ForumsWEPRWorld Cup 2010's Lack of Technology

13 2203
Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

I think it is fair enough to call the World Cup a terrible mess when it comes to ruling plays. The referees have failed to call the Netherlands' second goal against Uruguay offside, Argentina's first goal against Mexico offside, and England's goal against Germany.

Is it the referees fault? No, they just simply don't have the ability or the technology to make the right call. It is somewhat like punishing a blind man for not noticing a crime being committed.

A solution would be to have some sort of dimensional analysis for the referees to use, like in tennis. Now, FIFA could either use Hawk-Eye or Cairos. Hawk-Eye works by, in the case of tennis, placing specialized cameras which triangulate the court and capture every movement of the ball. Cairos uses a chip in the ball that creates a three-dimensional picture, like Hawk-Eye to figure out the position of the ball relative to the court.

FIFA refuses to use either of this because people like a controversy. Now, my response to that would be that you shouldn't have to make the fans argue about who would've won. Besides, a sport should always show the true winner of every game.

FIFA claims that football is universal, and should be that way. Somebody playing in the park wouldn't have the technology that FIFA does. My question, doesn't FIFA already have more technology than someone playing in the park.

FIFA's last attempt to argue that the technology would be useless, is that it would be too complicated. Frankly, I don't see anything complicated at all. Just put a dozen cameras around the field and watch them give precise measurements about where the ball is.

The technology sends constant pictures of the ball, and to determine if a player was offside or if a goal was in or not, would take less time than for a linesman to raise his flag.

FIFA mentioned that they will have two additional linesman in the 2014 World Cup in Brazil, but wouldn't it be better to have a more accurate way of ruling plays?

What are your thoughts on the matter?

  • 13 Replies
PanzerTank
offline
PanzerTank
1,707 posts
Nomad

My thoughts are that this threads is gonna get locked. This should go in the other Fifa cup thread. But other than that I agree.

wolf1991
offline
wolf1991
3,437 posts
Farmer

I disagree, the technology isn't as simple as you make it out to be. FIFA would have to spend millions to install these cameras and FIFA tries to build the controversy because it does make a better game and it gives fans a drive. Sometimes if we let some technology in we rely on it too heavily. Also it doesn't solve all the problems you still have someone judging that picture and that someone is bound to screw up at one point.

Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

I disagree, the technology isn't as simple as you make it out to be. FIFA would have to spend millions to install these cameras and FIFA tries to build the controversy because it does make a better game and it gives fans a drive. Sometimes if we let some technology in we rely on it too heavily. Also it doesn't solve all the problems you still have someone judging that picture and that someone is bound to screw up at one point.


The great part about it is that Hawkins (the creator of Hawk-Eye) would pay for all the expenses).

Look, if you want to read the article, click here.
Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

Also, I would rather know who won a game rather than let my favourite team lose because of shitty referee. The technology has failed, but usually because of power cuts. Tennis is a much better game now that it has Hawkins' technology.

ZyXyZ
offline
ZyXyZ
6 posts
Peasant

The chip inside the ball is just the right way to avoid goals not being given. I think that offside decisions may still be up to the refs and their linesmen - but goals decide about millions of cash for the players and their clubs. One thing I would suggest not to do - I think that replays like in Rugby are bad because they bring mistrust against the referee if you can review every single decision. The referees shall be trustworthy - but they have to be supported by the technology we have and not be criticised by fans (especially not after having the twentieth replay on television...)

Milos
offline
Milos
848 posts
Peasant

Traditionally football match is fluent, no time-outs, no time stopping for fouls, corner kicks, offsides or penalties. Integrating Hawk-eye in the game would ruin it. FIFA would gladly bring referees from Champions League because they are the best there is but arbiters from all parts of the world must be present at the WC.

Nater
offline
Nater
1,296 posts
Nomad

How about USA's goal they called a foul? That's what I care about.

Bon243
offline
Bon243
96 posts
Nomad

i know! that was complete idiocy!

Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

Traditionally football match is fluent, no time-outs, no time stopping for fouls, corner kicks, offsides or penalties. Integrating Hawk-eye in the game would ruin it. FIFA would gladly bring referees from Champions League because they are the best there is but arbiters from all parts of the world must be present at the WC.


If you read it, it takes less time than fora linesman to raise his flag up.
Yeongung
offline
Yeongung
3 posts
Jester

Hmm... It's an interesting concept, using a chip in the ball. But how'd it catch offside players? Chip in the player, perhaps.

Problem is, cheating is as much a part of soccer as the ball is. Bad calls go hand-in-hand with players purposefully falling over, or attempting to take out another player when the ref isn't looking.

So, I can understand why FIFA wouldn't want to use something that can make the game fairer. And really, who would want to watch soccer if the players can't act like spoiled 12 year olds?

Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

I don't want a man to cry like a little baby on the field because a guy stubbed his toe. I don't do that, and I don't think it's right for them to get free kicks for faking it.

The chip in the ball is good for tennis, but Hawkins uses Hawk-Eye, which catches offsides and pretty much everything. All the referee has to do is go to the camera and check it, which'll take less time than regular games.

Football should not involve cheating because then the point of the game gets lost, not entirely but I don't want to see crybabies on the field.

uhIforgot
offline
uhIforgot
4 posts
Nomad

I agree. The technology works great in tennis so why not use it in football. The fact that FIFA see the need to prevent technology like this from entering football just to create controversy is ridiculous.

Kevin4762
offline
Kevin4762
2,420 posts
Nomad

I agree. The technology works great in tennis so why not use it in football. The fact that FIFA see the need to prevent technology like this from entering football just to create controversy is ridiculous.


That's what I thought, but people in this thread think that it's okay to let teams have false victories or losses, which should never happen.
Showing 1-13 of 13