I’m glad the US got through. They had another disallowed goal today. A loss would have been a real black mark on this tournament.
So you’re saying that if they lost because of the disallowed goal it would have been real black mark? You don’t think that it was offside, or that it shouldn’t have been called?
The real black mark on this tournament was that France was even there.
One black mark doesn’t exclude another from happening. Both situations come from the fact that referees made mistakes that could have been solved with video replays to help them for close calls.
Ireland would have been playing in the tournament if FIFA wasn’t so reluctant to use available technology.
I’m glad the US got through. They had another disallowed goal today. A loss would have been a real black mark on this tournament. [/quote]
You don’t think that it was offside, or that it shouldn’t have been called?
I didn’t see it, but in the immediate post-game write-up on CBC.ca, they had said that the US had a goal taken away on a “questionable” offside call.
Was it questionable? Is there a question about it? I mean, close is close, and referees are human, but there are like a gazillion high-resolution cameras there, I’m sure that we can equivocally decide whether or not the referee was justified.
Well, that’s what I was trying to ask BigThumb – if he thought it should have been called or not.
I’m not digging up the video and captures on this one, BigThumb, it’s all you this time. Convince us that it wasn’t offside.
Exactly, referees are human and the technology is there to help them. In these days of multi-cameras, uncertainty needs to be reduced.
I’m saying that it was another questionable call that could have been solved by helping the referee with video replay. If the USA would not have made it the next round, after two questionable calls, I think it would have been a black mark on FIFA, just like the fact that Ireland didn’t make it to the groups stage because of a referee’s mistake.
So what do you think? Bad call?
Look at the image. Look at the pattern on the grass. Look at the bodies of both players and the distance from the pattern. Very close.
I can’t tell if it was a bad call in this case. But it is a questionable call that could have been helped by video replay.
Remember, I never said it was a bad call! I said that the US had another disallowed goal today. Isn’t that the truth?
The black mark comment was in reference to the questionable calls by the referees.
Yup. But the USA also had bad calls go in their favour. Did you see the foul that got Donovan his free kick in the previous match?
You can’t make up your mind, despite going through the video (you left out the one with the lines! It’s on CBC’s 2010 Youtube feed). You think we should stop a soccer game so that everyone can do the same? ie: not make up their minds? Say it’s too close to call? Then what?
I like the current system – referees are rated on their calls. Bad refs are rated lower. These guys won’t ref another international match again.
I’m not a FIFA official so it isn’t my call. But I’m allowed to say it was questionable and suggest that video replay would help FIFA officials. And with the low numbers of goals in soccer, a short delay to review something like this wouldn’t add that much time if you compare that with the extra time often given for divers on the field.
So the mistakes keeps on happening with new refs and the pool of experienced refs gets smaller.
Who rates them? Other officials I presume. Why wouldn’t they help with such calls while rating them? I mean, they must be watching the games and they must be watching the replays. Why wait after the game and tell the ref “bad call, you won’t ref again!” when they could assist him?
I don’t like the current system and I don’t think I am the only one.
Well, I’m not a doctor either, but I play one on TV.
You’re basically complaining about a referee making a decision, but you’re not sure if he made the right decision? Just that it was ‘questionable’ ?
Tell us why you think it was questionable, then we can proceed to figure out if your video replay would have changed his mind.
This is like hoshq all over again. You made a statement, which I’m sure you regret now, but you won’t admit it
So if they lost because of this call, it would have been a black mark? You think they should only lose on calls that aren’t questionable? Or do you think it was a wrong call?
Even questionable calls can be the correct ones.
Come on, BigThumb, take a side already. Was it a bad call?
I only have 2 more barbed hooks left, but as soon as you bite, I’ll reel you in.
I think you just lost the argument because on this site, comparing someone to hoshq is equivalent to a Godwin.
I think that if they didn’t make it to the next round, the two disallowed goals would have left a black mark on this tournament. I thought this was clear. The first one was a bad call, the second one was questionable.
You, on the other hand, seem to think that today’s call was a bad one. Why else would you have said the following?
… Bad refs are rated lower. These guys won’t ref another international match again. [/quote]
Also, I’m deliberately staying up late because I have to attend Safe Grad all night tomorrow night. But I will go to bed soon so put on better bait.
Ah come on, that’s still not coming right out and saying it.
You’re just worried that you’re going to say that it’s a bad call, and I’ll have video that’s right from over the assistant referee’s shoulder to show you that it’s a good call. Or vice-versa. :-)
Here’s me trying to get you to take a side: I personally think the assistant made the right call by raising his flag.
Also, isn’t it awesome that CBC has 3 or 4 video feeds per match? Like you can just follow players from one side, or look at the overhead view of the entire match, etc. Hint hint.
Didn’t I say that it was questionable? That I couldn’t make the call? So I can’t take sides on this one (not like for the first USA disallowed goal). My whole point is also focussed on the need for video replays.
But you just changed your mind. You say that you think the assistant referee made the right call but you also said that these bad refs will not work at that level again.
Also, it seems I am not the only one thinking the call was questionable:
Didn’t I say that it was questionable? That I couldn’t make the call? So I can’t take sides on this one (not like for the first USA disallowed goal). My whole point is also focussed on the need for video replays.[/quote]
Well, if you’d take a side, I’d show you a video, taken from the point of view of the assistant, that would put the question to rest. ie: no need for a video replay, since the assistant could clearly see it was offside.
But you just changed your mind. You say that you think the assistant referee made the right call but you also said that these bad refs will not work at that level again.[/quote]
I was referring to the ref in the USA-Slovenia match, obviously. And that French ref (surprise!) in the Brazil - Ivory Coast match.
argumentum ad populam ?
Seriously, you want to use this as a case for video replay. It isn’t.
Just the opposite. All the video (except from the point of view of the assistant) is “questionable” and “too close to call.”
Only from where the assistant is standing can you clearly see that it was the correct call. So instead of this being a case for video replay, it becomes a good example of why video replay isn’t needed – just the opposite.
In this case, video replay would muddy the very clear waters.
But since you’re not taking a side, I’ll leave the last barbed hook for another day. The secret weapon is the CBC multi-view, by the way
I don’t need to see it since you’ve used the word clearly before and couldn’t prove your point then (and FIFA was reviewing the call too).
Same poor ad hominem attempt that doesn’t really work because I am canadian.
argumentum ad populam ? [/quote]
More like * Tweedledee & Tweedledum* if you are describing our present discussion.
I’m not the one who needs to see this multi-view as my position, which is shared by many others, is that the call was questionable. FIFA officials are the ones who need to see it. Sorry, they needed to see it right after the call to make sure that the call was good and wouldn’t be questionable. If the video really shows that it was a clear offside ( and by clear I don’t only mean your definition) then this discussion would never have taken place because no one would say the call was questionable.
Time for you to stop at Dolly’s fish market because this fish ain’t biting today.
So you’re basically complaining about nothing? You’re complaining about a call, but you don’t know if it was a good call or not, just that it was made? Would you be complaining about it if it wasn’t called?
How typically French! Whining about something, and not willing to take sides, or taking both sides!
It works great! Keeps catching you! Over and over again!