world cup thread

[Taelas]

I'm not disagreeing with the ref's power. I just wanted to know from someone who watches the sport more if the officiating in that game really was as bad as I thought it was. I pointed out the two biggest mistakes, but there were also smaller things, a foul on a high steal where only the ball was touched, a no call on a tackle that was clearly not on the ball, etc. The other games I've seen have not really seen this kind of officiating inconsistency, but perhaps I'm, not savvy enough to see the other things that are missed.

I also would like to know if there are rules for inadvertent whistle in soccer. Most American sports the ref can call back a whistle/flag that they know shouldn't have been called and by throwing them didn't affect play.

I'm far from an expert (or even an enthusiast), so I don't know. I've never seen it if the rule exists, at least not that I've noticed.

As I mentioned the Americans played so poorly in the first half that they should live with the results easily. Had they played like they should have, that call would have taken away their 4th or maybe 5th goal in what was already a drubbing, and oh well.

I'm also not convinced that replay will grind the game to a halt. There are ways to limit the impact. The challenge system that football has, doesn't take that much time. Coaches get 2 challenges a game and if they lose the challenge they lose one of their time outs. So basically it's like using a time out as far as game flow. Of course football doesn't have time outs and the flow of the game is more important but I would think there are a few situations where a limited challenge system could be allowed.

Fans appreciate results where the ref is less of a factor more than they are bothered by breaks in flow or slightly longer games. At least that has almost always been the result in US sports, even with some of the clumsier implementations of replay in college sports. It's not perfect, but I think it's better.

But again, it's easy for me to not be bitter in this case because well you play like crap for a whole half...

Perhaps you're right. But players argue with the referee all the time even though they risk getting a card for it, and if the possibility of a video replay existed, they would argue all the more.

It removes absolute authority from the referee and places it on a video recorder. That doesn't feel like football to me.

If we included things like video replays, the game would grind to a screeching halt every time a ref has to make a call. Better to keep the game rolling and suffer the occasional mistake.

Hockey has used replays for a long time. If you have clear processes for reviewing objectionable goals, things go quickly. It doesn't noticeably slow things down. What it does do is solve arguments, which in turn improves the refereeing. Replays are a good thing.

This is doubly true when you have down-to-the-wire qualifications for the world tournament held only once every four years. I'm sure Ireland is more than a little pissed about the "occasional mistake" right now - it doesn't seem so small when it happens at a crucial time, and there are a lot of crucial times.

-Jester

Perhaps it'd work. I honestly don't know. But the FIFA World Cup is the biggest sport tournament in the world, and they have refused to do so so far. I prefer to think they know what they're doing.

If it was Denmark instead of the US, I bet you'd have a different attitude towards it. And like Jester said, using replays the right way (such as Hockey and the NFL, and soon Baseball) will make the situation better.

I'd be upset that we were the subjects of the mistake, but it wouldn't change my opinion on the matter otherwise.