Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Soccer/Football: Goal Line Dispute Technology?  
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7694 posts, RR: 21
Posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3134 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Watched the whole of the England vs. Germany game.

Overall, Germany played better. However, Lampard's goal was so blatantly a legitimate goal, about a yard over the line of the goal mouth, and was disallowed at a crucial moment.

We can never know what effect that levelling of the score to 2-2 would have had going into the second half, but there was no way this can be considered fair. There has to be a better way.

Two questions:

1) Should goal line technology be introduced to resolve such disputes? (No brainer in my opinion)

2) In circumstances like today, where EVERYONE knew that the goal Lampard scored was legitimate, should Germany have done the decent thing and let England score?

I'm not saying we would have one, and like I said, overall the German performance was better, but we will never now know - and all because of one unbelievably poor decision by the linesman and the ref.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
133 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3122 times:

1) Yes

2) No

filler


User currently offlineAirPacific747 From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2376 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3123 times:

1) Yes

2) Yes

I wish we could see the consequences of 2-2 in a parallel world.


User currently offlineDunaA320 From UK - England, joined Feb 2009, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3121 times:

As a true English fan, I agree the Germans played better, they were all over us. However, the goal, it was 100% over that line, no question asked. If that had gone in, Im not sure how the team spirit would have been, perhaps improved, we shall never know, but it definatly cast a huge shadow on a brilliant game of football.

The referee/linesmen have some serious questions to answer for. It seems crazy in this day and age a person with such responsibility can make such a bad mistake/judgement.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3108 times:

I'm guessing there isn't any sort of instant replay option for the refs/linewhatevers to look at in WC games?

User currently offlineJMA777 From UK - England, joined Jun 2010, 42 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3103 times:

1) Yes - if the likes of cricket and tennis can adopt such technology to help call the decisions where human fallibility is present, then surely the richest sport in the world can too.

Although, in my opinion, the German goal keeper was the most worthy of blame. He knew full well that a goal had been scored, yet threw the ball back out into play. Not very sportsman like at all, a disgrace to most - even the few German fans I spoke to.

2) It certainly looked like they were trying to let us score in the opening 10 minutes of the second half, but we just couldn't find the back of the net. If they had let us score, I doubt it would have made much difference as we could have easily conceded 7 or so German goals.



Josh
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7694 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3095 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 1):
2) No

Why not?

As pointed out, the goalie KNEW, like everyone else there did, that it was a goal. A good goal too. To pretend like it never was and just carry on is, simply, cheating. Pure and simple.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3080 times:

Opponents shouldn't be responsible for poor refereeing.

It would have been nice but there shouldn't be an obligation.


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13170 posts, RR: 77
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3076 times:

You were indeed robbed.
By a team, that for all the pretensions, all the hype, drew with the well known footballing superpower the USA, could not even score against that other mighty footballing nation Algeria, did put one goal past Solevia, a nation of 2 million which did not even exist 20 years ago.

That had dissent in the ranks, an aging team of the so called 'Golden Generation', a generation so 'golden' they have that great track record in World Cup and Euro tournaments, oh wait, their record is a load of shite isn't it?
'We did well in the qualifiers' the great mass of the deluded say, fine, not much point in that if you cannot hack the real deal, as in WC 2006, as in Euro 2008 - oh hang on, weren't there for that were they?

It's like a self proclaimed elite military unit that does well in training exercises but falls apart, or freezes up, when the real war begins.

'We woz robbed', as the biggest hypers of them all, the super soar-away Sun will say, god I am sick of passing a newsstand with that potato headed in-bred Rooney staring out, who scored how many in this WC?

I know, lets blame the manager, bloody foreigner!
That's the third manager in four years this most overrated team has had.

Face it, English football is in a mess, not just the national team, but there is another looming issue, put it this way, if Pompey's troubles were the Premier Leagues Northern Rock , then Man U might well become the RBS , or Lehman Brothers , courtesy of those it's owners.

I know I'm being harsh, but you have to look at the whole performance over this WC, did they really look like they could ever beat Germany, never mind an alternate history of one allowed goal, you are right, Germany was better, way better, the idea that 2-2 would have spurred England on but not Germany, is not very fair, is it?

Look on the bright side though, they were better than France.
Or that it did not go to penalties.

[Edited 2010-06-27 16:18:42]

User currently offlineAirportugal310 From Palau, joined Apr 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3076 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 6):
As pointed out, the goalie KNEW, like everyone else there did, that it was a goal. A good goal too. To pretend like it never was and just carry on is, simply, cheating. Pure and simple.

And? They are there to win a World Cup, not call the shots on the field.

The onus of responsibility to call the goal was on the officials, not the goalie. Pure and simple.



I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 484 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3064 times:

What an absolute disgrace!

I don't think the disallowed goal would have made much difference, the German side could have easily been up 5-0 in the first half.

Post Mortem.

1. The English defence was too easily taken apart. Caught out of position so many times. Many supporters in England think that John Terry is a world class center back, i disagree. He has the speed of snail his positional awareness is shocking. Infact the German coach said and i quote:

"Our objective was to set Terry up with Klose to force him to come out of the defence. We knew the full-backs would be very much to the side, and that would create space that we could penetrate. We could have been 3-0 up in the first half because we did penetrate them".


hows how opinions vary. England see Terry as one of the best defenders in the world; the Germans think he's so poor that they made targeting him the focus of their game-plan. And they were right.


2. We need a coach who is afraid to drop the "big names", if they are not performing, drop them. I think IMHO that the england coaching staff need to employ the same team selection as Herb Brooks (1980 Winter Olympics USA Hockey coach who took a bunch of college kids to win the gold medal)

and i quote Herb Brooks

"I'm not looking for the best players Craig, I'm looking for the right ones"

Food for thought. Pick the system you think will work, then pick the players to fit in that.



Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

Should Armando Galarraga be give his perfect game? England got spanked and no goal cam would have changed this.

User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7694 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3031 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Airportugal310 (Reply 9):
And? They are there to win a World Cup, not call the shots on the field.

The onus of responsibility to call the goal was on the officials, not the goalie. Pure and simple.

Oh sure, let's just throw the whole concept of good sportsmanship out and sod everyone else. Ever heard of fair play? Yes, the responsibility lies with the ofiicials, but when the mistake is so blatant, and the rules in terms of reversing decisions so stupid, others who can do something about it should do so. Do I want my team to win at all costs of by cheating? Hell no. I want them to win fair and square.

Quoting Dano1977 (Reply 10):
I don't think the disallowed goal would have made much difference, the German side could have easily been up 5-0 in the first half.

Quite possibly, but unfortunately we are now only left with this speculation. There have been many games when the weaker side have still won, and done so honestly, and in any case you can never underestimate the boost that a goal like that at such a crucial time can give to a team and give them the confidence to make them go the extra mile. On the other hand, having a totally legitimate goal disallowed has the opposite effect - demoralisation.

Quoting GDB (Reply 8):
I know, lets blame the manager, bloody foreigner!

Better idea - let's blame those who made this utterly ridiculous decisions.

Whatever your opinion, whoever you think played best, it WAS a goal - and we will never know what impact that goal would have had on the rest of the match.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineus330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3868 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
1) Should goal line technology be introduced to resolve such disputes? (No brainer in my opinion)

No, because in tennis and in cricket, the ball is so comparatively small that it doesn't matter where you place the chip on the ball. The problem in soccer is that the ball is so big and all of it must cross the goalline for the goal to count--which means that the part of the ball with the chip could be over the line, but it could still not technically be a goal.

That said, my alternative proposal (instead of the goalline technology) is to institute something like the National Hockey League does--something that would not disrupt the flow of the game unless the call needed to be changed. FIFA should install cameras along the goalline, and have one "replay official" sitting in the stadium somewhere--and only review whether or not the ball fully crossed the line.

If the replay official finds that the ball indeed fully crossed the line, than he can contact the 4th official sitting by the bench, who can then rush on to the field to stop play, and have the clock reset to the time it was when the ball crossed the line, and give the other team the kickoff.

That way, the game is only stopped unless it is absolutely necessary--and wouldn't occur every single game.
FIFA should be calling up the NHL right away.


User currently offlineLarshjort From Denmark, joined Dec 2007, 1434 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3020 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
2) In circumstances like today, where EVERYONE knew that the goal Lampard scored was legitimate, should Germany have done the decent thing and let England score?

Like France let Ireland score during the qual after Henry scored using his hand?
Referee mistakes is part of the game and it's been like that since referees were introduced.

/Lars



139, 306, 319, 320, 321, 332, 34A, AN2, AT4, AT5, AT7, 733, 735, 73G, 738, 739, 146, AR1, BH2, CN1, CR2, DH1, DH3, DH4,
User currently offlineDano1977 From British Indian Ocean Territory, joined Jun 2008, 484 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3010 times:

Quoting us330 (Reply 13):

There is one problem...

The majority of players and managers are calling for goal line technology, but there is only 1 person who objects to it and thats Sepp Blatter the FIFA president.

Football or Soccer is a $billion industry, it needs to evolve with the times. The technology is available, it just needs somebody with the big kahunas to go against FIFA.



Children should only be allowed on aircraft if 1. Muzzled and heavily sedated 2. Go as freight
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7694 posts, RR: 21
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3009 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting us330 (Reply 13):
No, because in tennis and in cricket, the ball is so comparatively small that it doesn't matter where you place the chip on the ball. The problem in soccer is that the ball is so big and all of it must cross the goalline for the goal to count--which means that the part of the ball with the chip could be over the line, but it could still not technically be a goal.

As you describe with hockey, cameras would be fine, We already have the bloody things but the referee is not allowed to look at the footage at the time. Absurd. It would at least in cases like this, where the ball didn't hit any white paint but was a good yard or so behind the goal line.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineDunaA320 From UK - England, joined Feb 2009, 613 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2994 times:

Quoting Dano1977 (Reply 15):
Football or Soccer is a $billion industry, it needs to evolve with the times. The technology is available, it just needs somebody with the big kahunas to go against FIFA.

Well said!


User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7694 posts, RR: 21
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2983 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

And this is all in addition to the fact that Argentina had a totally illegitimate goal allowed against Mexico this evening, outrageously offside. Grr.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7993 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2970 times:

Quoting us330 (Reply 13):
The problem in soccer is that the ball is so big and all of it must cross the goalline for the goal to count--which means that the part of the ball with the chip could be over the line, but it could still not technically be a goal.

I remember reading about Adidas studying the idea of a soccer ball with an RFID transmitter literally right at the center of the ball--as such, this means VERY precise geolocation tracking of the ball itself. That means we can easily track the ball for things like whether the ball went over the goal line or even if there was an intentional handball.


User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2730 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2953 times:

FIFA officials were correct about this call. Evidenced here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDWmpvq2XZw


  



View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 9799 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2916 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 6):
To pretend like it never was and just carry on is, simply, cheating. Pure and simple.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 12):
Do I want my team to win at all costs of by cheating?

Except that Germany didn't cheat.

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 7):
Opponents shouldn't be responsible for poor refereeing.

It would have been nice but there shouldn't be an obligation.

  

Sportsmanship is playing the damn game, despite bad calls and whatever other setbacks occur.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 12):
Whatever your opinion, whoever you think played best, it WAS a goal - and we will never know what impact that goal would have had on the rest of the match.

Exactly. So there's no point in saying Germany cheated, or complaining till you're blue in the face about how the score should have been tied. For all we know, maybe England's goal would have sparked Germany, and they would have won 4-2 or something.

Quoting us330 (Reply 13):
If the replay official finds that the ball indeed fully crossed the line, than he can contact the 4th official sitting by the bench, who can then rush on to the field to stop play, and have the clock reset to the time it was when the ball crossed the line, and give the other team the kickoff.

The only problem with this is the following (albeit unlikely) situation:

If, during the time between the bad call and when play is stopped, the other team manages to score a goal, there will be HUGE arguments about setting the clock back and removing that goal.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineAutothrustBlue From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2850 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 6):
As pointed out, the goalie KNEW, like everyone else there did, that it was a goal. A good goal too. To pretend like it never was and just carry on is, simply, cheating. Pure and simple.

Neuer could have done all the convincing in the world, but who knows if the referee will even accept/believe it. IIRC, after France scored off of Henry's handball, Henry told the ref that he had handled, but the ref would not disallow the goal. Methinks referees are not inclined to believe the players' word.



Power set.
User currently offlineAirportugal310 From Palau, joined Apr 2004, 3587 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2838 times:

Quoting AutothrustBlue (Reply 22):
Methinks referees are not inclined to believe the players' word.

As a former referee, this is a valid point.

Doing so can invariably lead to perceived favoritism (regardless of intent), which will ignite fires so bad even the best PR teams in the world could not overcome.



I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
User currently offlinefuturepilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2802 times:

Quoting JMA777 (Reply 5):
Although, in my opinion, the German goal keeper was the most worthy of blame. He knew full well that a goal had been scored, yet threw the ball back out into play. Not very sportsman like at all, a disgrace to most - even the few German fans I spoke to.

Oh please. How is he supposed to know when his back was turned to the goal? Even if he did know, how is it unsportsmanlike to pretend that it wasn't a goal? I thought the objective here was to win the game? it's pathetic to even consider blaming the German goalie for what happened. The line judge missed the call, and the biggest point of the day, you can't blame FIFA when the terrible defense of the English defenders allowed four goals, including terrible goalkeeping as well.

Quoting RussianJet (Thread starter):
) In circumstances like today, where EVERYONE knew that the goal Lampard scored was legitimate, should Germany have done the decent thing and let England score?

Absolutely not. You're trying to win a game, not be sportsmanlike. If Germany had given England a freeby, i'd denounce and reject soccer forever.

Quoting Dano1977 (Reply 15):
Football or Soccer is a $billion industry, it needs to evolve with the times. The technology is available, it just needs somebody with the big kahunas to go against FIFA.

I agree. These guys wait their entire lives to play in a world cup. From the moment they're old enough to stand on two feet and walk, they've been kicking a soccer ball. To have a glorious moment such as world cup goal stolen from you by a missed call by a ref is heart wrenching. FIFA needs to get this done.

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 6):

As pointed out, the goalie KNEW, like everyone else there did, that it was a goal. A good goal too. To pretend like it never was and just carry on is, simply, cheating. Pure and simple.

You can't be serious. Do you know anything about sports? Let me inform you. The objective is to win, despite bad calls. If you believe that if I score a goal, and I knew that I was offside, that I should run to the ref and tell him to disallow the goal, all in the name of sportsmanship, then maybe sports isn't your thing man.



"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
25 MrChips : Because a team intentionally allowing a goal could be construed as fixing the match - an act that even a toothless, ineffectual body like FIFA will p
26 Post contains images Braybuddy : I'm amused at how seriously people take the World Cup, It's only a game, so build a bridge and get over it. We had a similar situation here when we lo
27 TransIsland : 2) No, that's just a tad unrealistic. 1) Also, no. Wembley 1966, and people talked about it for 44 years; sadly, I fear that after today, Wembley wil
28 us330 : No there won't--not if everybody understands the rules beforehand. It's happened in hockey before--where reversing a bad call has led to the removal
29 scrubbsywg : amazing you are so sure he was watching he ball go in while he was flying through the air looking at what looks like the sidelines. i wouldn't be so
30 Post contains images NAV20 : You make a good point, us330 - but it's difficult to see, on the face of it, how such 'technology' could be applied to soccer, because one of its pri
31 david_itl : England would have had a player there but would not have challenged for the ball - it's happnend lots of time when play has been stopped despite the
32 Post contains images gkirk : A bit like 1966? Anyway, it was quite obviously a goal, but what's happened has happened, and I think FIFA are too spineless to bring in the technolo
33 Andreas : A man's job....a demolition job well done. 5-1 would have been even sweeter, but hey, we are nice guys, didn't want to rub your noses in it... Have a
34 gkirk : To be fair, the German defence looked wobbly at times as well, what was the keeper doing Superman impressions for at Upsons goal?
35 Andreas : Yes indeed, and not only Neuer but Mertesacker even worse...I know. Just nobody even tried to take the part of Terry when it became clear that this g
36 JMA777 : Winning is playing by the rules. I'm not saying that England should have won - we deserved what we got, but not 'fessing up to that goal is disgracef
37 LTU932 : In a way, you could see this as justice that was done after the Wembley goal, when it was a Soviet linesman that screwed us. But in all seriousness, t
38 Andreas : Sorry but you must be joking! Did I ever see Terry or Rooney or Gerrard walk up to a Ref to tell him it was offside or whatever??? THAT is the job of
39 RJ111 : Of course we stood a chance. Not saying we are the better team, but we could have still won.
40 Post contains images Andreas : Yep right See you in 2 years....or 4.... for the next rubdown
41 Post contains links JMA777 : I disagree. Look at the first image of the German goalkeeper as you scroll down on this BBC link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/davidbond/2010/06/bond.h
42 nighthawk : Did he see it? I cant access youtube or anything right now to verify, but I would imagine the goalkeeper was diving backwards and looking up at the b
43 Post contains links JMA777 : I'd certainly argue he did. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/davidbond/2010/06/bond.html
44 RJ111 : Correct. The disallowed goal changed the whole composition of the game. It could have been anyone's game after that.
45 LTU932 : Let's just forget about this! In the heat of the moment, honesty is last, we've already seen it with Luis Fabiano, when he was asked by the ref if his
46 Post contains images Andreas : Sorry I don't get the picture...it DID change the composition of the game: From this "goal" on it was England pressing...until around minute 60 or so
47 RJ111 : Do you think we would have committed so many players forward if we weren't chasing the game? If we played like a bunch of beginners then Germany has a
48 MD11Engineer : Stop whining. The "goal" was a referee´s disgrace and should have been awarded, but for the rest, your team played like sh#te and should have been k
49 Andreas : Actually your first point is somewhat...you know...strange, to say the least. Are you aware that other team, sometimes try to score as well...which w
50 UALWN : True. How would you solve that? Goal cameras wouldn't solve this. I am against goal cameras: they would solve one kind of incidents, but what about t
51 Post contains images MD11Engineer : Andreas, How does you domestic situation hold up in the face of this WC? Are you in the doghouse already? (I assume that your partner is English) Jan
52 Post contains images Andreas : Actually yes, my wife is as English as it gets, and her family even more so. We have negotiated some sort of domestic peace treaty...no talks about f
53 Post contains images RussianJet : Whereas not allowing a perfectly good goal couldn't? Cute, but if you watch any serious amount of football you will know that a) incidents like this
54 RJ111 : You are not familiar with the concept that comitting more men forward in an effort to score when chasing the game can leave you more vulnerable to th
55 Post contains images Andreas : You clearly don't read a lot of posts before answering: And to do so being 2-1 down....is that a beginners mistake or not? Your defense was non-exist
56 RussianJet : So if you watch that much football, you know it was a goal then. No, it was a goal - one that was unfairly denied. And again, if you go to that many
57 RJ111 : So in your whole time watching football you've never seen a team have to commit more men forward because they HAD to score, only to be caught on the b
58 RussianJet : I wouldn't be too staggered. This also seems to be the only person who believes that had the goal been correctly given, that the game would definitel
59 UALWN : Who cheated? The referee? FIFA? Certainly NOT the Germans. It was not their fault if the referee didn't see the ball going across the line. As for th
60 TristarAtLCA : To remain on topic, yes, help for referees to determine whether a fast moving ball crosses a goal line in the blink of an eye should be implemented. R
61 Andreas : It is quite annoying to repeat oneself just because the other party chosses not to READ a posting: Yes I did, BUT YOUR TEAM did this LONG BEFORE they
62 us330 : I never said they should stop the game for a review--FIFA should employ an official whose sole job is to review goals (again, similar to how the NHL
63 RussianJet : Who cheated? The team who accepted a goal being disallowed that they flagrantly knew should not have been. As with when posession is returned out of
64 RJ111 : I certainly read it, you obviously weren't clear enough. Really? Odd that there were no German counter attacks in the first half.
65 TristarAtLCA : It appears we were in fact watching the same game Andreas. England were simply dreadful in defence, midfield and attack which lead to our worst ever
66 Andreas : I am not sure what you are trying to tell me....are you aware that Germany was UP 2-0 by Minute 33 or 34? At least on my TV set it was.....and as for
67 RJ111 : TristarAtLCA, Try to keep up with the points being made if you're going to butt into the argument. You have just massively contradicted yourself.
68 RussianJet : However badly we played, each team should have walked off at half-time with TWO goals each.
69 TristarAtLCA : I will butt into any argument I damn well please RJ111 as I have paid the same dues as you to air my opinion on this forum. Especially on the subject
70 RJ111 : Uggh, so wait you just told me that England were pushing too many players forward and Germany were countering all through the match, and now you're s
71 TristarAtLCA : And no one disputes this RJ. But due to the astonishing decision of FIFA not to use the pictures available to the entire world 10 seconds after the '
72 RJ111 : You agree with Andreas that England were committing too many men forward from the start and getting caught on the break. But you then say that actual
73 futurepilot16 : It's not his call to make. How is it disgraceful. It would be moronic to "fess up" to that goal. Dude, even if he did see it, it would have been reta
74 RussianJet : But what of sportsmanship and fair play? This is what irks me as much as any other issue. If the goal call had been seriously marginal, I could under
75 Andreas : Actually you know what I am going to do now (not that it matters much for you): I going to watch the next set of matches today, have two or three dri
76 RJ111 : Yep, caught out and now retreating. Enjoy.
77 JMA777 : Oh, you like quoting years: 1914, 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918... ...wait, there's more... ....1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945 Enjoy the sun.
78 Post contains images Andreas : Don't forget 1966, you know...goal and non-goal discussion I already do (enjoy the sun), trust me and I am quite sure there'll be more years to come
79 aviationmaster : This whole debate on yesterday's non-given goal just shows what is wrong with English football at the moment. Yes, it was a bad call. Yes, referees ne
80 Post contains images Andreas : That's what I was trying to tell these gentlemen, but they do insist on being right, but Out of Africa....whereas we Germans are clearly not right, b
81 Post contains images aviationmaster : Maybe, maybe not. They'll start listening once they get their next wake up call in September from the Swiss team (i.e. if the Swiss team learns how t
82 TristarAtLCA : RJ111 Nice try. My response was to this (and please note FIRST half): Tell me why the Germans needed to counter attack in the FIRST half. Our defence
83 Post contains links and images NAV20 : Good points again, us330. You'd have thought that (given that millions of us worldwide saw the live TV replay and knew instantly that the goal was 'g
84 RJ111 : No, the particular point was that we were pushing too many people forward and we were being countered from the start. Obviuosly not true. Like i said
85 TristarAtLCA : Look what I found: So what WASN'T he saying about our defence??? Take Andreas' advice: > > > You have explained nothing and misunderstood ev
86 RJ111 : And look what i found... Christ almighty. 3 posts now.
87 nighthawk : Did you read the rest of my post? I think you have taken my comments completely out of context. I never said he should have owned up, infact I said t
88 Andreas : May I suggest to use copy and paste....since you'll probably have to do it all over again, it makes life really easier for you...or let's just assume
89 RussianJet : NIce to know that you have a crystal ball which can show us what a second half starting at 2-2 would have brought. Some of the problems with our play
90 UALWN : But at the end, all you have is a defeat. Sorry. Oh, come on. I didn't see Upson go to the ref after Klose's goal to tell him that he had actually co
91 RJ111 : Perhaps it is a communication breakdown, but in reply 61. You responded to my comments admitting you were aware that when teams were chasing they wer
92 RussianJet : That's some nice speculation on certain events, but it is FACT that the ball went over the line. You know perfectly well that fouls etc. involve huge
93 MD11Engineer : For f#ck´s saske, stop whinging. Even if you had gained that goal (which should have been awarded to England), you would have lost. Your team simply
94 aviationmaster : We can speculate all night long about how the English team could have fought their way to victory if the goal had been given, but I just do not see ho
95 Post contains images TristarAtLCA : And wrong everytime. Even the man whose point you are arguing is telling you that. That must be it. But keep explaining how I don't get it. Its now g
96 NIKV69 : What is sad about this is FIFA will fight any technology advance. I do believe that the ball crossing the line should be subject to review for how it
97 us330 : True. I don't know the economics of FIFA, the World Cup, the English Cricket Board, etc. What I do know is that in the States (sorry to keep playing
98 GDB : My opinion does not count, England were utter shite throughout the WC. And is it not one of the problems of English football culture is that so much
99 RussianJet : On whether it was a goal or not you are right - because the cameras show it to be FACT. As for who played how, so what? Have you never seen the overa
100 Post contains images RayChuang : This last weekend's debacles with missed calls on goals should be impetus to implement on a large scale some sort of ball tracking system that can tra
101 garnetpalmetto : Just saw on ESPN's crawl while watching the College World Series (Go Gamecocks!) that FIFA has announced replays of controversial calls will not be sh
102 Post contains images YVRLTN : I think as the technology is available it should be used on occasions like this to avoid a wrong decision. It is far better to stop the flow of the g
103 UALWN : Yes, it is. The fouls I mentioned weren't less facts (capital letters don't do it for me --- it's like shouting: the louder you shout the more obviou
104 TristarAtLCA : Blatter has announced that goal line technology is back on the negotiating table when the FIFA board meet in July, just a few months after they told t
105 signol : Fifa have often said in the past the reason they don't want to introduce any kind of technology in the game is because it would make the professional
106 RayChuang : I think Blatter was under pressure not only from the general public who obviously saw how blatantly the referees missed the goal in the England-German
107 UALWN : It is great, and I love cricket (but I root for Australia, sorry). But soccer doesn't work like that. Also, there are no tea breaks in soccer.
108 us330 : Great crisis management by FIFA. Rather than do something about the problem and admit that there are screwups and that they will meet about changing
109 garnetpalmetto : Utter equine feces. Amateur and minor league sports often don't have access to the technology their professional or major league counterparts do. Tha
110 UALWN : They have been wearing them in European Championship and, at least, Spanish League ("La Liga") matches for quite a few years now.
111 signol : I agree completely. Football / soccer needs to address this, and the way that it is done in rugby works well. If the official is unsure of something,
112 RussianJet : Yes they could. They could have given us the goal we earned and deserved out of sportsmanship. Unrealistic or utopian, whatever, but they could have.
113 UALWN : It is wrong. The referees made a huge mistake. It is not unfair for Germany to take advantage of it. (Parenthetically: it's not even obvious to me th
114 Post contains images RussianJet : I disagree. I still believe in the concept of good sportsmanship and fair play. If you don't then hey, that's your right. Of course refereeing mistak
115 UALWN : Well, how couldn't I? It was a huge mistake, for anybody to see. But, as I said, blatant mistakes happen all the time (goals conceded while off-side,
116 Post contains images AM744 : Many many amateur games are refereed by one person. No linesmen. So there goes the rules standardization.
117 RussianJet : I see what you're saying, but can you seriously compare a bit of diving or a dubious offside decision to an incident like this when the ball was so c
118 PPVRA : Say we have three off field refs watching the game from different angles for goals, fouls and everything else, and some kind of system they use to qui
119 NAV20 : All I can say is, just from watching the video, the goalie jumped/dived to his left but got nowhere near the ball since it was far too high. While th
120 RussianJet : Why the obsession with the goalie? There were eleven people on the German team, not just him. Plenty of them must have seen.
121 NAV20 : Sorry, Russianjet, if you weren't referring to the goalie, you'll have to specify WHICH German players you are so sure had seen exactly what that bal
122 AM744 : He said in an interview that he saw the ball go in and his reaction was to kick the ball as fast as he could. He went on to say he thinks that moment
123 Post contains images L410Turbolet : There is still the option to wake up, smell the coffee and start playing as Team UK ... UEFA is no different and I can't speak for other national ass
124 RussianJet : You don't condemn him admitting to knowing it was a goal and carrying on anyway? Wow.
125 metroliner : Jesus, that's nice and low. So much for 'sportsmanship' and the good spirit most of you England fans on here are spouting. Damn straight. Even if he
126 aviationmaster : Would we be having the same debate if the player in question had been David James? Why should we condemn it? The ref screwed up, not Neuer or any of
127 RussianJet : Er, yes - why on earth not? As I already stated, if my team had one I would want them to have done so fairly.
128 gkirk : Shall we replay the 1966 World Cup final out of sportsmanship then? No, thought not.
129 RussianJet : Obviouly you thought correctly - as it would be impossible.
130 Post contains images gkirk : Rather than use video replays, which would hold the game up far too much, football should have a linesman permanently in line with the goals, there s
131 Post contains images RussianJet : Amen to that. It was still a goal though, so no - I will not simply forget that.
132 Post contains links david_itl : The only instantly comparable ball clearly over the line but not given is the one conceded by Roy Carroll playing for Man Utd against Spurs. He scramb
133 Post contains images eicvd : As you said yourself it was a Man Utd game, they are well used to getting away with stuff
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Gymnast Svetlana Khorkina - "I Was Robbed!" posted Mon Aug 23 2004 17:49:29 by EA CO AS
And We Thought MD-90 Was Weird: WX Conspiracy posted Fri Sep 23 2005 22:34:56 by TedTAce
The A380 - What Do We Know? posted Wed Jun 16 2010 19:11:40 by CHRISBA777ER
If All Planes Was Grounded, How Would You Travel? posted Sun May 9 2010 15:15:16 by 747400sp
Which True Cunard Queen Was The Most Beautiful posted Sat Apr 24 2010 16:00:19 by 747400sp
Who Was The Final Cylon? posted Sun Apr 4 2010 11:12:28 by marcus
Swiss Vs Islam: Here We Go Again... posted Sun Mar 14 2010 18:18:52 by Dreadnought
Warning To Biden: We Negotiate Like We Drive posted Fri Mar 12 2010 05:50:24 by Baroque
We've Not Recovered From The Economic Downturn.. posted Thu Mar 11 2010 12:53:02 by Springbok747
Why Shouldn't We Buy Toyota Right Now? posted Mon Mar 1 2010 08:21:16 by mirrodie