Whether the ball crosses the line or not is clearly of some importance, and it's disappointing when there's the occasional mistake made - though not really surprising. However, let's take a step back and consider how the modern game is played, and it highlights what a mess the game is in.
In the old days, the referee would for ninety minutes do his best to provide an impartial service to the players, making honest decisions on what circumstances presented themselves as he ran around the pitch. There existed a degree of sportsmanship amongst the players themselves, and whilst referees undoubtedly made mistakes (as do players all the time) he would generally enforce a decent standard of fair play for all - a level playing field, in fact. It is this last point regarding 'fair play' that needs expanding upon.
There is now no real concept of fair play, because it's all about 'what you can get away with'. Dress it up as 'gamesmanship' if you like, but it's still at the very best 'unsportsmanlike' and at its worst, plain 'cheating'. So, every week, hundreds of thousands of people go to watch a game, to cheer and to create hostility, as they watch two teams of cheats (and often cheating thugs) have it out with each other. Both teams are out to con the referee. They don't admit this, but there is no disputing it.
Now, there are of course many decent players, players who like to play fairly and honourably. The problem is that any squad will contain others who will pull a fast one at the drop of a hat. So, the team as a whole is tainted. The money at stake in football means that by fair means or foul, teams want (and need) to win. So, managers routinely bemoan their fates when they feel they have lost out to poor refereeing decisions, but seem only vaguely interested when it comes to properly acknowledging that their teams are occasionally lucky fuckers when, say, they were awarded a penalty erroneously.
"It evens itself out over the season" is utter bollocks. In that case, the ref might as well toss a coin rather than make any decisions. If it evens itself out, why get so het up then when one decision works against you?
Back to the main point; players con referees, moan at referees, intimidate referees and act like spoilt kids if they don't get their way. It is unsurprising, then, that refereeing decisions are examined in minute detail. If a ref gets most things right in a game, then "he had a good game" is bandied around, with nods of approval from the analysts'/pundits' bench - as if the result of any game comes in three parts [Liverpool 3, Wigan 3, Ref 2]. If the ref has a supposed poor game, it has come about for one of two reasons, or a mixture of the two:
1 - He seemed to forget all training he ever received, looked the other way at crucial points, had a bet on with Bet365 or somehow conned all the many assessors who over many years deemed his talents sufficiently good to mean refereeing at the top level. In summary, Dr Jekyll became Mr Hyde.
2 - The antics and conning and moaning and bickering and cheating and diving and simulating and gesticulating and rolling around of players served to assist the referee in not quite being able to determine the truth in all situations.
In general, the players deserve no more or less than the standards they themselves live up to. Until players and managers all acknowledge this, and agree that their teams [and businesses / PLCs] are corporately responsible for the mess that means a stroppy twat earning £100k per week can have a tantrum if a ref shows him a yellow card (for cheating) then we're all doomed. To introduce 'goal line technology', the favourite talking point of the weekend, would mean that one small aspect of the game is taken out of the realm of the referee, and put into an adjudication process. This is because we obviously cannot trust a referee because he's more of a scheming, cheating fucker than the players???? Okay, so the players need to know the truth, do they? In that case, there would simply be further calls for technology, because every penalty decision would soon be classed as important enough to warrant a hold-up of play, whilst replays were studied. So that's ball-over-the-line and penalty scenarios taken care of. What about violent conduct - you know, elbow in the face, Rooney style? That would have to warrant a reply. Then, the winning goal was offside and the linesman was unzipping his sleeping bag when the ball was kicked! Again, replay required. So, what's the point of having a referee then?
The conclusion has to be, then, that we introduce technology across the board, and ensure that the WHOLE game is properly managed, and that rules are properly enforced - as a machine or robot would operate. If that is the conclusion, then this would of course mean that every shirt-pull, hold, tug, kick, attempted kick, punch etc is necessarily assessed, along with the language used. So, telling the ref to "Fuck Off" would mean an instant red card [as per the rules] as would telling the ref he's a cheating fucker. "No way, no way, I never touched him" would mean an instant yellow card being show [as per the rules]. The modern players would never cope, games would be abandoned, and the 90 minutes of a game would stretch over about 135 with all the hold ups.
So, if the players want to shout at the ref, call him a cunt, dispute pretty much everything he does, appeal for everything as if lives depended on the outcome, and cheat, then they must be prepared to accept that the saviour of 'technology' will mean consequences for them. We will know not just whether a ball crosses a line, but that they dived to get a penalty, that the elbow never made contact, that they spat on an opponent's shirt, that they squeezed the odd testicle, that in the celebration, two of them used tongues, and that 2 players encroached into the penalty area at the last penalty on each of the seven times it was taken before on the eighth required attempt, it was hit over the bar by the tired player.
You see, there is no answer. Goal line technology is a minor element of an overall crisis in the modern game, created not by referees, but by the players themselves. There is little honour or decency left in the game, certainly at the top level. There is generally more as you look down the leagues, although everyone takes a lead from those at the top - so it's at the top that the rot has got to stop. When 4 players run up to the ref and shout at him, waving fingers, and disagreeing with the decision, the ref should put all four names in his book after four flashes of yellow. That ref would earn respect - temporarily. After the game, the managers would say the game was spoilt by the ref, and the establishment would turn its back on him. Referees apparently 'spoil' games quite often; players apparent never actually 'spoil' a game. Ha!
A fellow blogger recently highlighted the difficulty of deciding at what level of football goal line technology would apply, if introduced. There's more to football than the Premiership. Does everyone else playing the game deserve less? I would actually argue against the technology, and be in favour of better discipline and higher fines/penalties across the game - starting at the top. Let's get some standards back into football before it's too late - though it might already be an impossibility. The authorities are corrupt because the vested interests of so many individuals and of 'big business' are linked with the organising bodies.
In summary, the Premiership deserves every bit of controversy it gets, because 95% of all problems and issues are self-inflicted. Many players are, by and large, greedy overpaid people. Even the honourable are caught up in a no win situation, so have to conform, in the best interests of the team they play for. Did the ball cross the line? Who really cares, it evens itself out over a season, apparently. Heads I win, Tails you lose. And anyway, technology shows that on the first goal attempt where the ball hit the crossbar, the free kick should have been retaken anyway, because the wall was not 10 yards back, but 9 yards, 7 inches. "Those five inches denied my player the chance to allow the ball to dip and creep under the bar - that would have changed the rest of the game", I hear the manager say in a future post-match chat.
...
No comments:
Post a Comment