Ireland robbed of their chance at the South Africa world cup

[Cheech]

http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/01/59/29288582428d8c7c9e5812674a8d.jpeg France's Thierry Henry, second from left, passes the ball as Ireland's goalkeeper Shay Given, right, tries to stop it, just before William Gallas (unseen) scored the goal for France during their World Cup qualifying playoff second leg soccer match at the Stade de France stadium in Saint Denis outside Paris, Wednesday, Nov. 18, 2009.
Michel EULER/ASSOCIATED PRESS



A sporting dispute between Ireland and France is threatening to blow up into a major diplomatic scandal on Thursday, as top politicians wade in and the sport's governing body denies that anything can be done.
At issue is Wednesday's soccer match between the two nations. In extra time, the French scored a crucial goal that sent them on to next summer's World Cup in South Africa and eliminated the Irish squad. Based on replays, the goal was triply illegal: two of the French attackers were offside, while one of them – captain Thierry Henry – clearly touched the ball with his outstretched hand.
Today, FIFA, which oversees world soccer, said there would be no replay of the game, despite a flurry of Irish protests.
After Wednesday's match, which ended in a tie, but favoured France on a 2-1 aggregate score, France's Henry admitted touching the ball.
"I will be honest, it was a handball," Henry said. "But I'm not the ref. I played it, the ref allowed it. That's a question you should ask him."
Some are already calling the play "Le Hand" and "Le Main de Dieu," referencing a famous World Cup goal in which Argentina's Diego Maradona appeared to knock the ball into the English goal with his fist. After the match, Maradona responded to questions about the controversial play by attributing the goal to "the hand of God."
Gallic indifference to the cheat is being greeted by green rage in Dublin.
Today, Ireland's justice minister, Dermot Ahern demanded that FIFA, soccer's governing body, nullify the result and replay the match.
"If (the current) result remains, it reinforces the view that if you cheat, you will win," Ahern said.
Giovanni Trapattoni, the 70-year-old Irish manager, also demanded another chance.
"For the dignity and integrity of football, we will go to France and play again," Trapattoni, a legendary Italian, said. "(FIFA president) Sepp Blatter goes on about fair play – let him reflect on what happened last night. Where is football going if a team is cheated out of fair play? Where are we going if this decision stands?"
FIFA has never in its history nullified a result because of a refereeing decision. A FIFA spokesperson this morning called attention to Rule 5 in the Laws of the Game, which reads in part that "the decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play are final."
Last night's game has renewed calls from around the world for soccer to institute an instant replay system, like those used in the NHL and NFL.
Both FIFA president Blatter and UEFA president Michel Platini are against technology, preferring instead to experiment with five officials – one additional official behind each goal – during this season's inaugural Europa League.
Ireland captain Robbie Keane was furious with Henry and said goalkeeper Shay Given had a clear view of the incident.
"We knew anyway. When you see the reaction of Shay, he's two yards away from it. You don't get a reaction like that (otherwise). (Henry) almost caught it and walked into the net with it," Keane said.
"He's an absolutely top player and has been for a long time, but it was a clear handball. He actually dragged it in from going out. I wouldn't expect it from anybody."
France struggled over both games, winning 1-0 at Croke Park with a deflected goal from Nicolas Anelka, and Henry praised Giovanni Trapattoni's resilient team.



source: http://www.thestar.com/sports/soccer/article/727806--irish-rage-over-france-s-handball-soccer-win?bn=1





Unbelievable. It's happened in the past, it's still happening, and it'll happen in the future. In a sport where 1 missed or bad call can drastically change the outcome of a game, they have to do something to avoid these so called mistakes. Yet, fifa is unwilling to be reasonable on any level.

[Reefscape]

Its disgusting how Thierry Maradonna ( Brits will know what i'm on about ( hand of god )) can openly admit in post match interview it was a handball, yet no action looks like its going to be taken by FIFA....Same old story, footballers are nothing but cheats and will do whatever it takes to win....bye bye sportsmanship...

[Reefscape]

Oh...and look who is the vice president of the FIFA commitee???

Michel PLATINI (http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/federation/bodies/members/people=28528.html)....and where does he come from i wonder?? hmmm...oh yes...F R A N C E !!!!! shock horror......

[Coler]

Would never have happened in Rugby (which is my own game) - Replays used to confirm decisions on scores are used at all high level matches. It takes literally seconds to get a confirmation/reversal and there is no valid reason why it is not used in football.

I'm gutted for us.

NB yep sport is sport...but the estimated lost revenue for Ireland as a nation of not reaching the World Cup Finals is €20m...this is serious stuff especially in the current economic circumstances. You have to accept the result but it smarts to lose like that.

[Wycco]

If Ireland get a replay - I demand England get a replay against Argentina from the 1986 World Cup.

To make it fair- use all the orignal players... let's see if fat- post drug-abuse Maradonna can score against us now.

[DrgRcr]

Stuff like this will and does happen in sports everyday, when the potential for human error is involved in making a split second decision. Unless you replay EVERYTHING or have 30 referees/umpires in each game of each sport, there will always be something that slips by the view of one. And I don't think replay should be used for everything.

[Cheech]

It's come to the point where it seems like we're watching a WWE wrestling match.. you know the ones where the ref is turned away, and the bad guy cheats by hitting the good guy in back of the head while the ref isn't looking, then the ref turns back around, sees the guy on the floor pinned, and makes his three count. Except, WWE is entertainment...

Fans know he cheated, TV knows, players know, commentators know, Heck, Henry admitted to it, yet, it's still a goal...


In the end, FIFA's message to the world, and to every child who loves the sport is:


If you can, cheat... Just make sure you don't get caught by the ref. Because cheaters can win, if they're smart.

[Reefscape]

If Ireland get a replay - I demand England get a replay against Argentina from the 1986 World Cup.

To make it fair- use all the orignal players... let's see if fat- post drug-abuse Maradonna can score against us now.


Here is another bad thing...Maradonna has just been given a 2 match ban for swearing at an offical in his last match....2 match ban just for that, yet a self admitted cheat is going to get away without any penalty....rediculous... :devil:

[Reefscape]

It's come to the point where it seems like we're watching a WWE wrestling match.. you know the ones where the ref is turned away, and the bad guy cheats by hitting the good guy in back of the head while the ref isn't looking, then the ref turns back around, sees the guy on the floor pinned, and makes his three count. Except, WWE is entertainment...

Fans know he cheated, TV knows, players know, commentators know, Heck, Henry admitted to it, yet, it's still a goal...


In the end, FIFA's message to the world, and to every child who loves the sport is:


If you can, cheat... Just make sure you don't get caught by the ref. Because cheaters can win, if they're smart.


LOL....so true....in this case, the ref was about 25 yards from where maradonna...ummm....i mean Henry was standing ( where the ball was )...if he has been in the proper position of close to where the ball was actually in play, he'd of seen it....LOL

[Wycco]

Maradonna swore at the official? I thought his ban was for swearing at the media during an interview? I could quite possibly be wrong though... and point remains nonetheless.


Either way- since when has FIFA, UEFA, the FA or anyone else ever been consistant? I won't name names to start arguments between fans of different clubs (although I can think of specific occasions)... you can have some players who yell at refs swear at them- curse at them all game long EVERY game. Then you get one player who makes one comment asking why a free-kick was given and he is made an example of "respect the ref" with a red card and followed up with a two match ban.

Someone dives in the penalty box and get caught- sometimes the ref gives a free kick to the other team- sometimes he gives a yellow card.




The one thing that is consistant though is that FIFA will not grant a replay of the game. They never do. But if they do- I want a replay of the '86 semi-final. ;)

Just like Thierry- Maradonna DID admit the handball after the game... and a semi-final is so much bigger than a qualifier.

[Cheech]

^^^ those are all reasons why they should consider instant replays. They can set it up in a way where it wouldn't take too much time to make the calls. But to do nothing is simply a slap to the face of every player and fan who loves the sport.

[Coler]

Stuff like this will and does happen in sports everyday, when the potential for human error is involved in making a split second decision. Unless you replay EVERYTHING or have 30 referees/umpires in each game of each sport, there will always be something that slips by the view of one. And I don't think replay should be used for everything.

Not true (replay everything). The technology is used in Rugby, which is refereed by one ref with two assistant refs on the sidelines insofar as the field of play is concerned (unlike say Gridiron which has a whole heap of zebras around). In Rugby only issues concerning the validity of scores are replayed, where the referee can not confirm it himself.

In high level Gridiron a given team can challenge a play by expending a timeout (refunded if successful challenge) dealing with the situation where a ref refuses to review - not a bad idea.

So you don't need tons of refs to use it, you don't refer everything and the experience in Rugby (an action packed and fast moving contact sport) shows that it enhances the sport.

[Cheech]

Not true (replay everything). The technology is used in Rugby, which is refereed by one ref with two assistant refs on the sidelines insofar as the field of play is concerned (unlike say Gridiron which has a whole heap of zebras around). In Rugby only issues concerning the validity of scores are replayed, where the referee can not confirm it himself.

In high level Gridiron a given team can challenge a play by expending a timeout (refunded if successful challenge) dealing with the situation where a ref refuses to review - not a bad idea.

So you don't need tons of refs to use it, you don't refer everything and the experience in Rugby (an action packed and fast moving contact sport) shows that it enhances the sport.


That makes perfect sense.

[DrgRcr]

I understand that Coler, but even with the example you gave for gridiron, you only get a certain number of challenges. Eventually if you take the human element out of everything, we may as well put remote control robots on the field. This is what happens when sport is no longer a sport, but a business instead.

[Cheech]

I understand that Coler, but even with the example you gave for gridiron, you only get a certain number of challenges. Eventually if you take the human element out of everything, we may as well put remote control robots on the field. This is what happens when sport is no longer a sport, but a business instead.


With all the rediculous scandals that have surfaced throughout the years when it comes to soccer, I think it's already been established that the guys on top are more concerned with the business part of it than they are the sport itself.


A balance somewhere in the middle of both extremes would hopefully do the trick

[Coler]

I understand that Coler, but even with the example you gave for gridiron, you only get a certain number of challenges. Eventually if you take the human element out of everything, we may as well put remote control robots on the field. This is what happens when sport is no longer a sport, but a business instead.

I take your point, but the question is fairly put as whether human error in sports officiating is a) unavoidable b) desirable. I speak as a Rugby Referee.

I would say the answer is no to a) and no to b).

So why not just minimise the human error where it does not interfere with the sport ? Even having an extra official at each goal mouth would be perfectly fine and would prevent incidents like the one we're discussing.

Ultimately, incidents like this do no credit to anyone, and there is no doubt they are avoidable. The players and supporters are completely let down by the failure to spot a foul like this and if it arises from an avoidable human error, the question is really why not do something about it especially when the something involved would not in anyway damage the sport.

[DrgRcr]

There really is a fine line as to how far you can take it I guess. If this were truly just a sport, we'd be moving on. But because someone stands to lose substantial amounts of money, it is now scandalous. This is how stupid wars start. Look at college football for an example. Why is it that ESPN shows what seems like a million CFB scores on the ticker during telecasts? Do I really need to know the score of Ball State vs. Appalachian State(no offence to any alum)? It is because Vegas has a line on it and people wagered on it. A co-worker once said to me that college football was the only pure sport left. It took a few minutes for me to get back up from nearly choking.

[jpappy789]

There really is a fine line as to how far you can take it I guess. If this were truly just a sport, we'd be moving on. But because someone stands to lose substantial amounts of money, it is now scandalous. This is how stupid wars start. Look at college football for an example. Why is it that ESPN shows what seems like a million CFB scores on the ticker during telecasts? Do I really need to know the score of Ball State vs. Appalachian State(no offence to any alum)? It is because Vegas has a line on it and people wagered on it. A co-worker once said to me that college football was the only pure sport left. It took a few minutes for me to get back up from nearly choking.

Or is it because ESPN claims to be the "worldwide leader in sports"? Why should they exclude certain scores and only show the popular ones? I doubt it's only because people are betting on them...

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=701150&sec=worldcup2010&cc=5901