by Pat Johnston

Are the obvious blown/ missed calls putting a black eye on the dignity of modern day football?  There is no doubt.  Instead of going through the list of blunders (which is noted in previous articles by many), let’s just cite the most recent, and probably, notorious incident to surface.  I speak, of course, about Henry’s “handling” of the Irish.  I do not begrudge Henry one bit or feel that his legacy will be forever tainted.  I am inclined to say that it will be enhanced when the dust settles.  He has now entered very exclusive company as his exhibition of gamesmanship is being spoken of in the same breath as Diego Maradona’s “Hand of God”.  

Some will cry “outrage!” at my labeling of his deed as gamesmanship, and yet in the same breath they will use the same term to describe the initiation of instant replay in the beautiful game.  More on instant replay is coming but I must first say that to label Henry a cheat would be naïve and lazy.  He did what just about any professional at any level would do to achieve the desired result: whatever he could and get away with it.  No one was in position to see it and make the call.

Thierry Henry “Handles’ the Irish
Controversy Requires Action
Offside Calls Need Video Review

A recent AP article absolved Swedish referee Martin Hansson of any blame.  Hansson is vindicated and states “a graphic reproduction of the incident clears the whole refereeing team.”  Modern day technology recreated the whole scenario and showed that every official’s view was obstructed.  Thus the reason for no call. 

Scene shift, a street corner in Dublin six days after the Irish are eliminated and four days after FIFA refuse to recognize the validity of the Irish FA‘s appeal:

Irishman #1- “Kiss me Blarney Stone, you mean none of the enforcer’s of FIFA’s laws on the pitch saw that Henry lad’s foul deed and that’s why it was never called?” 

Irishman #2- “What a revelation!  Had he seen it, you mean he would have called it?  Well that’s a relief to all , even Jesus, Mary and Joseph.”

#1- “I can rest easier now that it has been explained and verified.  Top of the morning to ya.”

Somehow, I just don’t see this exchange happening.

Now back to instant replay. To those who are convinced that errors by the referee, absolved of blame or not, which directly determine the outcome of a match are a part of the game I say, “you live in the past”.  And living in the past can be very counterproductive.  I concede that in the 80’s and maybe even into the 90’s the technology may have been sketchy and not in place, but there is no doubt that the current presentation of a match to a television audience has enough angles and the capability to replay/review the play in question in an expeditious manner so as not to disrupt the flow of the game.  One (of several) prevailing argument for the use of instant replay is the fact that the officials are not capable of seeing all the critical happenings during the heat of the moment.  Modern technology proves that to Hansson’s benefit.  What a relief it would have been had they told him immediately after it happened.  He would have known well before the French made it back to midfield from their celebration and could have made the proper call, “hand ball”.  Shay Given takes the free kick, the game is not tainted and the Irish are talking about more important issues on the streets of Dublin in the following days.  They would have made everything as it should have been.  “They” being the hypothetical review official.  Use the modern technology when it can do the most good!

As for the flow of the game, truth be told, the most disruptive influence of a match’s continuity is the diver.  Flopping and rolling and writhing more often than they should, these guys are killing the spectacle.   Where is the outrage over them?

I have engaged many a person about instant replay, while some are close minded the more progressive thinkers have some common concerns about instigating it which are legitimate.   “When would you use it?”  “How would it be done?” “What’s to stop every little call from being questioned?  This is a very slippery slope you are looking to climb out on.” And so on……

At least these people would entertain the notion.  All the whats, whys, wheres, etc., aside, this could be done effectively and efficiently.  First we must agree that there is technology in place.  Of this I have no doubt.  Most replays are done within seconds of the actual incident and the information could easily be transmitted to the match official.  Upon reception of this information, the referee could make the proper call and the game could carry on.  This way those in the stadium, as well as those officiating, would know that they have made the right call, instead of a world wide viewing audience in the know while those responsible for the game’s integrity blindly stumble forward. 

How many games have you seen where a blown or missed call occurred and a goal was allowed/ disallowed improperly?  The match is tainted.  The millions watching on TV know this while the three charged with it’s integrity are now compromised for competence while the conclusion is yet to be determined.  Fortunately, the nightmare in the French/ Irish debacle was soon concluded after the defining moment.  Unfortunately for the Danish official Tom Henning Overbo, referee of the Chelsea v Barcelona Champion’s League Semi Final, the nightmare was long and protracted and will never go away.  Ironic that “modern technology” has vindicated Hansson, yet it was done way too late and the tardiness victimized the Irish.  Overbo will never have that luxury, his repeated blunders will forever be cited by the proponents of video replay.

Two queries have been presented:

Is there a problem with matches being determined with missed or improper decisions by match officials?  There is no doubt, the answer is yes.

Is there technology available to remedy this problem without compromising the flow of the match? Again there is no doubt.

So some questions that remain:

How and when should instant replay, during a match, be applied to effectively determine the proper decision?  Let’s review these ideas in the next installment.

Will the governing bodies ever allow replay to actually be applied for the benefit of the game?

There are sure to be more, I welcome all queries and thoughts on this subject, it can be a Pandora’s Box or it can be Lorenzo’s Oil.  It all depends on how it is applied is my thought, I welcome yours, stay tuned…..

Click here to HAVE YOUR SAY on Johnston’s call for replay.  Is it finally time that FIFA and the world accept some form of replay in soccer?

READER FEEDBACK

While I hate seeing any game decided by a wrong call, the idea of instant replay is just about as completely moronic.  Soccer is a game of flow.  What are we to do, stop the game every time there is a questionable call.  How would we restart the games?  Say a referee blows his whistle for an offside call.  Upon further review it is determined the player was not actually offside, do you award a free kick to the team who was wronged, is it a drop ball, do we put all the players back to their positions at the time of the call and then put the ball in play from there.  Does the instant replay rule only apply to international matches which are televised for a western audience?  Will television crews be required for youth games on Saturday? Who checks the instant replay? Does the match official run over and check a screen after each call to make sure he gets it right?  One of the beautiful things about soccer is that the same rules apply to everyone in any sanctioned match, from the youth level all the way up through the World Cup.  Instant replay will mean that only those with the means will be able to fully follow the laws of the game.  Soccer is not American football, but that is what it will become with instant replay, a monotonous exercise in waiting.  I will admit that referees are not infallible, but that is the beauty of the game.  Some times the wrong call goes your way, sometimes it goes against you.  The same is true in life and that is why I love watching and playing the game.  While Mr. Johnston's credentials are impressive, he obviously had not seriously considered the fundamental changes that such a rule change would cause to the game and he obviously his opinion is shaped by being a person of means.  I am sure his yearly budget is probably as big as some country's are for their soccer squads, but should we preclude those countries from trying to qualify for the World Cup, because they can't provide the 26 different camera angles for the referee to review that ESPN had for the France Ireland match.  Besides, if the referee had video replay to make sure all their calls were right, who would we blame for our shortcomings on the field.       

Brandon B