Comments:International Board fixes soccer field size, halts technology experiments

We should use technology!

Back to article

This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.

Quick hints for new commentators:

• Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
• Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
• You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading

Click here to add a new comment · Add onto existing comments

This is an outrage. We should use technology to improve the game, not ask for extra assistant referees. It's only going to cause confusion; more is not the answer. It may lead to conflicts between the refs. Look at American Football. They employ the use of technology and everything works just fine. Besides, employing more assistant refs per game is going to cost federations more money. I'm tired of seeing offside-goals being called legit, legit goals being called offside, and hand-of-god stunts.

This happened yesterday, America's second goal has an offside (first guy who attempts to head the ball but fails) and the refs didn't call it. Here, a goal was unfairly anulled when it was legitimate (the second time this happens to this team in this competition this year) and this cost the Peruvians the game. I'm sure this happens to several other clubs and national teams all the time and this must change.

I think we shoul still have the flexibility of changing the dimmensions of the soccer field. It makes it a little more interesting. Besides, what's is wrong with having the homefield advantage. It's just part of the human spirit to overcome obstacles. If the visiting is truly the best they will demonstrate that in any field.

Wrong move

FIFA shouldn't have said no to technology. That's outrageous. What's wrong with Hawk's Eye? It's used in tennis and no one has complained yet. I think Sepp had decided beforehand to say no to technologies. He just put up a show for the public opinion. The additional referees don't help much. Technology was the best solution. If Blatter is worried about football using its human face maybe he should consider retiring.

Comments from feedback form - "help!"

help! —208.122.107.254 (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2012 (UTC)