If technology doesn't seem like magic, it's probably obsolete

I'm finding less time to update my blog these days, but my flickr photostream is often updated.

Playing in my house right now...

At 00:00 GMT on Thursday I was listening to:

More of what I've been listening to

Latest pictures from my phone
More pictures from my phone

Friday June 25 2004 at 01:20 GMT

OK, this is the one time I'll admit it, but I really wanted England to win when they played Portugal last night. The match itself was pretty exciting, ending in a 1-1 draw after a very dubious decision by a referee standing quite a long way from play, unable to directly see the incident, that would have had England winning 2-1. When is football going to embrace a video umpire for this kind of thing? Crazy.


Absolutely! Great minds think alike - I blogged (slightly more emotionally last night!):

England lost in the quarter final of the European Championship tonight.

Ho hum. What's new?

Well, technology is what's new. If the men in the grey (albeit Armani) suits who control Football allowed technology into the game, England's winning goal would have been allowed and the story would be different.

It's not fair on the players. It's not fair on the fans. And it's certainly not fair on the referee. If the referee has any doubt about a match winning decision, why the hell can't he see the replay, like everyone else?

So here's a message to the men-in-grey-suits:

I know it was brave to allow referees to have the technology called "whistles" all those years ago. And that technology improved the game didn't it? So, maybe allow some more of this new-fangled stuff into the game to prevent fuck-ups like this in the future. It worked once, after all.

Secondly, whose idea was it that Richard Branson could referee?
Russell Buckley | Friday June 25 at 07:09 GMT | Web| Comment permalink

Anybody with an open mind watching a replay of that 'goal' would see there are 3 fouls and 1 offside before Campbell heads the ball. The whistle was also blown before the initial header on goal which lead to the rebound. Don't believe this nonsense about England being cheated. Portugal also had 2 very good penalty claims ignored. England are showing themselves to be very bad losers.
Simon | Friday June 25 at 09:08 GMT| Comment permalink

You might be right with allowing replays, but it wouldnt have helped England nothing in this case.

The goal was obviously invalid as the goalie isnt allowed to be attacked in the 5 meter area in front of the goal. Indeed if this would have happend in the english league this goal might have come through, but on the international level you gotta keep strictly to the rules and they say.. no goal. So please keep real.
Joel! | Saturday June 26 at 02:09 GMT| Comment permalink

Name and email address are required; email address will NOT be displayed.
Web site (optional):
Type the word thinkthin in the box, or else your comment will not be added. Type very carefully, 'cos if it's mistyped, you'll lose your comment:

Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS! [Valid RSS] GeoURL

Powered by