting behind a TV that could let the center ref know when something's clearly wrong like the England goal. We're not talking about going NFL-style and having the center ref go into a booth for 10 minutes.

 

[topequisdog]

Why not have a 90 second rule? The folks in the booth have 90 seconds to replay the questionable goal, it's automatically added to the "stoppage time", and you avoid these major blunders. With all of the flopping going on, a 90 second review on 1 goal is not going to disrupt the game. It takes a bit of time to get the ball from the goal and set up at midfield, so this can all take place during that time. I don't understand the "constant action" argument for soccer. How many times does the game stop for someone that's been nudged, holds his face in his hands, and rolls on the ground for minutes at a time? They add time for that, so why not a goal-based review system? I would suspect it would be used less than once a game.