FIFA and the FA need to wise up, whilst the British tabloid press need to grow up.
So England are out of the World Cup, this time a little earlier than usual and with more justification than in some past tournaments. The 4-1 second round defeat to Germany punctured a balloon of hope rather than of expectation, and most fans should have been forewarned by the far from convincing displays that had got them through group C. Still, one fairly decent performance against Slovenia in England's final group game had convinced the many perennial suckers for punishment amongst us that England would rise up and overcome the young German squad before them last Sunday.
As it happened England were generally all over the place for the first half an hour or so, and Capello's team found themselves 2-0 behind. What happened next has been well documented and probably will be for too much time to come. England had got back into the match when Matthew Upson headed home a Steven Gerrard cross shortly after Germany's second goal. Within a minute of this Frank Lampard's improvised lob crashed against the Germany cross bar and bounced down behind the goal line.
England were obviously the poorer side overall, but the fact that the goal wasn't given has re-opened the debate for goal line technology, one which I have to subscribe to. This was a case where TV viewers were in little doubt that a goal had been scored and were starting to celebrate an unlikely comeback. Fabio Capello himself was seen to be celebrating from his England dugout, and yet the Uruguayan linesman who was significantly closer to the incident had failed to see it.
Accidents do happen and however much we don't like it, officials are prone to mistakes at even the highest level, as humans they are not infallible. Yet Sepp Blatter has as recently as March rubbished the debate for a technology that could swiftly give a correct decision for such controversial moments.
His argument that fans like to debate such incidents' is indefensible. I can confidently predict that the vast majority of football fans would prefer to discuss a fair and honest result for their team rather than knowing that they had been victims of poor decision making, especially when as with Lampard's goal there is no debate.
If FIFA were to embrace the technologies used by Cricket, Tennis and Rugby, surely even Blatter could see that Hawk-Eye or Cairos (where a microchip is inserted into the ball for detection) would hardly break up the flow of the sport that much. The few seconds involved are clearly worth sacrificing in an effort to stop such occasions being clouded in a negative light.
There has been fear mongering from FIFA that by allowing any such technology they would open up a Pandora's box, where all decisions would be under pressure to be cleared up in this way. Again this is ludicrous, are FIFA that much of a lame duck that they are incapable of setting their own agenda? There is no reason why football's governing body couldn't implement goal-line technology only, this would limit the techniques available to deciding the most make or break decision- is it a goal or not?
Pressure may come for technology to be expanded for offside decisions etc, but these are not make or break moments. A player who breaks through defence when he should be flagged offside may still miss the goal for example.
The positive of England's exit is that the goal that never was has forced Blatter's hand somewhat. Such a foul-up needed to happen on the World Cup stage in order to embarrass FIFA into reopening the debate, and Blatter has confirmed that when the International FA Board meets in July they will do exactly that- here's hoping for some common sense to prevail in that meeting.
Back to England and our own FA has seemingly increased the pressure on Fabio Capello by refusing to make a decision about his future until after the World Cup. Frankly I am in two minds, Capello clearly has some questions to answer tactically (why is Heskey anywhere near an England shirt?!) but is there anyone better who could lead the national team?
The Italian was lauded before the World Cup and rightly so, he had transformed England throughout the qualifiers into a robust and effective unit. However, the World Cup campaign has been a bit of a disaster zone since England arrived in South Africa, from Green's gaffe to Terry's 'big mistake' and then the awful performances against Algeria and then Germany.
Many fans and pundits may be baying for Capello's head, but is he really where all the frustration should be aimed at? Or rather alternatively isn't is about time some of the England players were shown the door at international level, at least until some of them earned their place back. The worry for England is that there isn't exactly a dearth of talent waiting in the wings, Theo Walcott went from being the next big hope to being dropped on the eve of the World Cup- although one can't help but wonder if his pace may have helped England after all.
Personally I hope the FA are not predictable in their nature, and that they stick with Capello and perhaps start to recognise what the FA's in other countries do to support their national team. In his last press conference before exiting South Africa, Capello was asked about the need for a winter break in the Premier League- an idea that he adhered to, as have most former England managers.
It is an option that has never been properly explored by the FA, and one must wonder if this is down to the Premier League's thirst for money and TV rights. After all, the Premier League was set up with the principle of reducing England's top division to 18 teams in an effort to help the cause of the national team.
This is something that should have happened and still should happen, but it appears that the Premier League's bank balance is ultimately where the allegiances lie. After another more humiliating failure at this World Cup the FA should grab the bull by the horns and realise that less may well equal more on a national scale. Similarly the FA could consider scrapping the League Cup in an effort to reduce the inflated playing schedule of some of our players, sadly these answers are a pipe dream and the fear is that the FA will simply let Capello take the fall in an effort to appease the counter-productive British press.
This is where we come onto some sections of the British press, who in some respects are architects of England's downfall. Every international football tournament we see an England bandwagon than rolls mercilessly onwards, and in the middle of it all are certain newspapers that build up England and endlessly ask it's players and coaches if they are going to win the competition. It is mostly lazy, and depending on where you look, tasteless journalism.
Tabloid hacks are so keen to be a part of success in the England football team and yet as soon as the tables are turned there is the inevitable witch-hunting and looking for scapegoats. The English players should be able to handle pressure like all other professionals, but there must be something in it when foreigners consistently cite elements of the British press as being the worst around.
The worst of all can be seen in the Daily Star and the Daily Mail. After England's win over Slovenia had set up the clash with Germany, the Daily Star responded with a front-page headline of 'Job done now for the Hun'. Sadly it seems that some people cannot get over a war that ended almost seventy years ago and which has nothing to do with sport except for the coincidence of nationality.
The largest contempt must be left for Richard Littlejohn of the Daily Mail, who continues to get away with outbursts that seem to be designed for outrage and who could be accused of inciting racial hatred. In yesterday's Daily Mail he was quoted on the front page as saying 'Thank Heaven The Few didn't defend as badly as England's footballers in Bloemfontein yesterday afternoon, otherwise we'd all be speaking German.'
Again, how this piece of odious journalism belongs in a national paper is beyond me. We are talking about a football match in 2010 Mr Littlejohn, and in case you'd forgotten the Second World War is actually over. All I can say is that life must be incredibly stressful if you harbour grudges since before you were born! I just hope the FA is not as knee-jerk when it comes to dealing with Fabio...
As it happened England were generally all over the place for the first half an hour or so, and Capello's team found themselves 2-0 behind. What happened next has been well documented and probably will be for too much time to come. England had got back into the match when Matthew Upson headed home a Steven Gerrard cross shortly after Germany's second goal. Within a minute of this Frank Lampard's improvised lob crashed against the Germany cross bar and bounced down behind the goal line.
England were obviously the poorer side overall, but the fact that the goal wasn't given has re-opened the debate for goal line technology, one which I have to subscribe to. This was a case where TV viewers were in little doubt that a goal had been scored and were starting to celebrate an unlikely comeback. Fabio Capello himself was seen to be celebrating from his England dugout, and yet the Uruguayan linesman who was significantly closer to the incident had failed to see it.
Accidents do happen and however much we don't like it, officials are prone to mistakes at even the highest level, as humans they are not infallible. Yet Sepp Blatter has as recently as March rubbished the debate for a technology that could swiftly give a correct decision for such controversial moments.
His argument that fans like to debate such incidents' is indefensible. I can confidently predict that the vast majority of football fans would prefer to discuss a fair and honest result for their team rather than knowing that they had been victims of poor decision making, especially when as with Lampard's goal there is no debate.
If FIFA were to embrace the technologies used by Cricket, Tennis and Rugby, surely even Blatter could see that Hawk-Eye or Cairos (where a microchip is inserted into the ball for detection) would hardly break up the flow of the sport that much. The few seconds involved are clearly worth sacrificing in an effort to stop such occasions being clouded in a negative light.
There has been fear mongering from FIFA that by allowing any such technology they would open up a Pandora's box, where all decisions would be under pressure to be cleared up in this way. Again this is ludicrous, are FIFA that much of a lame duck that they are incapable of setting their own agenda? There is no reason why football's governing body couldn't implement goal-line technology only, this would limit the techniques available to deciding the most make or break decision- is it a goal or not?
Pressure may come for technology to be expanded for offside decisions etc, but these are not make or break moments. A player who breaks through defence when he should be flagged offside may still miss the goal for example.
The positive of England's exit is that the goal that never was has forced Blatter's hand somewhat. Such a foul-up needed to happen on the World Cup stage in order to embarrass FIFA into reopening the debate, and Blatter has confirmed that when the International FA Board meets in July they will do exactly that- here's hoping for some common sense to prevail in that meeting.
Back to England and our own FA has seemingly increased the pressure on Fabio Capello by refusing to make a decision about his future until after the World Cup. Frankly I am in two minds, Capello clearly has some questions to answer tactically (why is Heskey anywhere near an England shirt?!) but is there anyone better who could lead the national team?
The Italian was lauded before the World Cup and rightly so, he had transformed England throughout the qualifiers into a robust and effective unit. However, the World Cup campaign has been a bit of a disaster zone since England arrived in South Africa, from Green's gaffe to Terry's 'big mistake' and then the awful performances against Algeria and then Germany.
Many fans and pundits may be baying for Capello's head, but is he really where all the frustration should be aimed at? Or rather alternatively isn't is about time some of the England players were shown the door at international level, at least until some of them earned their place back. The worry for England is that there isn't exactly a dearth of talent waiting in the wings, Theo Walcott went from being the next big hope to being dropped on the eve of the World Cup- although one can't help but wonder if his pace may have helped England after all.
Personally I hope the FA are not predictable in their nature, and that they stick with Capello and perhaps start to recognise what the FA's in other countries do to support their national team. In his last press conference before exiting South Africa, Capello was asked about the need for a winter break in the Premier League- an idea that he adhered to, as have most former England managers.
It is an option that has never been properly explored by the FA, and one must wonder if this is down to the Premier League's thirst for money and TV rights. After all, the Premier League was set up with the principle of reducing England's top division to 18 teams in an effort to help the cause of the national team.
This is something that should have happened and still should happen, but it appears that the Premier League's bank balance is ultimately where the allegiances lie. After another more humiliating failure at this World Cup the FA should grab the bull by the horns and realise that less may well equal more on a national scale. Similarly the FA could consider scrapping the League Cup in an effort to reduce the inflated playing schedule of some of our players, sadly these answers are a pipe dream and the fear is that the FA will simply let Capello take the fall in an effort to appease the counter-productive British press.
This is where we come onto some sections of the British press, who in some respects are architects of England's downfall. Every international football tournament we see an England bandwagon than rolls mercilessly onwards, and in the middle of it all are certain newspapers that build up England and endlessly ask it's players and coaches if they are going to win the competition. It is mostly lazy, and depending on where you look, tasteless journalism.
Tabloid hacks are so keen to be a part of success in the England football team and yet as soon as the tables are turned there is the inevitable witch-hunting and looking for scapegoats. The English players should be able to handle pressure like all other professionals, but there must be something in it when foreigners consistently cite elements of the British press as being the worst around.
The worst of all can be seen in the Daily Star and the Daily Mail. After England's win over Slovenia had set up the clash with Germany, the Daily Star responded with a front-page headline of 'Job done now for the Hun'. Sadly it seems that some people cannot get over a war that ended almost seventy years ago and which has nothing to do with sport except for the coincidence of nationality.
The largest contempt must be left for Richard Littlejohn of the Daily Mail, who continues to get away with outbursts that seem to be designed for outrage and who could be accused of inciting racial hatred. In yesterday's Daily Mail he was quoted on the front page as saying 'Thank Heaven The Few didn't defend as badly as England's footballers in Bloemfontein yesterday afternoon, otherwise we'd all be speaking German.'
Again, how this piece of odious journalism belongs in a national paper is beyond me. We are talking about a football match in 2010 Mr Littlejohn, and in case you'd forgotten the Second World War is actually over. All I can say is that life must be incredibly stressful if you harbour grudges since before you were born! I just hope the FA is not as knee-jerk when it comes to dealing with Fabio...
Comments