FIFA president now says it is a 'necessity', so what has he been doing about it for the last two years? http://football.uk.reuters.com/foot...8D16C-BACA-11E1-989A-C9F37F33923B.php?rpc=401 [video=youtube;k2C7ZMahWOg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2C7ZMahWOg&feature=player_detailpage[/video]
Of course the ****-stirring media almost all fail to mention that it wasn't a goal anyway due to it being off-side.
I knew he was gonna say this after what happened last night.It's only because England were the benefactors of the officials decision that he wants to introduce GLT.He hates England.
I have come to the conclusion that those claiming this was a goal fall nto two categories of people: 1. Ukrainians who are justifiably frustrated that having had the lion's share of the game and creating a lot of chances they havent scored, and looking for an excuse. 2. People so blinded by their hatred of England/the national team set up that they are incapable of listening to a rational, reasonable argument if it means accepting england weren't lucky/jammy. I have heard not one convincing argument that the goal scored yesterday was legitimate. I find it quite literally astounding that so many supposedly knowledgable football fans and pundits (including alan green and most of the bbc sports team) can, with a straight face, say that ukraine had a 'perfectly good goal' disallowed and skate over/totally disregard the player a yard offside in the build up. This wasnt 3 free kicks and a corner later, this was the same move. There is literally zero debate. The right decision was made for the wrong reason. The goal shouldnt have stood, and it didnt. End of. as for blatter.... no comment
Actually in fairness I should probably add a 3rd category: People who genuinely dont fully understand the offside rule. I did have a discussion with somebody earlier who claimed that it wasnt offside because he was in an 'onside' position when he recieved the bal............
There was somebody the other day that was claiming that if a ball is played forward without any defenders between the passer and the goalie, then it's offside.
It doesn't help when the clip on the BBC site doesn't show whether it was offside and makes no mention in the accompanying article. There are many reasons to hate Blatter but he said after the England Germany game that he'd reconsider the case for goal line technology and has been for it ever since so there's no anti-England complaint there. With the goal line technology debate, as much as I want to see it, the glaring problem everytime it crops up is the poor standard of the officials. In this case there's an offside been missed followed by the official stood on the goal line not seeing it cross the line. Whether it was offside or not, whether it balanced it out or not, it's still an awful decision from the man who seems to have been given the sole job of making such a call. You can't bring in video replays for all decisions so keep it to the goal line technology as it's so fundamental to the game and somehow improve the standard of refereeing. It'd also help if the football associations made the refs job easier by cracking down on diving and other cheating retrospectively.
Even when Sepp Blater does the right thing, he does it for the wrong reason. We all know he hates England. And he knows we know, which is why he chooses to say these things at this time.
It is good news - Goal Line technology FINALLY. Fair football wins at last! How Sepp Blater thinks in my opinion "haha! England loose to Germany in the world cup when the ball clearly went over the line, this would of made the game 2-2! I see no Reason to introduce goal line technology . We have the result we want!" "England win controversially! Ukraine got the ball over the line when the move was offside anyway ! We must introduce this technology now!" The guy is a to**er; simples. Anyone who says FIFA is not corrupt is simply clueless.
Agreed with your point about the BBC. I suppose I have to take your point on board about Blatter. I was going to say that he seemed a lot keener on technology after this incident than the germany incident in 2010, but the obvious counter argument is that he introduced a new system as a direct result of lampard's goal which has subsequently failed, leaving him with no alternative. Taking my firm opinion (that we shouldnt even need to be having this discussion) to one side - I totally agree that its an absolute shambles that somebody who's one and only job is to adjudicate goal line incidents has not seen this goal. The only realistic alternative now is goal line technology. Although had technology been used yesterday then england would be the ones who ended up being hard done by. as it is, I still think it evened itself out over the course of one move!
