Platini sticks to his guns

2012-12-11 11:04

Kuala Lumpur - UEFA president Michel Platini remains ardently opposed to the use of goal-line technology, which is being employed by FIFA for the first time at the Club World Cup, and said on Tuesday the money would be better spent developing the game.

The technology was employed in Thursday's Club World Cup curtain raiser between Sanfrecce Hiroshima and Auckland City in Yokohama as soccer's governing body FIFA finally answered calls for it to join the 21st century.

While once-sceptical FIFA president Sepp Blatter changed his mind after a series of controversial decisions in high-profile matches, Platini is not for turning.

The Frenchman, in Kuala Lumpur to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Asian Football Confederation on cooperation, delivered a blunt "No" when asked by reporters if he would follow Blatter's lead.

"It is not a question of goal-line technology, it is a question of technology," he said. "Where do you begin with the technology and where do you end with the technology?

"To put goal-line technology in our competitions is 50 million Euros ($64.63 million) in five years. I prefer to give the 50 million to the grassroots and development in football than to put 50 million into technology for perhaps one or two goals per year.

"It's a lot (of money) a goal, yeah?"

Platini has long been tipped to succeed Blatter as the head of the world governing body in 2015 when the Swiss has said he would step down.

By that time the technology could be commonplace in stadiums around the world as FIFA presses on with its implementation despite the cost.

Hawk-eye, widely used in cricket and tennis, and GoalRef, which uses a microchip in the ball and low magnetic waves around the goal, are being used at venues in Toyota and Yokohama.

FIFA will analyse the results and could use one of the systems at the Confederations Cup in Brazil next year.

Platini, who is in favour of deploying extra officials instead of technology to help make decisions, will have the opportunity to discuss the issue with Blatter and the rest of the FIFA executive committee at a meeting in Tokyo on Friday.

"We supported the additional referees that is now accepted by the international board, and with the referee one metre from the line I think if he has good glasses he can see if the ball is inside the goal or outside," he said.

While Platini is resisting calls to introduce technology, the 57-year-old has been responsible for sweeping changes in soccer since becoming UEFA president in 2007, a position he was reelected to unopposed last year.

He introduced 'Financial Fair Play' rules in an effort to curb overspending by European clubs, and offered more automatic places in the lucrative Champions League group stage for domestic champions.

Platini has also said UEFA has put fans first with its radical decision to stage Euro 2020 in cities across Europe rather than one or two host countries.

Criticism of the plan was premature, he said on Tuesday.

"The idea was decided, there is nothing else. Now we will create committees to think about what could be the best idea for what we have to do in the eight years before Euro (2020)."


  • jonathan.mumo.3 - 2012-12-11 11:30

    Dis guy usualy evades from de reality when will he learn??

      johan.viljoen.925 - 2012-12-11 11:41

      This happens when the tail is swinging the dog around.

  • vernon.samuel.7 - 2012-12-11 12:03

    Does he perhaps have a point? Are we pumping too much of money for football's elite and neglecting the masses? Let's face it, this will only be used in the top European leagues and the world cup initially. Perhaps we need to accept that this is just a game after all and learn to respect referees' decisions. I suspect that if refs are penalised over bad decisions, they will take greater care and shocking decisions will be reduced.

  • zaaristotle - 2012-12-11 12:12

    It's easier to bribe an official than a microchip?

  • martin.gee.godfrey - 2012-12-11 12:34

    One only has to watch football every week to see that the referees and assistant referees (linesmen) are making so many incorrect decisions in the in-goal area. Off-side goals are allowed, legitimate on-side goals are disallowed, balls bouncing off the cross-bar and over the line are disallowed, the list is endless. These errors are costing teams valuable points every week. Surely with all the TV cameras at grounds, all they would need is a Television Match Official (TMO) who can look at the footage. It is done in rugby all the time and it wont slow the game down any more than it is slowed down by players diving and feigning injury. Clearly the cost of 50 million Euros has been sucked from somewhere as a reason for not doing it. Football is big business and clubs need to protect their interests. This season alone, virtually every English Premier Leauge team has suffered at the hands of poor decisions by match officials which has cost clubs valuable points. Platini should know better as a former player the cost of losinng critical matches can have on clubs and teams. Time to move into the 21st century.

      gerald.parker.3956 - 2012-12-11 13:22

      So what you are saying is that television cameras should be used just about all of the time. You also say that rugby uses it all of the time but did you know that with the new instrucions that TMO's have been given it can take up to 3 or 4 minutes to give a decision. An example from rugby, how many forward passes have gone unpunished. with the television cameras a football referee could, as you would like, refer to the TMO for a decision. with reference to Vernon's comments above don't you think that the best answer would be to go the American Football route. If you THINK that a foul has been committed or an offside or a goal has or has not been scored, stop play and ask the TMO to look at the replay and make a decision.This way all elements of an incorrect decision are removed, only one problem. a game of football could last well over two and half hours. I think that referees would then become redundant as the TMO sitting in a room away from the field could control the game. This will kill the game at grassroots level because no clubs would be able to afford the equipment. Overseas there are at least 10 cameras at each game and here only 5 or 6 are used. as far as the costs go that is the pricing that the compnaies that ahve the technology are asking, it's a case of pay or don't have it at all

      martin.gee.godfrey - 2012-12-11 14:46

      gerald.parker - I might make it sound more simplistic than it will be. Not every decision can be referred obviously, but they could look at transgressions in the in-goal area as a starting point. Starting first with goal line technology for balls crossing the line, then progressing as time goes on to off-side and penalty decisions only. Look I understand it is a tricky area to have consensus on, but we all know how football is being tainted by some seriously poor decisions. Rugby games certainly don't stretch to more than about 6 minutes longer (apart from rare occasions) and football always has time added on of anyting up to 10 minutes (especially at Old Trafford when United are losing.. lol) But I really beleive there is a place for at least goal line technology and don't beleive it will cost 50 million Euros to implement.

      gerald.parker.3956 - 2012-12-12 11:15

      FerretGee I have it on very good authority that the new goalline technology already has doubts cats about it. In the case with the sensors being in the ball, if the referee is not happy that the bounce of the ball is true then he can reject the ball and play the game with a normal ball. In the case where the sensors are in the goalposts a player standing next to the goalpost and on the goalline will obstruct the sensors and there will be no reading. Thereason why there is always added time after the 90 minutes is because time is always added for injuries and minimum 30 seconds per substution so if as you say 10 minutes added plus lets say 2 or 3 referrals at 3 minutes each thats an extra 16 to 20 minutes at the end of the game and you have forgotten the 2 or 3 minutes added to the first half. Understand that when this new system is in force if the referee has any doubt he WILL refer it to the TMO and then he is not responsible if the incorrect decision is made

  • pages:
  • 1