This book is one of the most unique books you
ever read; rather than using words or phrases as titles of chapters as it is in
almost every book you may have read; the titles of chapters of this book are
actually sentences. Yes, each chapter title is a sentence – they are sentences
made by fictional commentators in four of the more popular football or soccer leagues
in the world. Each title-sentence covers a specific Referee decision in
football. Chapter one is titled with a sentence that covers the award of a
penalty to a player who dives in the penalty box. Chapter two has a sentence-title
that exemplifies a commentator’s reaction when a fine goal is disallowed. The
title of chapter 3, deals with the issue of an unwarranted second yellow card
to a player whilst the title of chapter four, is a sentence that exemplifies a
commentator’s lamentation when a player is unjustly sent off. Finally, chapter
five carries in its title, a sentence of a commentator describing the worst
decision he has ever seen in three decades of football commentary while calling
for football authorities to consider the introduction of video technology to
aid Referees.
In chapter one, I set out to make my first case
for video replays with an incident that happened in a World Cup knockout match
in 2006; but before I bring on the case, I lay some foundations – I needed to
let the reader know why I watched that World Cup match which was the match that
gave birth to my desire to see video replays for Referees; but to put things in
proper perspective, I tell the story of my origins as a football fan. Thus, the
book begins with me in tears, real tears. I started to try to explain to the
reader why I was so heartbroken, but then I realized that to give a basis for
the tears, I needed to tell about how I became a football fan as a little boy.
Once that was done, I went back to the beginning and explained the tears and
after the reader had come to terms with the tears that began the book, I moved
to use that information as the reason why I had watched the match which
eventually made me begin my crusade for the introduction of video replays for
Referees. With all those stones set in place, I delicately and coherently push
in my first case for replays – a Germany 2006 World Cup incident. I interject
my cases with spicy little details and delicious matter from football stories
to keep my readers entertained as I move towards my argument for video
technology. All through this book, I tell a lot of football stories, stories
that help drive home the point that football is truly the beautiful game, a
fact highlighted in the title of this book.
In chapter two, I make a strong case for video
technology for Referees when they need to be super sure whether to allow or
disallow a goal; while in chapter three, I make the case for officials to see
video replays before confirming a second yellow card. Chapter four carries the
case for video replays to be viewed before a player is sent off and chapter
five puts the cap on top. Each chapter of this book, besides the fifth chapter,
ends with what I have tagged, Tactical
Formation Truths, TFT’s. The TFT’s serve as summaries for the first four
chapters
All through the book, you will see sentences
that I have called Pearls; these
pearls are food for thought to arouse the reader’s curiosity – they may or may
not be connected to the paragraphs preceding or succeeding them. In chapter
three, the reader will encounter what I have called Scenarios. These scenarios are fictional scenarios that help
emphasize and re-emphasize the need for video replays for Referees. There are
22 scenarios in all, that number being a representation of 22 footballers on a
football or soccer pitch.
In chapter five, I highlight 11 reasons why football
is the beautiful game and I describe those reasons as The Beautiful Starting 11; and on the other face of the coin, I
bring out 11 opponents of that team of beauty by generating an 11 man list of
dirt in the game. Also in chapter five, I include an article that I wrote some
months after goal-line technology was introduced and then I let readers see an
open letter (fictional) from the Referees Association of the World to FIFA. In
the letter, match officials plead for the approval of video technology to aid
the accuracy of their job. I make my conclusions with a coherent argument of
why I do not think that video replays should be used for every decision in a
football or soccer match and I highlight why they should be used only for what
I have described as: the Big 4 – the four
most important decisions of the game:
second yellow cards, red cards, penalty awards, and to confirm if a goal should
be allowed or disallowed. I close with a poem which I hope that some
football fan somewhere in the world, who is a gifted musician, will make into
what I have called, the Squeeze Out Song
and then I close with some classy words.
Table of Contents
PEARL
1 – MISTAKE
What
is a mistake? Here is my idiosyncratic definition: A mistake means that you
missed what you intended to take – you had two options, you knew that one was
right and the other was wrong, you took option A and then you realized that you
should have taken option B – you made a mistake. You missed what you were
supposed to take; it’s a MISS-TAKE. And as humans we correct our mistakes
immediately we discover them; but in the beautiful game, as innocent as
Referees’ mistakes are, they do not have the opportunity of video replays to
correct their MISS-TAKE. The Ref, his Assistant, the innocent player, the
player’s team, the manager and the club, all get to live with the monumental
consequences of the mistake. A good case in point is when a player dives in the
penalty box but the Referee thought he was “fouled” The Ref gives the defender
who “fouled” the diver a yellow or red card, and awards a penalty against the
innocent player and his team; the diver stands up, scores the “penalty kick”
and celebrates with his or her team mates while the innocent team mourns their
losses. Now that is dirt!
PEARL
4 – TIME
Will
the approval of video replays eat up too much time from the regulation time of
90 minutes? No it won’t. Rather than use up more time, video replays will
actually save time. Have you ever watched a match where a controversial penalty
decision was made by the Referee? About how many minutes did it take the
affected team to launch a protest before the penalty kick was taken? You may
not have done any estimates, but I have – it usually takes an average of 2
minutes before the protestations die down enough for the penalty kick to be
taken, because; the affected team splits into two groups, one group protests to
the Linesman or Referee’s Assistant and the other protests to the Referee. Many
times after the Referee has been able to sparsely disperse the group around
him, he usually lends a helping hand to his or her Assistant in dispersing the
other group before giving out a yellow card or two to players who refuse to
accept the “right” decision; and then the whistle is blown for the penalty to
be taken. Yes, it takes about 2 minutes. Do you know how much time it would
have taken the Referee to review a video replay if he was allowed to? The
answer is a maximum of 20 seconds, and that is an overstatement.
PEARL
5 – REWARD THE GUILTY; PUNISH THE INNOCENT
A
player can be brought down in the penalty box and be PUNISHED with a yellow
card for “diving” while the offending player can be REWARDED with a free kick
and one or two team mates of the player who had won a clear penalty can be
PENALIZED with even more yellow cards for protesting the WRONG decision, and
their team may lose that match as is often the case. It sounds like Tyranny but
it happens in the beautiful game! Reward the guilty; punish the Innocent. Why
does this happen? Your answer is as good as mine – Referees make those calls
because they do not have the advantage of video replays.
PEARL
9 – ADMINISTRATIVE ABOMINATION
One
player (the diver) commits the crime, another player (the defender) is punished
for it; one team gets rewarded with a prize (the penalty) that they absolutely
did not deserve, another team suffers the loss (points, money, and
qualification) for a crime none of their players committed. I call it
administrative abomination
PEARL
13 – THE GOLDEN BOOT
Two
players run neck and neck for the golden boot in one of the world’s biggest
leagues, at the end of the season, striker A had scored “30” goals while his
rival for the golden boot, striker B, had scored 28. A video technology
advocate reviews all goals scored by the two strikers and discovered that 4 of
the goals scored by striker A were offside goals which match officials had
missed. If there was video technology for Referees, striker A would have been
credited with 26 goals and striker B would have won the golden boot with 28
goals. Sounds unfortunate right? Well unfortunately, these unfortunate losses
happen in the beautiful game. And the blame
is neither that of player A nor B, nor is it that of the Ref; blame the rules.
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank you.