Brazil penalty gives Sepp Blatter’s video referees plan fresh impetus
|
Version 0 of 1. The controversy surrounding Brazil’s decisive penalty in their opening World Cup match against Croatia is set to give added impetus to Sepp Blatter’s plan to introduce video referees. Just as the case for goalline technology was made by Frank Lampard’s high profile goal that never was against Germany in 2010, there is a growing belief that the outcry over the incident at the Arena Corinthians could have a similar effect. After decrying the use of goalline technology for years, the Fifa president made an abrupt U-turn in 2010 and has now gone further by opening up the idea of each coach being awarded two video challenges per match. On Thursday night, the Japanese official Yuichi Nishimura sparked Croatian fury by awarding Brazil a second-half penalty when Fred went down under minimal contact from Dejan Lovren. Speaking before the match, the FA general secretary, Alex Horne, said he believed any high profile refereeing howler would give the idea huge momentum. “Don’t underestimate the power of circumstance. If we get something happening in the next three or four weeks that is blindingly obvious – like Lampard’s ‘goal that wasn’t a goal’ in Bloemfontein – then that could give this real momentum,” said Horne, a member of IFAB, the game’s law-making body. “I’m personally not a massive fan of doing something that would interrupt the free-flowing nature of the game but a lot of people have the view that it is inevitable.” The Croatian coach, Niko Kovac, labelled Nishimura’s decision “ridiculous” and said it risked turning the World Cup into a “circus”. “I don’t think anybody, anywhere in the stadium saw this as a penalty. If you continue like this you will have 100 penalties,” he said. “I think 2.5 billion people watching on TV saw this was not a penalty.” Horne said any decision to follow the lead of other sports, including rugby union and cricket, would have far reaching ramifications and should not be taken lightly. “It needs a lot of thought and I would not be in favour of taking any decisions lightly. “There is a risk that it would bring in a completely different dimension to football. Where challenges have been introduced in other sports such as tennis and cricket they have brought in other problems.” Blatter plans to ask the IFAB technical committee to look into the feasibility of adopting his idea. His sudden conversion to video referees also has a political dimension. He doubtless believes the idea will make him look progressive in the runup to his campaign for re-election in 2015. It also marks him out from Michel Platini, the Uefa president who this week confirmed he wanted Blatter to stand down and who is a longstanding opponent of technology in the game. A trial has been taking place in lower league Dutch football involving the British-based firm Hawk-Eye, looking at whether decisions can be relayed to referees in a matter of seconds from a control room looking at TV pictures. The Scottish FA chief executive, Stewart Regan, who is also an IFAB board member, said on Wednesday any such change would take at least two years. Regan said: “It would be a complete departure from what we have had. If the manager has an appeal and that results in the game being stopped, that interferes with how you and I understand football operates which is fast-moving, flowing, and that’s what fans have come to expect. A lot of debate has to go on. Goalline technology is a black and white decision, but if it is a subjective decision you can look at it 100 times and sometimes you can’t rule. It would have to be decided by IFAB and would have to go the football and technical advisory panels, and it would be at least 18 months to two years.” |