Can't resist it.
The Uruguayan Mauricio Espinosa and the Azerbaijani Tofik Bakhramov now represent the ying and yang of linesmen in English football.
Back in 1966 Germany couldn't immediately call for goal line technology. Instead they settled for exacting their revenge over 44 years. An exquisitely cold banquet of vengeance.
Still, 44 years apart, two goals show why football doesn't need technology, the pain and the glory, the costly errors and generous benefits of a bad call, it's all here.
Football's triumph and football's horror encapsulated in two bounces off the crossbar:
NB: The post title is stolen off various Twitter sources. Thanks.
Showing posts with label England v Germany. Show all posts
Showing posts with label England v Germany. Show all posts
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Crossing the line
Well, I called that wrong.
4-1 to Germany. A tanking. A tonking. An Anyone But England believer's wet dream.
At 2-0 it could have been 5-0. At 2-1 it should have been 2-2.
At the end it was an embarrassment for England.
The papers tomorrow will make interesting reading. I rather fancy the referee, linesman and Fabio Capello should look away now.
And the players? Wayne Rooney, John Terry, Frank Lampard et al have hardly cemented their reputation as world class players. Too many fluffed lines on the biggest stage.
The post mortem won't be pretty. It will take some time. We might be best to leave them to it. Gloating is unbecoming at the best of times. After that annihilation it would just be cruel.
The immediate reaction is likely to focus on the use of technology. No doubt the marital status of Sepp Blatter's parents is going to be loudly questioned.
And the FIFA supremo's comments about goal line technology being too costly deserve to be ridiculed.
But I'm actually on his side on this.
Would we stop at goal line technology? Because if we start with that then the calls will be louder for the use of replays elsewhere.
Penalty decisions? That would rule out the two penalties England won against Argentina at recent World Cups.
Offside decisions? Fouls? Pass backs? Hand balls in World Cup play-off games?
All these decisions can turn games, referees and linesmen can get them all wrong. Technology in one area of the game will lead to a clamour to get technology in every area of the game.
Technology is quick and simple. Is it? My experience of rugby suggests that it's not. Baffling decisions like today's might be reversed after one replay. But tighter decisions will require careful study by a TV official under as much stress as anyone else. It will break the pattern of the game.
But, and I hate myself for saying this, Blatter is right when he talks about a human aspect to football. Ultimately human error is part of the game.
Referees, players, managers. They all make mistakes. If they didn't football would be perfect. But it is the imperfections that add to the excitement of the game.
They madden us, infuriate us, frustrate us. But they keep us coming back for more.
England were the victims today. They'll be on the right side of wrong decisions in the future, as they have been in the past.
It might a societal thing, this demand for everything to be 100% correct all the time. But we're not all 100% correct all the time. Football reflects us, for better or worse.
So a no to technology. And a definite no to technology being pushed in on the back of that one goal.
You'd need to be Dr Sam Beckett to discover how it might have changed the game. 2-2 at half time is very different to 2-1 at half time.
But Germany deserved their win. 4-1 possibly didn't do their superiority justice. Goal or no goal, England needed more than technology today.
4-1 to Germany. A tanking. A tonking. An Anyone But England believer's wet dream.
At 2-0 it could have been 5-0. At 2-1 it should have been 2-2.
At the end it was an embarrassment for England.
The papers tomorrow will make interesting reading. I rather fancy the referee, linesman and Fabio Capello should look away now.
And the players? Wayne Rooney, John Terry, Frank Lampard et al have hardly cemented their reputation as world class players. Too many fluffed lines on the biggest stage.
The post mortem won't be pretty. It will take some time. We might be best to leave them to it. Gloating is unbecoming at the best of times. After that annihilation it would just be cruel.
The immediate reaction is likely to focus on the use of technology. No doubt the marital status of Sepp Blatter's parents is going to be loudly questioned.
And the FIFA supremo's comments about goal line technology being too costly deserve to be ridiculed.
But I'm actually on his side on this.
Would we stop at goal line technology? Because if we start with that then the calls will be louder for the use of replays elsewhere.
Penalty decisions? That would rule out the two penalties England won against Argentina at recent World Cups.
Offside decisions? Fouls? Pass backs? Hand balls in World Cup play-off games?
All these decisions can turn games, referees and linesmen can get them all wrong. Technology in one area of the game will lead to a clamour to get technology in every area of the game.
Technology is quick and simple. Is it? My experience of rugby suggests that it's not. Baffling decisions like today's might be reversed after one replay. But tighter decisions will require careful study by a TV official under as much stress as anyone else. It will break the pattern of the game.
But, and I hate myself for saying this, Blatter is right when he talks about a human aspect to football. Ultimately human error is part of the game.
Referees, players, managers. They all make mistakes. If they didn't football would be perfect. But it is the imperfections that add to the excitement of the game.
They madden us, infuriate us, frustrate us. But they keep us coming back for more.
England were the victims today. They'll be on the right side of wrong decisions in the future, as they have been in the past.
It might a societal thing, this demand for everything to be 100% correct all the time. But we're not all 100% correct all the time. Football reflects us, for better or worse.
So a no to technology. And a definite no to technology being pushed in on the back of that one goal.
You'd need to be Dr Sam Beckett to discover how it might have changed the game. 2-2 at half time is very different to 2-1 at half time.
But Germany deserved their win. 4-1 possibly didn't do their superiority justice. Goal or no goal, England needed more than technology today.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
2010 World Cup: England v Germany
International football's biggest rivalry, apart from all the other big international rivalries, returns to entertain us.
England v Germany. Germany v England.
A footballing powerhouse with an enviable World Cup record meets a team that envies that record.
We all know that this particular rivalry began in the 1940's when England (represented by various nationalities) and Germany met in Paris.
That game was almost abandoned at half time but thankfully Russell Osman intervened and persuaded one of England's ringers - Sylvester Stallone - that the game could be won.
International football's most enduring rivalry, apart from all the more enduring rivalries, was born.
1966, 1970, 1990, 1996 and on and on.
Since that storied Wembley day in 1966 Germany have had the upper hand. Without being an expert on such matters I get the impression that this nags a bit at England's national psyche.
Had everything gone according to plan this game wouldn't be happening at this stage. But England stuttered against the United States before offering a more than passable impersonation of the Chipping Norton Red Lion 2nd XI against Algeria.
Such is the emotional tightrope of the World Cup as digested by the English media that an English win over Slovenia saw the pendulum swing from suicidal recrimination to unquestioning belief in 90 brief minutes of a much improved but still hardly world-beating performance.
For their part the Germans thrilled against a woeful Australia, were unlucky against Serbia and set about the job with every possible cliche of professional efficiency against Ghana.
Whatever else happened in the group stages, the two teams arrive at this match on the back of 1-0 victories that were not much more than functional.
They both need more than that if they are to progress.
History suggests that the Germans are favourites. They might be a young team who came into the tournament relatively unfancied. But they remain Germany. They've got a habit of winning these games. Stereotype. Probably. But they just do.
England have a habit of losing these games. It's often agonisingly close but it's still defeat.
But for some reason I've got a feeling that England might just sneak. Based on what? Not history, not form. Just a little feeling.
England's performances thus far have led to much soul searching and no little sniggering this side of the border. But Wayne Rooney hasn't become a bad player since arriving in South Africa. Fabio Capello hasn't become a bad manager since Robert Green fumbled a shot against the United States.
Do England lack the world class players that can win the World Cup? Yes. But so do Germany. And neither squad will feel that going out in what Clive Tyldesley might well call "the round of 16" is not a reflection of their ambitions.
England need to play better than they have done so far. They'll probably need Germany to have an off day.
Stranger things have happened.
Mind you, if it goes to penalties all bets are off.
I remain, as ever, neutral. But. Anyone wondering why the Anyone But England campaign rears it's head every two to four years (depending on qualification) should probably take a look at the English papers tomorrow morning. They might be perfectly sensible. Or they might display the English media at its jingoistic worst.
On the other hand: A note to the ABE squad. England aren't going to win the World Cup. Would it not suit your aim of laughing at England more if they beat Germany before a more agonising quarter final or semi final defeat? Just a thought.
England v Germany. Germany v England.
A footballing powerhouse with an enviable World Cup record meets a team that envies that record.
We all know that this particular rivalry began in the 1940's when England (represented by various nationalities) and Germany met in Paris.
That game was almost abandoned at half time but thankfully Russell Osman intervened and persuaded one of England's ringers - Sylvester Stallone - that the game could be won.
International football's most enduring rivalry, apart from all the more enduring rivalries, was born.
1966, 1970, 1990, 1996 and on and on.
Since that storied Wembley day in 1966 Germany have had the upper hand. Without being an expert on such matters I get the impression that this nags a bit at England's national psyche.
Had everything gone according to plan this game wouldn't be happening at this stage. But England stuttered against the United States before offering a more than passable impersonation of the Chipping Norton Red Lion 2nd XI against Algeria.
Such is the emotional tightrope of the World Cup as digested by the English media that an English win over Slovenia saw the pendulum swing from suicidal recrimination to unquestioning belief in 90 brief minutes of a much improved but still hardly world-beating performance.
For their part the Germans thrilled against a woeful Australia, were unlucky against Serbia and set about the job with every possible cliche of professional efficiency against Ghana.
Whatever else happened in the group stages, the two teams arrive at this match on the back of 1-0 victories that were not much more than functional.
They both need more than that if they are to progress.
History suggests that the Germans are favourites. They might be a young team who came into the tournament relatively unfancied. But they remain Germany. They've got a habit of winning these games. Stereotype. Probably. But they just do.
England have a habit of losing these games. It's often agonisingly close but it's still defeat.
But for some reason I've got a feeling that England might just sneak. Based on what? Not history, not form. Just a little feeling.
England's performances thus far have led to much soul searching and no little sniggering this side of the border. But Wayne Rooney hasn't become a bad player since arriving in South Africa. Fabio Capello hasn't become a bad manager since Robert Green fumbled a shot against the United States.
Do England lack the world class players that can win the World Cup? Yes. But so do Germany. And neither squad will feel that going out in what Clive Tyldesley might well call "the round of 16" is not a reflection of their ambitions.
England need to play better than they have done so far. They'll probably need Germany to have an off day.
Stranger things have happened.
Mind you, if it goes to penalties all bets are off.
I remain, as ever, neutral. But. Anyone wondering why the Anyone But England campaign rears it's head every two to four years (depending on qualification) should probably take a look at the English papers tomorrow morning. They might be perfectly sensible. Or they might display the English media at its jingoistic worst.
On the other hand: A note to the ABE squad. England aren't going to win the World Cup. Would it not suit your aim of laughing at England more if they beat Germany before a more agonising quarter final or semi final defeat? Just a thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)