Or rather NOT to do:
Establish electronic assistance such as video evidence and ball sensors.
Everyone knows this feeling: Your team plays exceptionally well but one or two fuck-ups from the referees change the face of the game completely.
It's a angering and devastating feeling for every fan, so the cry for video evidence, ball/goal sensors and such simply seems to be the logical way to put more fairness into the game.
You could also argue that these techniques probably would have been established in football in the early days if they would have been available and that they have been established in other sports quite well.
So far, so good. But let's take a step back now:
What are some of the most memorable and emotional scenes in football history?
The Wembley "Goal", Maradona's "Hand of God", Zidane's headbutt, Cantona's dropkick, Rivaldo's hilarious dive, Schumacher horribly tackling Patrick Battiston, Rijkaard spitting at Völler... and now the non-goal from Bloemfontein and Tevez' offside-goal etc. pp.
Yes, not all of the scenes were based on wrong decisions, but they have one thing in common that makes them so outstanding and memorable:
The human factor.
And they are to show that good referees will come out on top of most situations.
Establishing video evidence would take even more speed and flow out of the game and - most importantly - that human factor.
Now don't get me wrong: Such HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE bad decision as the non-goal yesterday need not to happen.
What we need is a compromise, so here's what the FIFA needs to do:
* Re-evaluate and consequently restructure the selection process for tournament referees:
This World Cup once again shows that there's a correlation between the level of football played in a country and that country's referees.
We need more quality than quantity. There are the best teams in the world competing and they should be judged by the best referees in the world.
Every referee at a World Cup should be among the best in the world not only the best of their local federation.
If that means that the vast majority of referees are from Europe, then it be that way.
Same goes for assistants.
* Establish additional linesmen as goal referees:
This was tested at the Euro League and it's IMHO the best compromise to prevent horrible misjudgements while retaining the human factor.
There will still be the occasional heated debate but we won't experience so clear misjudgements any more.
---------
We don't need video evidence being called upon every arguable decision, ruining the pace of a game and being used as a tactical mean to interrupt the game in the same vein as we don't need shit referees ruining a game with horrible decisions.
Discuss!
Establish electronic assistance such as video evidence and ball sensors.
Everyone knows this feeling: Your team plays exceptionally well but one or two fuck-ups from the referees change the face of the game completely.
It's a angering and devastating feeling for every fan, so the cry for video evidence, ball/goal sensors and such simply seems to be the logical way to put more fairness into the game.
You could also argue that these techniques probably would have been established in football in the early days if they would have been available and that they have been established in other sports quite well.
So far, so good. But let's take a step back now:
What are some of the most memorable and emotional scenes in football history?
The Wembley "Goal", Maradona's "Hand of God", Zidane's headbutt, Cantona's dropkick, Rivaldo's hilarious dive, Schumacher horribly tackling Patrick Battiston, Rijkaard spitting at Völler... and now the non-goal from Bloemfontein and Tevez' offside-goal etc. pp.
Yes, not all of the scenes were based on wrong decisions, but they have one thing in common that makes them so outstanding and memorable:
The human factor.
And they are to show that good referees will come out on top of most situations.
Establishing video evidence would take even more speed and flow out of the game and - most importantly - that human factor.
Now don't get me wrong: Such HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE bad decision as the non-goal yesterday need not to happen.
What we need is a compromise, so here's what the FIFA needs to do:
* Re-evaluate and consequently restructure the selection process for tournament referees:
This World Cup once again shows that there's a correlation between the level of football played in a country and that country's referees.
We need more quality than quantity. There are the best teams in the world competing and they should be judged by the best referees in the world.
Every referee at a World Cup should be among the best in the world not only the best of their local federation.
If that means that the vast majority of referees are from Europe, then it be that way.
Same goes for assistants.
* Establish additional linesmen as goal referees:
This was tested at the Euro League and it's IMHO the best compromise to prevent horrible misjudgements while retaining the human factor.
There will still be the occasional heated debate but we won't experience so clear misjudgements any more.
---------
We don't need video evidence being called upon every arguable decision, ruining the pace of a game and being used as a tactical mean to interrupt the game in the same vein as we don't need shit referees ruining a game with horrible decisions.
Discuss!
