Latest news

So much for a promise by the FIFA President

After the Lampard goal i/no goal ncident at the World Cup, Sepp Blatter told the world that goal-line technology would be discussed at the July meeting of the International FA Board. 

It wasn't. It is now promised for October.  .  . . . . .

Blatter has always obstinately resisted technology to help referees make decisions, but maybe, at last, he will be capable of change

FIFA General Secretary Jerome Valcke told BBC Sport that the Lampard incident had been "a bad day" for tournament organisers. He also said the 2010 World Cup would be the last "under the current refereeing system," without giving further specific details. Whatever could he mean? 

Another case of wait and see.

Time for another laugh or two after that

Just click and fall about

There was some justice after all

The World Cup was won by arguably the best team, Spain, and the superb organisation was a tribute to the “new” South Africa and heralded the full entry of the continent on to the international football scene. 

But those were not the only just outcomes of the competition - the two main cheats did not prosper:

France, who got to the finals unfairly by the “hand of Henri”, went on to behave shamefully and were despatched before the knock-out stage. 

Uruguay who beat Ghana thanks to the hand of Suarez, lost in the next round.

And the Germans who were helped to victory over England by a glaring refereeing error, were also beaten in their next match !

So there was some justice after all.

High time for the penalty goal

Unbelievable. Ghana are cheated out of a place in the semi-finals of the World Cup and the media seem to accept it as just one of those things. Even when Suarez brags about having got his team into the semi-final by "the best save of the World Cup" no-one seems terribly concerned. The talk is all about missed penalties as if that was the issue.

The real  issue  was not that the penalty awarded for hand-ball in the last minute was missed, or that Uruguay scored more goals during the ‘penalty shoot-out’, and therefore won the game, it was that a Uruguayan player’s hand deliberately prevented a certain goal and denied Ghana the victory they would rightly have achieved.

 Injustice with a capital 'I' and so preventable. No need for FIFA to argue about technology. Why not a simple modification to Law (for every level of the game Mr Blatter) - ’If, in the opinion of the referee, a certain goal is prevented by the arm/hand of a defender other than the goalkeeper, the referee must nevertheless award the goal and dismiss the offender from the field of play.’

Problems? Of course the referee has to be sure, but this would not be the only occasion when goal/non-goal relies on his judgment. More serious for the conservatives, the 'penalty try' already exists in the rival code and, like video, should therefore be opposed, however convincing the case and even if it works . . . .

What about justice for once?

So that's it . . . or, let's hope, not quite

England are out, beaten, one suspects, by a better team, but the disallowed Lampard goal did play a part which can never be measured. 

Can we now hope that Blatter, his die-hard cronies and surprising new ally, Plattini, will remove their heads from the sand and accept that goal-line technology is a must? They might even be persuaded that the game in the upper echelons is not the same as on the local park and that loads of differences exist already, even in the application of the Laws. "Get real, FIFA", as they say  . . . .

28/07/10

Time now for a laugh

With so much bad news around, a bit of fun is called for. Just click and go . . . 

© 2010  Reading Referees’ Association