Related

Article

Ferguson and Wenger back calls for video ref help

20 November 2009 12:30

Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson (pictured here on November 2) admits he would like to see video technology used to clear up controversial decisions -- but cannot see the sport´s governing bodies adopting any new schemes in the near future.

MANCHESTER (AFP) - Sir Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger joined forces Friday to call for video technology to be used in football to avoid controversies like the one that has marred France's qualification for the World Cup.

The issue over whether football should embrace the technology available was re-ignited on Wednesday night when France's Thierry Henry used his hand to control the ball before crossing for William Gallas to score the goal that ended Ireland's chances of going to South Africa.

Ferguson supports change but the Scot fears that all discussion on the issue is futile because world football's governing body, FIFA, are simply not interested in revolutionising the role of the referee.

He said: "The stance is that they prefer human decision-making rather than technology decision-making and until they change their mind there is nothing you can do about it - you have to convince them, nobody else.

"It is not a matter of asking every player and manager in the world their opinion because they will all share the same one, as I do myself, that technology can play a part and can help referees in a situation like the other night."

Gallas?s goal sent France to the 2010 World Cup in South Africa with a 2-1 aggregate victory while Ireland have been left counting the cost of some extreme misfortune.

Ferguson added: "My thoughts were with (Ireland coach) Giovanni Trapattoni. He prepared a team that put in an absolutely magnificent performance. You couldn't ask for better from a coach but it was taken away from him.

"It happens and it's denied a couple of our players the great experience of playing in the World Cup finals and you'll never get a better experience than that."

Ferguson's call for the introduction of technological support for match officials was backed by Arsenal boss Wenger, who argued that mistakes like the Henry one could no longer be accepted given the stakes involved.

"Football accepts that a billion people see it, one guy doesn't see it and it is the one who prevails. It cannot work," Wenger said.

"We cannot accept that an obvious decision is wrong because we do not want to give ourselves all the needed help we can have in the modern game.

"Being at the game, I saw the referee giving a goal knowing that something was wrong and that is really sad. He didn't see it, I can understand, the linesman didn't see it, but they couldn't get any help.

"In the end, he gave a goal, already knowing that it wasn't a goal. We cannot accept that in our sport and you have to do something about it."

Wenger said the referee should be able to consult video footage in such cases.

"We cannot sort out all the cases but we have to sort out as many cases as we can."

Wenger also admitted to feeling a little 'embarrassed' by the nature of France's qualification.

"For the sense of justice it is quite embarrassing to see," he said. "I think even France is embarrassed. We didn't play well at all and we won the game and won the qualification with a goal that was not a goal."

Read all about the World Cup 2010 at worldcup.soccerway.com

Comments (10)

hollyice

20 November 2009 16:08

I don't agree with video refereeing because it will spoil football .A game can last more than 2 hours without break time and added extra time .

Players will have to wait few minutes more to celebrate a goal like in ice hockey , so goes for 80000 supporters also .

Offsides will be the most big problem with players asking always a replay of the video .

Then think about smaller amateurs clubs who have no such opportunity to play with video , they will be completely lost against bigger ones because these ones are used for it .

Adding 2 referees will be the best idea , that will reduce mistakes considerably .

Tontodonati

20 November 2009 17:29

I've always been against video-technology in any sports. But after what happened in France last Wednesday, I believe that in some cases it may be beneficial to have it. I can understand the Irish fans being irate. I would have been fuming had the same kind of blatant mistake had cost Italy a spot in the World Cup. The problem I see here is on how to implement a set of rules which forbids recourse to video replays after every single time the referee blows the whistle or fails to blow it.

KermisVelo

20 November 2009 19:00

France go through on what should be a red card!

I don't fault them, Henry or the referee and it would be difficult for a player to hold up, but I think it is FIFA's fault for not having instant replay.

Maybe they should have it that if a team is found to have won by an illegal goal afterwards and video confirms that, then that goal is judged invalid but that is not a conclusive solution either.

FIFA is almost a hundred years old I believe. There should be a competing world football body with a fresh and new approach.

djmist

20 November 2009 19:08

The best way to implement video replay is simply and non-intrusive . An automatic review of every goal for competitions that can afford the system. Most reviews will be simple and straight forward. Controversial goals may take a few moments longer to review but won't impede on time too much. There is already a 4th official to add time on to the end of the match if needed - but it will not be much. The replay should only be used to confirm or deny a goal. All other judgments are up to the referee on the field. The players and managers have no say in the use of the replay. We have the technology - we just need a common sense implementation. To vote against its use is to be as stubborn as FIFA.

djmist

20 November 2009 19:12

hollyice - No one (fan or player alike) will wait to celebrate. Players and fans of sports that do have replay celebrate when they team scores and then again after confirmation (or celebrate then are disappointed). No one holds their breath waiting for word from the replay booth.

Avi82

20 November 2009 20:33

Video-technology would not work at football. Anyone played football would not be agree with video-technology. This is football, not rugby, hockey or whatever....

The referee was from Sweden, not France. Platini is not responsable with swedish referee's mistake or Henry's handball.

Ireland was eliminated, not because of Henry's handball, but their own mistakes and incopatences.

I supported Ireland against France, but now, not really. If France play against Ireland, the result would be very obvious, anyway.

If FIFA or UEFA decide the game should be replay, then, most of the games should be replay, and then none of the tournements finish.

hollyice

20 November 2009 21:03

Football was played a century ago without video replay , many teams got benefit of referee's mistakes and those same teams suffered from those mistakes also . Argentina against England in 66 and 86 both got gifts , Spain against Yougoslavia in 82 when referee offered to us a penalty of an action that happened 2 yards outside the box . Cheating belonged to football and adding 2 referees will clearly eradicate that but video will just spoil the game .

hollyice

20 November 2009 21:08

Football was played a century ago without video replay , many teams got benefit of referee's mistakes and those same teams suffered from those mistakes also . Argentina against England in 66 and 86 both got gifts , Spain against Yougoslavia in 82 when referee offered to us a penalty of an action that happened 2 yards outside the box . Cheating belonged to football and adding 2 referees will clearly eradicate that but video will just spoil the game .

Refusing a complicated scored goal after 5 mn of video analysis you will risk the life of players in front of 80000 Serbians or Egyptians .

KermisVelo

21 November 2009 16:45

Djmist is exactly correct in the post of doing it in an "unobstrusive" manner, if I am correct, that is the way it is done in ice hockey and in the National Hockey League. A goal is scored and then, they review as the puck is set up to be put back into play at the middle ice section.

Adding more referees would add as much time as anything unless you told them to do it real quick but at ice hockey games too, the organist plays "3 blind mice", they could submit to crowd sentiment.

Sure, FIFA and the way it is run is around 100 years old, we also know that if you read history, United Kingdom at one point joined and then got out of FIFA as well.

Just because the game has been run like that for so long doesn't make it right. Let's not forget Soccer Referees have been chased on the field and maybe even killed before following the "old rules" so the "old rules" are no better.

I don't even know if FIFA has any rights now to be telling other people how to act since they are so morally bankrupt.

I don't know if such a goal happened in say, an FA Cup final for example, if the English FA or FAI of Ireland would just throw up their hands and say "games over, we can't do anything about it." FIFA has no moral authority.

KermisVelo

21 November 2009 16:49

Should France go to the World Cup, everyone will be doing their best to defeat them, you can bet on that.

The field for South Africa looks very strong, the big 4 Subsaharan African teams will be there, Cameroon, Nigeria, Ivory Coast and Ghana and all the other powers. There look to be much fewer of the sleepy teams that often make it to the world cup, not to disparage any teams.

Sponsored links