World Cup 2010 - Prelude to South Africa

[Hereward]

Henry has just said the game should be replayed. East to say when he knows it won't be, I guess.

[DJDonegal]

I'm not saying he should stop watching football, he's right to want to have fair games and I'm the first one to advocate the video (see my first post in this topic). The thing is, most games have bad calls : handball not seen , wrong call for offside, for diving players. So, apart from this happening in a high stake game, this is routine in pro football. So why the big surprise ? Why people watching football are surprised by all this mess ?

It's good it made such a big impact though, cause we may have the video ref sooner.

Wrong call for offside comes from bad officiating. Bad officiating is (we hope) not biased, merely human error. Handball not seen (as is this case here) is usually not down to bad officiating, but bad luck. Not all handballs are deliberate. However, this handball was a deliberate action taken by the player in question in order to make a gain for his team. It resulted in a goal, and that goal directly contributed to the elimination of the Irish team from appearing in the World Cup Finals. A huge occasion taken away by one mans hand.

You brought up diving and I think diving is much along the same lines as this offence. You may remember the recent furore (furor?) surrounding Eduardo and his dive for Arsenal against Celtic. That was much more low key than this (yet still subject to huge public and press debate) due to other mitigating factors:

1) Arsenal already had a healthy advantage in the two legged tie.

2) Arsenal went on to score other, legitimate, goals to put the tie beyond question.

3) It did not cost a country a place in the World Cup Finals.

None of those was the case in this instance, and if there can be a large outcry for the Eduardo situation, I expect no less from this.

[lessthanluke]

Calibandar. Where could the ref have been to see the handball? In the 6 yard box interfering with play?

[kuroishi]

Edit : I was answering to Calidanbar

Well, then I think that we'll have to disagree on that point, as I feel that the referee was in the right position in the action. It was a free kick, and in these situations, the referee has to keep an eye on the one shooting the FK and can't place himself in the penalty area. As a result, he had players between him and the place where the hand took place, couldn't see the hand and then couldn't take his decision based on the assertions of the Irish players.

I have doubts about the use of video in football (but that's another debate), but I agree that it would have been useful there. But the referee can't be blamed for the rules of the game.

Not every fault can be blamed on the actions of somebody ! It's very human to look for someone to blame when you feel that an injustice has been done, but I really don't think that the referee should take responsability for what happened. If someone has to take it, then it is Henry.

[Paddy]

I'm not saying he should stop watching football, he's right to want to have fair games and I'm the first one to advocate the video (see my first post in this topic). The thing is, most games have bad calls : handball not seen , wrong call for offside, for diving players. So, apart from this happening in a high stake game, this is routine in pro football. So why the big surprise ? Why people watching football are surprised by all this mess ?

Who is expressing surprise?

The people you are arguing against are saying nothing more than:

• what Henry did was wrong, it was cheating,
  
• as a grown adult, he should be held responsible for his actions, which in this case were cheating,
  
• as a professional footballer, he should be responsible for following the rules of his sport,
  
• the referee and assistant are responsible for making a error in not seeing the foul but they are not responsible for Henry cheating, and
  
• whether it is a unique case or happens in every minute of every game does not stop it from being cheating.
  

How many times do we have to say this until you all understand? It's not like it's a difficult concept, in fact, it's fundamental to the concept of games and sports.

The argument about whether extra technological assistance should be provided to referees to help them in their job is separate to that argument.

It's a little frustrating that people keep repeating the exact same invalid arguments over and over, not matter how many times they are shown to be invalid.

And it's much more frustrating that incidents like Ireland being cheated out of a fair chance to go to the World Cup happen and will continue to happen because there seems to be a culture of denying responsibility for an individuals own actions in professional football and its fans (see: "I am the ref," "He is not the ref," "It's not his job," and "All other players would have done the same thing.")

ETA: And please make no mistake. I do not hate Thierry Henry in any way. Quite simply, what he did was wrong and because I want cheating to happen less in football, I'm going to point that out.

[Calibandar]

Luke/Kuroishi

Calibandar. Where could the ref have been to see the handball? In the 6 yard box interfering with play?

If need be. He needs to be in a position where he can see critical events take place. The ref also has linesmen to assist him, so if the ref isn't in a position, the linesman should be. The linesman is there to assist him since the ref can't be everywhere, even if positioned stategically.

No one saw it, but that is not say they shouldn't have. Obviously this would never be an issue if video camera's could be used. But they should have seen it, and they didn't, so it is their mistake, regardless of Thierry Henry's morals. Clearly Henry decided that it was necessary for him to resort to foul play ( much like a dive resulting in a penalty) for France to go through.

Not every fault can be blamed on the actions of somebody ! It's very human to look for someone to blame when you feel that an injustice has been done

Sometimes things are just the result of circumstances and no one is to blame. That's obvious isn't? If my house blows over because of a hurricane I'm not going to go seek out the builders and sue them for negligence. However if Thierry Henry deliberately resorts to foul play then he is simply to blame for that isn't he? And since it is the ref and linesman's jobs to call players to halt they are partially to blame as well, because they didn't do what they are there on the pitch for, to stop injustices.

Personally though, I blame Fifa because of the simple fact that they allow these sort of things to happen. If you simply don't provide room for this sort of behaviour, you have a fairer game and neither the ref or Henry would be in the position they are in now. Maybe you will reply to that by saying that " of course, it's the big corporations now isn't it" and pick up the glove for poor old Fifa, but the fact of the matter is that they can easily prevent this from happening, but choose not to, despite the outcries of many people who are active participants in the game.

[kuroishi]

Luke/Kuroishi

If need be. He needs to be in a position where he can see critical events take place. The ref also has linesmen to assist him, so if the ref isn't in a position, the linesman should be. The linesman is there to assist him since the ref can't be everywhere, even if positioned stategically.

No one saw it, but that is not say they shouldn't have. Obviously this would never be an issue if video camera's could be used. But they should have seen it, and they didn't, so it is their mistake, regardless of Thierry Henry's morals. Clearly Henry decided that it was necessary for him to resort to foul play ( much like a dive resulting in a penalty) for France to go through.

Sometimes things are just the result of circumstances and no one is to blame. That's obvious isn't? If my house blows over because of a hurricane I'm not going to go seek out the builders and sue them for negligence. However if Thierry Henry deliberately resorts to foul play then he is simply to blame for that isn't he? And since it is the ref and linesman's jobs to call players to halt they are partially to blame as well, because they didn't do what they are there on the pitch for, to stop injustices.

Personally though, I blame Fifa because of the simple fact that they allow these sort of things to happen. If you simply don't provide room for this sort of behaviour, you have a fairer game and neither the ref or Henry would be in the position they are in now. Mayube you will reply to that by saying that " of course, it's the big corporations now isn't it" and pick up the glove for poor old Fifam but the fact of the matter is that hey can easily prevent this from happening, but chose not to, despite the outcries of many people who are active participants in the game.

No, I won't defend FIFA as I feel that the rules have been imperfect for as long as one can remember (France had its own awful and unfair moment in football history too...) and that they have been waaaaay too slow to take action. My personal opinion is that the "referees behind the goal line" is a step in the right direction, but once again, it's slow in the coming.

On the position of the referee during the action... We disagree, but I don't think that there is an objective mean to determine which of us is right. I will stand by my opinion as I think it's the right one but I can understand that you would feel diffently.

edit for correction

[Altherion]

My personal opinion is that the "referees behind the goal line" is a step in the right direction, but once again, it's slow in the coming.

We can halve the added manpower by having just one more referee that has access to the same cameras which are already in place. In fact, if he was simply watching ordinary television, he'd very clearly see it was a handball.

[Bronn Stone]

Were I France, I'd be demanding a replay of the match as well.

Going through after such a result would be shameful and you'd be permanently marked as cheaters in everyone's minds. Even winning the whole Cup would be tainted.

If FIFA said 'no', then I'd just schedule a friendly with Ireland in France. And withdraw from the tournament if you lost.

I have long been in the camp of those who believe that additional assistant referees are needed behind the goal. The chippiness in the box has to end.

[Renasko]

Well, FIFA are not having any of it. They've said no.

[Bronn Stone]

Well, FIFA are not having any of it. They've said no.

What makes you think FIFA has the final say?

They can't really stop France and Ireland from playing a friendly and they can't stop France from withdrawing from the tournament. If France withdrew, FIFA might not then choose Ireland as a replacement, but the uproar after that would be too much for even them to ignore.

If France do nothing and go on to South Africa, they will be the universally despised villains of the tournament. Henry, who should be a hero - returning to the continent of his ancestors as one of the greatest players on the planet - would instead be a goat of the first order.

Fair Play is Fair Play. And in this case, Fair Play requires telling FIFA to go do something anatomically impossible.

If it matters, I think FIFA is right in enforcing the rules as written. Unless France demands a rematch. Which they should if they have any sense of decency or Fair Play.

[Celtigo]

Henry says there should be a replay:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/henr...article1371069/

The cynic in me says he knows this will never happen and thus has nothing to lose and can gain some of his reputation back.

As for the referee, he is absolutely to blame for this along with Henry and FIFA. If I made the kind of error he did, on a stage of similar importance, I would be reprimanded by my boss and possibly moved off important matters or clients for a period of time. If I made it a habit, I'd be fired. He should have seen that call, it was blown, and he should pay a price for that.

[The Iceman of the North]

If France withdraws from the World Cup, they are likely to be thrown out of the next couple of Euro and World Cups. France doesn't really have a choice.

[Bronn Stone]

If France withdraws from the World Cup, they are likely to be thrown out of the next couple of Euro and World Cups. France doesn't really have a choice.

I don't see it. FIFA would back down. They'd have to. The politicians would demand it. And if France and Ireland agreed, there would not be anyone who cared enough to make a stand on the opposite side and plenty who (some with their own historical beefs with FIFA) would join in.

[The Iceman of the North]

You'd really think that the FIFA top would give a rat's ass about what some obscure politicians might say? FIFA sees themselves as above mere politics.

[Bronn Stone]

You'd really think that the FIFA top would give a rat's ass about what some obscure politicians might say? FIFA sees themselves as above mere politics.

If they can play one side against another, they are immune.

If it is only one or two obscure politicians, they are immune.

But if you get a group of influential nations involved, all on one side of an issue, they are no longer immune. And it isn't like England or Brasil or Germany or Spain or Italy are going to expend any great effort to keep France from risking being booted from the tournament - with the alternative of taking their sides and appearing to uphold the honor of Fair Play.

[Paddy]

I like your idealism Bronn, but I think you are being a bit naive about this part:

they will be the universally despised villains of the tournament. Henry, who should be a hero - returning to the continent of his ancestors as one of the greatest players on the planet - would instead be a goat of the first order.

France will not be universally despised. They will not be seen as villains and Thierry Henry will not be seen as a goat.

That much should be plainly obvious from even the responses in this thread. If they win the World Cup, it will be a footnote, just like the general world-wide view (i.e. outside England) appears to be that Maradonna near single-handedly won the World Cup in 1986 and doesn't focus so much that he cheated a goal against England.

Although... now that I think about it, another difference in popular perception between the incidents is that Maradonna scored what is usually considered the greatest individual goal in International football history in the same match, so maybe England weren't just good enough; whereas Ireland feel so robbed because they played France off the pitch in their match and deserved to go through on the balance of play.

I don't think that will make much difference to public perception, but maybe I'm wrong.

The other fact that you should take into account is that FIFA are a pretty proud bunch. If as much pressure comes on them as you say, FIFA could well feel that the most important thing in this situation is that their authority is not undermined. Buckling to such political pressure would do that.

[Bronn Stone]

I like your idealism Bronn, but I think you are being a bit naive about this part:

Maybe it is my idealism but right now I think FIFA are taking the heat for France - because France don't want to do the right thing. Under the rules, they have won and the FFF isn't going to do anything they aren't required to do.

France will not be universally despised. They will not be seen as villains and Thierry Henry will not be seen as a goat.

That much should be plainly obvious from even the responses in this thread. If they win the World Cup, it will be a footnote, just like the general world-wide view (i.e. outside England) appears to be that Maradona near single-handedly won the World Cup in 1986 and doesn't focus so much that he cheated a goal against England.

The Hand of God goal was also clearly a foul. But it was possible to watch the replay and not see it. The quality of the replays of the day contributed greatly, but it was still the nature of the play that disguised the presence of the hand. Henry's handball was right in front of the camera with a great angle to see it. Maradona's wasn't.

And I suppose it is worse in that it was effectively a Golden Goal at that late point in the game.

[mormont]

Now we have Slovenia and Slovakia, two total unknowns.

Slovenia have qualified for the World Cup before, and the Euros too, so I think it's slightly odd to describe them as 'total unknowns'. (And they have played a few matches to get there...)

The argument for using video evidence is one I'm coming around to, but there needs to be careful thought given to how it would work in practise. Even in the Henry incident, the ref gave the goal before anyone could possibly have objected, since he (obviously) wasn't aware in time that there was a problem. So in a sense, the problematic part of allowing video challenges is not just the video, it's the principle of being able to challenge the ref's decisions. How do you manage that? Especially in situations where play has not stopped? And what happens where video evidence reveals a foul but no challenge is made? I can see why some people don't want to even open the can of worms, but I think it will have to be done at some point.

On the ref's positioning, it's not at fault IMO. He is, as someone said, in the correct position, observing the free kick. How his linesman missed it, on the other hand... I have no idea. The biggest share of the blame on the official's side belongs to the linesman. His positioning is poor, but he should still be able to see it.

[Paddy]

Maybe it is my idealism but right now I think FIFA are taking the heat for France - because France don't want to do the right thing. Under the rules, they have won and the FFF isn't going to do anything they aren't required to do.

I'm sorry, I dont understand. Before you said that the FFF should offer a replay to Ireland and give them one because their football team will be seen as villains because of the unfair nature of how they qualified, but now you are saying that the FFF wont feel villified and that the villification is on FIFA?

I agree that FIFA seem to be taking the majority of the flak, but for not introducing better measures to ensure players can get away with less cheating. Not to give Ireland another chance.

The Hand of God goal was also clearly a foul. But it was possible to watch the replay and not see it. The quality of the replays of the day contributed greatly, but it was still the nature of the play that disguised the presence of the hand. Henry's handball was right in front of the camera with a great angle to see it. Maradona's wasn't.

Did people not realise pretty much the next day that it was a foul? With that famous photograph and Maradona's "a little with the head of Maradona and a little with the hand of God" statement?

The point I am getting at is that Argentina and Maradona's winning of the World Cup in 1986 doesn't seem to be terribly diminished in popular perception because of the Hand of God goal.

I'm putting this forward as evidence that the French Football team will not be much vilified in popular perception by going to South Africa or even by winning the tournament, contrary to what you say will happen.