World Cup Soccer

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Please forgive a question from an American with little appreciation for soccer football.
So why aren't more refs on the field and/or video review? How do the sport's fans put up with this? A more cynical observer might think such a rule change would spoil the bribery income stream for refs.

3 refs in Basketball on a small court is ok.
The NFL has more and review.
The NHL has 3 on the ice and 2 covering the goals (IIRC)
MLB has 3 or 4, they add 2 more during the playoffs. (The one behind the plate see most of the important action.)

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Last week I watched the refs blow calls disallowing two goals for the U.S. in group play. This weekend they botched calls on goals for England and Argentina.

(Mexico)

So why aren't more refs on the field and/or video review?

Fiddler on the Roof had the answer:

"Tradition!"

- - - -

Compare tennis:

1 umpire, in line with the net

4 sideline judges

2 service line judges

2 baseline judges

[Flatlander]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

Compare tennis:

1 umpire, in line with the net

4 sideline judges

2 service line judges

2 baseline judges

and Hawk-eye

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

Compare tennis:

1 umpire, in line with the net

4 sideline judges

2 service line judges

2 baseline judges

(& Hawk-eye)

OTOH, compare how many times per match the tennis judges have occasion to make a close line call versus how many times per game a hypothetical soccer goal judge would have occasion to make a similarly close goal call.

Counter-comparison: how often a single tennis line call would make a difference in the match outcome versus how often a single soccer goal call would make a difference in the game outcome.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

Counter-comparison: how often a single tennis line call would make a difference in the match outcome versus how often a single soccer goal call would make a difference in the game outcome.

That highlights FIFA's gross negligence! Tennis has 9 judges and video review for calls that are unlikely to matter much. FIFA has only one ref and two(?) sideline judges for calls that are likely to be critical.

[davieddy]

Perhaps we could award half a goal if the ball didn't hit the net.
or there was a suspicion of offside or handball.
Replaying the point frequently happens in tennis.

David

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Tennis has 9 judges and video review for calls that are unlikely to matter much.

... but are common ...

FIFA has only one ref and two(?) sideline judges for calls that are likely to be critical.

... but rare.

Just another example of our tendency to disregard the need to protect against rare occurrences (e.g., comet or asteroid collision with Earth).

[xilman]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...10/8771294.stm

[ATH]

There should have been done something about this long ago, but it's probably conservatism in the high ranks of FIFA. Let's hope something will come of this now.

But the debate has been going on for years. Here is an article from 2006 against video technology in soccer: http://www.sportingo.com/football/a1...rld-cup-winner

In Icehockey the referee has been able to check video playback for several years regarding goals.

In my opinion soccer need a goal camera or sensor in the ball if it works reliably, and it needs 2 more referees, 1 in each penalty area, that focuses only on goals, penalty kicks and maybe offsides near the penalty area.

[davieddy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...10/8771500.stm

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

Fiddler on the Roof had the answer:

"Tradition!"

There's also Sepp Blatter.

http://g.sports.yahoo.com/soccer/wor...urn=sow,251690

(See photo. Dick Cheney's face ... on whose head?)