First comments from Martin Hansson

[Emmet7]

I guess his heart sank when Henry told him after the game was over. He must already have felt pretty worried about it (given the Irish reaction), then Henry tells him after the final whistle, and he knows he's in deep s**t even before he leaves the pitch.

Hold on a minute....when Henry alledgedly told the referee he handled the ball, the referee responded "I'm the ref" (according to Henry).

That hardly sounds like someone whose heart has sunk and who is distraught. It sounds like someone who is quite happy with the decision he made.

By the way, isn't there usually a ref's report after every game or if there is a controversial incident which includes what players say to the ref.

Look at how Drogba got a ban for what happened after the Champions League semi final last year, on the basis of video evidence and comments he made to the ref.

Again very few things add up in all of this. It doesn't add up that the ref didn't see the handball yet is able to tell the players with definity, the ball hit Henry on the hip. My feeling is the ref didn't see it, the linesman didn't see it, but the linesman told the ref it hit Henry on the hip or something similiar to that.

Both the linesman and ref were only guessing.

The biggest decision of two vital WC qualifying matches for the biggest tournament in the world, and all the ref and linesman can do is have a guess at it. I know they got most of the decisions right, but to have a guess at another one really isn't good enough and the fault there is not so much with the ref and linesman but with FIFA and the non-use of video evidence.

It's not good enough to get 90% of decisions right, if the decisions you get wrong can cost the match.

The whole thing is a farce and a travesty and Ireland has suffered because at the end of the day, those who are running the game of football are essentially clowns, who are more interested in the financial side of things than fair play.

[jbyrne]

Having watched many replays off the offside and penalty calls I would have to compliment the officials on being very fair and strong minded in their descisions and do believe that the Assistant Referee didnt see the handball.

All blame must be put on the shoulders of Henry and FIFA for their onging refusal to use technology.


really..... all blame on fifa and henry?? surely if, as you say, the officials didnt see it their positioning was woeful given they missed 2 handballs and 2 offsides? does that not attract at least some blame?

personally i think at least one (linesman on far side) did see it but didnt want to make the big call

[Drumcondra 69er]

really..... all blame on fifa and henry?? surely if, as you say, the officials didnt see it their positioning was woeful given they missed 2 handballs and 2 offsides? does that not attract at least some blame?

personally i think at least one (linesman on far side) did see it but didnt want to make the big call

I agree. Outside of that I could tell from the other end of the ground that something was wrong, basic physics meant there was no way he could have kept that ball in with his legs or his chest, even after the first handball it was still going out of play, it was impossible for him to keep it in by fair means with the pace on that ball, that and the reaction of the players should have given a clear indication something was wrong. I think the linesman bottled it, didn't want the responsibility of making the call.

[jbyrne]

I agree. Outside of that I could tell from the other end of the ground that something was wrong, basic physics meant there was no way he could have kept that ball in with his legs or his chest, even after the first handball it was still going out of play, it was impossible for him to keep it in by fair means with the pace on that ball, that and the reaction of the players should have given a clear indication something was wrong. I think the linesman bottled it, didn't want the responsibility of making the call.

i was at our end of the ground also and although i didnt see it hitting his hand i was 100% sure the ball was going out of play. then all of a sudden its in the net and i couldnt believe it. 20 texts from home later i knew how the ball had stayed in play ok!

[Junior]

i was at our end of the ground also and although i didnt see it hitting his hand i was 100% sure the ball was going out of play. then all of a sudden its in the net and i couldnt believe it. 20 texts from home later i knew how the ball had stayed in play ok!

Yep I was the same. In fact thinking about it, Im surprise the Parisian Mobile Network didnt keel over again, bearing in mind 12,000 Irish all receiving about 20 txts each at exactly the same time!!!!!!!!

If there was any obscene language filters on those texts, I doubt any of us would have received one!!

[Emmet7]

A handball like that wouldn't be allowed in a schoolyard kickaround, yet it's allowed in the qualifier for the biggest tournament in the world.

You can't call it matching rigging, but it's not far off it.

[Greenbod]

You can't call it matching rigging, but it's not far off it.

Either it's match rigging or it's not match rigging....it can't be "nearly match rigging"..what does that mean?

[gspain]

It wasn't match rigging. If they wanted to rig the game they could have bought Anelka's dive a few minutes earlier. I thought that was a penalty watching it live but obviously have seen since it wasn't.

I saw the handball live as did many others. It was very obvious. The offside for the handball goal was also an easy one for the linesman. The "penalty" may have been playing on the linesman's mind however it was a shicking call. The referee was badly positioned but probably couldn't see.

The other linesman also had a clear view if the handball as had the 4th official.

If there is one thing that comes out of this I hope FIFA rip up the Fair Play flag and never use it again. I was disgusted to see it come out at the Cup final last sunday.

[Emmet7]

It's pretty clear what I said...I said you cannot call it match rigging but it's very near to it. In other words I didn't call it rigging so don't put those words in my mouth. I said it was as close as you could get to a rigged match, ie ref turning a blind eye, but it probably wasn't a rigged match.

However if you have ever seen a rigged match involving a bribed ref, you will see him allowing obviously illigitimate goals and threathening opposition players with yellow cards if they complain.

But of course I don't believe Hansson was bribed, I do feel he was under a lot of pressure from FIFA and the home crowd and bottled it.

The seedings were rigged by FIFA to make sure big teams didn't play each other. That was an example of prematch rigging.

Next step was the pressure the ref must have felt he was under to deliver a right result.

Next step was the complete lack of advice to the ref in real time from a 4th offical or linesman that it wasn't a goal.

Next was the fact that there will be no punishment of Henry by FIFA despite blatent cheating and admitting to cheating.

Everything has been stacked heavily in France's favour.

Finally I am 100% certain, if Ireland scored that goal, (a) it would have been disallowed, (b) if it was allowed, FIFA would be demanding a replay, citing some precedent or other.

[endabob1]

Finally I am 100% certain, if Ireland scored that goal, (a) it would have been disallowed, (b) if it was allowed, FIFA would be demanding a replay, citing some precedent or other.

That is an unusually interesting point, had Ireland scored a late goal with an unsighted clear handball what would have happened...

For the rest of it;
Personally Henry lied or at the very least has been economical with the truth. He ran to Gallas as soon as the goal was scored, if he spoke to the ref it was after the game or certainly after it had been re-started.
The ref was unsighted, he can not be faulted in any way & I hope we aren't turning into Chelsea, hounding good referees into retirement.
The linesman had what looks like a clear view. He is the man with a case to answer but if he says he didn't see it & the ref didn't see it, he (Hansson) would be 100% sure that it didn't happen. Officials very rarely get decisions of that magnitude wrong.
The 4th official is not allowed intervene in on pitch decisions, someone else has posted the link to the official ruling but I'm 100% sure had the 4th official said to the ref that it was handball and the goal should be disallowed, there would have been a techincal breach of the rules (something which would be more akin to the Uzbekistan incident).

I agree that there was untoward pressure on the officials by FIFA and perhaps this was felt by the Linesman but the ref had an impeccable game up to that, he disallowed a French goal & turned down a penalty claim when he could have given either and had less controversy as a result.

[Greenbod]

It's pretty clear what I said...waffle waffle waffle waffle waffle

Clear as effin' mud..........what's close to being rigged, half rigged, five eights rigged, three quarters rigged? That's like being a little pregnant...... or maybe you mean nearly rigged, as in someone was just about to rig it then changed their mind?

[jbyrne]

The 4th official is not allowed intervene in on pitch decisions, someone else has posted the link to the official ruling but I'm 100% sure had the 4th official said to the ref that it was handball and the goal should be disallowed, there would have been a techincal breach of the rules (something which would be more akin to the Uzbekistan incident).


here we go round in circles but for what its worth wasnt the handball a technical breach of the rules also?

[irishfan86]

here we go round in circles but for what its worth wasnt the handball a technical breach of the rules also?

According to the Uzbekistan precedent, it's not about whether players break the rules or not, it's about whether or not the referee enforces the rules correctly.

[endabob1]

here we go round in circles but for what its worth wasnt the handball a technical breach of the rules also?

No, Without going into semantics, he didn't get the rules wrong he just didn't see it, had he seen it I'm sure he would have blown, he gave all the other handballs.

The previous one was replayed because the ref didn't know the rule when players infringe, he gave a free kick to Bahrain instead of allowing the Pk to be retaken as is stated in the rulebook.

[dr_peepee]

Hold on a minute....when Henry alledgedly told the referee he handled the ball, the referee responded "I'm the ref" (according to Henry).

I believe that's a mis representation of what Henry said to the media. He was actually recounting the conversation with Dunne sitting down after the game for that quote.

Something along the lines of "I admitted him (Dunne) that I handled the ball and He (Dunne) said 'You are not the Ref'"...

[Emmet7]

Clear as effin' mud..........what's close to being rigged, half rigged, five eights rigged, three quarters rigged? That's like being a little pregnant...... or maybe you mean nearly rigged, as in someone was just about to rig it then changed their mind?

I'm just going to put you on ignore now because it's clear you are looking for an argument and I don't come on here for heated arguments with people like you.

Goodbye.

[Stuttgart88]

The previous one was replayed because the ref didn't know the rule when players infringe, he gave a free kick to Bahrain instead of allowing the Pk to be retaken as is stated in the rulebook.Could we have asked for Heysel 99(?) to be replayed because Belgium scored from a throw in they took that had actually been awarded to us? (or so I'm led to believe).

Emmet, speaking of bribed refs: Heysel in 81.

[paul_oshea]

Emmet you are running out of people to debate with....soon you will just be debating with yourself, or maybe you already are ;)

[Noelys Guitar]

The two extra officials used in Europa cup games (and now being touted for use at the World Cup finals) are a waste of time if they (like the linesman at our game) don't make the calls. Ask Roy Hodgson what he thinks of the two extra officials. Fulham have been robbed in at least two games in this years Europa Cup by dubious decisions. Only technology will sort this out.

[osarusan]

Could we have asked for Heysel 99(?) to be replayed because Belgium scored from a throw in they took that had actually been awarded to us? (or so I'm led to believe).
If I remember correctly, it should have been awarded to us, but was actually awarded to Belgium. I don't think it was actually awarded to us and they just took it anyway.

[Stuttgart88]

The two extra officials used in Europa cup games (and now being touted for use at the World Cup finals) are a waste of time if they (like the linesman at our game) don't make the calls. Ask Roy Hodgson what he thinks of the two extra officials. Fulham have been robbed in at least two games in this years Europa Cup by dubious decisions. Only technology will sort this out.Wasn't there the example recently of Stephen Kelly being sent off for a Hagelaand foul right in front of the extra official at Craven Cottage - or some incident anyway that totally rubbished the effectiveness of the extra official in an incident that happened right under his nose.

The calls for video technology are misplaced in my opinion. Take the Chelsea v Barcelona controversy from last year. The hysterical UK media called for 4 separate penalties for Chelsea, none of which was awarded. In my opinion only one was a valid call and even that was credibly disputed by one or two posters here. You can't have one official (the ref) in charge of one judgment call and then defer the decision to another for what is again a judgment call. Whether the ball is over the line or not is beyond judgment - that can be determined by technology. The Henry incident could certainly have been determined without any controversy as having been handball, but how do you legislate for it? What about less obvious cases of delibertae handball or dives? Where do you draw the line? One person's blatantly obvious is another person's marginal (if even).

There is scope for video technology but only for black and white calls, not judgmental ones.

[osarusan]

Wasn't there the example recently of Stephen Kelly being sent off for a Hagelaand foul right in front of the extra official at Craven Cottage - or some incident anyway that totally rubbished the effectiveness of the extra official in an incident that happened right under his nose.

The calls for video technology are misplaced in my opinion. Take the Chelsea v Barcelona controversy from last year. The hysterical UK media called for 4 separate penalties for Chelsea, none of which was awarded. In my opinion only one was a valid call and even that was credibly disputed by one or two posters here. You can't have one official (the ref) in charge of one judgment call and then defer the decision to another for what is again a judgment call. Whether the ball is over the line or not is beyond judgment - that can be determined by technology. The Henry incident could certainly have been determined without any controversy as having been handball, but how do you legislate for it? What about less obvious cases of delibertae handball or dives? Where do you draw the line? One person's blatantly obvious is another person's marginal (if even).

There is scope for video technology but only for black and white calls, not judgmental ones.
You should post this in the video evidence thread in world football.

[Noelys Guitar]

Wasn't there the example recently of Stephen Kelly being sent off for a Hagelaand foul right in front of the extra official at Craven Cottage - or some incident anyway that totally rubbished the effectiveness of the extra official in an incident that happened right under his nose.

The calls for video technology are misplaced in my opinion. Take the Chelsea v Barcelona controversy from last year. The hysterical UK media called for 4 separate penalties for Chelsea, none of which was awarded. In my opinion only one was a valid call and even that was credibly disputed by one or two posters here. You can't have one official (the ref) in charge of one judgment call and then defer the decision to another for what is again a judgment call. Whether the ball is over the line or not is beyond judgment - that can be determined by technology. The Henry incident could certainly have been determined without any controversy as having been handball, but how do you legislate for it? What about less obvious cases of delibertae handball or dives? Where do you draw the line? One person's blatantly obvious is another person's marginal (if even).

There is scope for video technology but only for black and white calls, not judgmental ones.

Two call maximum per side per game might work. I agree there is no perfect way. But it took 90 or so seconds for the game to restart. The Henry handball would have been spotted immediately. So the game would probably have restarted in less than 30 seconds.

[Stuttgart88]

Two call maximum per side per game might work.

Take the Ledley King foul / tackle on Voronin earlier in the year where Liverpool claim they were denied a second penalty. Was it a body check or simply a fair shoulder to shoulder collision? Even the experts were divided on it. A time out call would have resolved nothing, nor would it have at the Chelsea v Barcelona game.

You could say a 5th TV official can adjudicate unilaterally in obvious cases like Henry, but what is "obvious"? One man's obvious is another's ambiguous in football.

[irishfan86]

Take the Ledley King foul / tackle on Voronin earlier in the year where Liverpool claim they were denied a second penalty. Was it a body check or simply a fair shoulder to shoulder collision? Even the experts were divided on it. A time out call would have resolved nothing, nor would it have at the Chelsea v Barcelona game.

You could say a 5th TV official can adjudicate unilaterally in obvious cases like Henry, but what is "obvious"? One man's obvious is another's ambiguous in football.

Well, you could make the main referee responsible for all decisions- in the NFL they don't defer the decision to another person as far as I know, the referee just runs over to a monitor on the sidelines (you could have a tech guy there to help view the replays).

Obviously it means there would be more of a delay factor, but who cares about a minute delay if it means the game is called accurately- even though stoppages might be more common in the initial stages, eventually players would know they weren't going to get away with things and these delays would be reduced.

[geysir]

Wasn't there the example recently of Stephen Kelly being sent off for a Hagelaand foul right in front of the extra official at Craven Cottage - or some incident anyway that totally rubbished the effectiveness of the extra official in an incident that happened right under his nose.
That is at least one bad call in how many games?
I have seen a few good calls which were said to have been advised by the extra officials.
The effectiveness of the extra officials would need to be properly researched, over all the games they have been involved in.