June 28, 2010
By Richard Stevens — Senior Writer/GoLobos.com
A goal is a goal is a goal — or it’s not. This is not a subjective decision like when to pull out a red card, or when a shove is really a shove and not a World-Cup flop.
So, should FIFA and the World Cup join the 21st century and use technology to determine when that bouncing ball has crossed the line? Lobo coach Jeremy Fishbein and his assistant, Paul Souders, say, “Yes.”
But they don’t want any other lines crossed by the exactness of video technology.”A goal is not something that is opinion,” said Fishbein. “The ball either crossed the line or it doesn’t.
“I personally think they should use the technology, but the issue is whether the change is just at the top levels or do you take it down to other levels? What about the qualifiers that determine who is going to the World Cup?”
The thing about the World Cup is that this is the top-level of soccer with an international audience. This is the Super Bowl, the World Series, the Stanley Cup, the Olympics of the game. It brings the eyes of the world to soccer and the World Cup entices a whole lot of eyes that don’t normally watch the game.
This also is a game where a single goal means a whole lot more than a single hoop in basketball or a single run in baseball.
So, shouldn’t FIFA get this goal-scoring thing right?
“There are certain laws of the game that should not be in dispute,” said Souders. “There should be nothing subjective about a goal. The goal-line technology definitely should be in place at the World Cup and all (major) levels.
“Soccer is a game where not many goals are scored and that decision dramatically effects the outcome. I think it’s a call that should be made instantly and done correctly.”
In case you haven’t heard, there have been more than a few controversial decisions on goals during the World Cup. England had a shot hit about two feet behind the line, but the officials did not give England the score.
There have been some controversial goals scored — or not scored — based on offside or phantom fouls. Fishbein and Souders do not feel video replay should be used on any other call.
“It’s either a goal or it’s not and that decision is not subjective,” said Fishbein. “I don’t think there should be any changes done with offside or any changes with how the game is called on the field of play.”
Said Souders: “As a coach or player, you have to live with human decisions. The rest of the laws of the game should not be disrupted. Leave everything else alone.”
One appeal of soccer is the ebb and flow of the game, a rhythm that does not need to be changed by instant replay or removing the human element. But the sacred flow of the game would not be hurt by a quick look — and a quick reversal — of a bad decision concerning a good goal.
You might have noticed that the TV replays of goals not allowed took less time away from the ebb and flow than did the sideline celebrations of those who scored goals allowed. There simply aren’t enough goals scored — or disallowed — to have any impact on the overall flow.
The fans get used to the technology, too. They did it in the NFL, NBA and college basketball and even in Major League ball and pro tennis. The replay also is part of the NHL, where goals also are few and oh-so important.
On U.S. at World Cup
Like all Americans, Coach Fishbein was not happy with the U.S. losing to Ghana — because the U.S. lost, because an opportunity was lost.
The best the Americans could have done in the qualifying round was to win their group. They did this. But the advancement brought tremendous attention to soccer and the U.S. path to the semifinals was through Ghana and then Uruguay. Not an easy path, but about as easy as the U.S. could have hoped for with so many world powers in the final bracket.
“It’s good for soccer, good for my profession, when the U.S. stays in there and brings attention to the sport,” said Fishbein.
The U.S. lost 2-1 to Ghana in extra time. The U.S. team is back on U.S. soil and the more traditional powers of the game are basking in this worldly limelight. The game still will receive a ton of attention, but probably not as much in America as it would have with the U.S. still in the fight.
The Lobo coach believes the answer to future U.S. success is similar to the answer for future Lobo success: get better.
“We’ve come to the point as a nation where we need to take one more step up,” said Fishbein. “You can’t say the U.S. team has improved dramatically over the past eight years. We are a competitive team, but we haven’t moved into that top echelon of world teams. We are still a long ways off.
“In my estimation, we had two players who demonstrated they could play at a high level on the world level (Tim Howard and Landon Donovan). They showed they are world-class players who could effect the outcome of a game. The rest of the team was pretty much role players.
“We are collectively good as a team, competitive. But we don`t have enough of the individual brilliance and you need that at the world level.”
Editor’s Note: Richard Stevens is a former Associate Sports Editor and sports columnist for The Albuquerque Tribune. He can be reached at rstevens50@comcast.net.