Monday, 21 May 2012

Arsenal Board/World Cup Video Nasties

crest_outside_emirates

Firstly let me start by responding to “Not-over-the-hill’s” post to my Friday blog as I promised. 

There are indeed seven directors of Arsenal Holdings plc – Chairman Peter Hill-Wood, chief executive Ivan Gazidis, Danny Fiszman, Sir “Chips” Keswick, Lord Harris of Peckham, Stan Kroenke and Ken Friar. 

Of those only two are big shareholders – Stan Kroenke (29.9%) and Danny Fiszman (16%). Ivan Gazidis holds no shares, the rest have very small holdings (all much less than one percent). 

Ken Friar retired as an executive director some years ago, being brought back in as an executive to help direct the stadium project, then to cover for David Dein when he got the boot, then to cover when Keith Edelman got his marching orders. He has remained on the board during that time and is still a director. 

You’re right that Arsčne Wenger has never had a seat on the board although he attends most of its meetings. Legally the answer to your question is that the board of directors has the responsibility to direct and prepare the company’s accounts. These are independently audited every year and the results are presented to all shareholders at the Arsenal Holdings plc annual general meeting each October. Unaudited half yearly accounts are also sent to shareholders each February. 

On to the World Cup. As a Welshman of course I can’t resist a little snigger. That aside and in all seriousness I thought the England performance was woeful yesterday, as it was in the three group games (with the partial exception of Slovenia). To drill down into England’s continued woeful performance on the international stage would take a month of blogs on that subject alone. Suffice to say the root causes are far more profound than the manager or his team selection. 

There are siren calls to get rid of Capello (as if the FA can afford to pay him off. They can’t) and employ an English manager. The last time the FA did that it produced the “Wally Under The Brolly”. The problems of the English game are far, far more profound and will take many, many years to address. The fail to do so will condemn England to be the new Scotland. North of the border they used to regularly produce good and in a few cases great footballers. They no longer do. 

Contrast England’s performance to that of Uruguay, a country of 3.6 million (less than half that of Greater London). Most people in Uruguay earn £300-600 a month (£3.6-7.2k a year). The figure here is £2,100 a month or just over £25k a year. The malaise in this country’s football is deep and abiding. The commercial success of the Premier League masks these failings. We have the Premier League tail wagging the FA dog. 

Still from a narrow Arsenal perspective we now only have two players left at the World Cup, Robin van Persie whose Netherlands side faces Slovakia today in the knock-out round and Cesc Fàbregas who will probably be warming the bench again for Spain against Portugal tomorrow. Van Persie may well start on the bench too this afternoon. 

FIFA continues to put its collective hands over its ears and hum as loudly as possible despite the goal that was and the goal that wasn’t yesterday. Let’s not be too precious about foreign officials. We’ve seen similar howlers in the Premier League. England can feel very hard done by the officials. Lampard’s shot clearly came down over the line. Mexico can also feel hard done by as Carlos Tevez was clearly in an offside position for his “goal”. 

The argument for the use of video technology seems to me to be inarguable in big tournaments and leagues where all the games are covered by cameras. I simply can’t see the argument about the game being the same at all levels. We already have match officials in radio communication in big leagues and tournaments. We’ve seen the experiment with two additional goal line assistant referees in the Europa League.

I’ve always been a sceptic about the use of video replays in football. Play in football is more continuous than other team sports which use video replays such as cricket, baseball, rugby league, rugby union, American/Canadian football, ice hockey and so on. That said the time has more than come to experiment. I like the idea of a manager being able to challenge a VERY limited number of decisions with a severe penalty if they challenge and get it wrong. Perhaps a corner against them. Perhaps a total of two-three challenges per half. Maybe even better would be a video referee in on the radio link telling and official if a replay shows they’ve got a big decision wrong would be better. I don’t know. I do know it’s got to come. And soon. 

Keep the faith! 

vic@arsenalinsider.com

{jcomments on}

GD Star Rating
loading...
  • Not-over-the-hill

    Thank you Vic! My guess is the American connection! AST has written notes with their quizing of the pair, Gazidis (American C.V.) and Fox. With Gazadis, the written up notes again seemed to lack any real depth for a 10% shareholding. For example, Arsenal Football Club Plc is one of the “indirectly held” companies. For a shareholder this is important, BUT all you fans out there can ignore TCGA 1992, as it is none of your business.
    A fourth official is employed, why can he not use a laptop (military quality) for immediate playback of the game in question, with advice by radio to the referee or one of the linesmen?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Berg10

    Vic

    Also being a Welshman I’m tempted to have a snigger at that excuse of a performance yesterday even if only to have a dig at Terry, Cole, Lampy and the spuddies, however, considering our nation’s lack of success at getting to the World Cup for so long I’ll refrain from it, nah WTF. :D

    On the useage of video the old excuse of it delaying play or stopping the flow is now obsolete given that replays in slo-mo are almost instant and with every contencious issue such as Lampys ‘goal’ and Tevez’s obvious offside there follows a situation generated reaction that ultimately delays the game anyway so at least by using the technology some decisions are corrected.

    I agree that this should be limited to major decisions to begin with then possibly less serious decisions fazed in as technology and officials’ useage improve.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • harper

    Apart from the inherent injustice to teams in FIFA’s stance on technology is the injustice done to referees.

    No one is more frustrated at this farce than the referees themselves, a lot of people don’t understand this. The people who want goalline technology and some kind of video replay adopted the MOST are the referees. Roberto Rosetti is a very good referee but he took a hit for FIFA yesterday. He knew the call was wrong but he had to follow the rules so he couldn’t do the right thing and make the right call.

    Arsene Wenger (who’s demanded that technology be adopted for years) was at the Ireland-France playoff. He was doing commentary for France TV. He had a close up view of the game. He said that he watched as the referee realized that something was wrong after Gallas’ goal was given, that he hadn’t seen what Henry had done but from everyone’s reaction he realized there was something wrong, that the goal should not have been allowed. Wenger said you could see the referee struggling, needing help, wanting to do the right thing, but not being able to according to the rules. So the ref had to bear the burden of that. Wenger said the referees need help and that technology can help them. That FIFA puts on the officials an unfair burden.

    These referees get villified in the press and by fans because FIFA refuses to give the tools to the officials to do their job better.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Vic Crescit

    @ Not over the hill – you’re welcome mate.

    @ DB10 – agree mate. I was 2 the last time we qualified in 1958.

    @ harper/DB10 – agree completely on video replays.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • Not-over-the-hill

    There seems to be a Balotelli rumour has resurfaced, via an Arsenal blog (?), to the Italian Press and then to a Russian blog.
    The Russian blog has the clincher. Balotelli waving a pistol in a city public centre, police called and the player arrested on Sunday. With Arsene having to dispose of previous recidivists, the bookies must think Arsene needs another “head case”.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • aj

    When the England squad was announced, The Mirror ran a headline:-

    Spurs 4
    Arsenal 0

    Bwahahaha!

    I see that as a 4-0 victory to Arsenal!

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • John in Norfolk

    Just a small point on video replays, Lampard’s shot hit the crossbar, bounced down over the line, bounced up hit the crossbar, the keeper caught the ball and played it down field and the game continued. At which point should the game have been stopped so that we could all watch the the replay?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • db10

    This is why the challenge system is good. The England coach can challenge the decision after this and play could be stopped and the decision reviewed at this point and the game could continue at the appropriate restart. If the challenge is incorrect then perhaps a free kick or corner or something could be given to the other team.

    But with goal line technology there is no need for replays. Video replays is a separate debate. Experiments have been successful with a chip in the ball, sensors in the goalposts and similar to ice hockey, when the ball crosses the line a signal will be given (in ice hockey a buzzer). It can be done instanly.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • goonamerica

    when we all turn off the sets cause FIFA f up the game then they will change. until that time they count their money and think nothing of the viewers.

    did anyone notice neither the game nor the second half starting until a geeza in a suit standing at the halfway line dropped his hand and told the referee he could blow his whistle and begin the halves? Technology and television controlled the actual start of the game. that is completely not in compliance with the rules of football which state the referee is the sole arbiter of when the game begins. do not begin to tell me technology cannot be used. the question really is where’s the money? and since they can’t make anything out of it they don’t care about it.

    Personally I hate international football. I hate it cause FIFA runs it. they are idiots. I hate it cause it is based upon whim and luck. you want to tell me the second half would not have been played differently if the score was tied 2-2 at the beginning of the second half?

    It might be the best situation that England not win their bid for the world cup in 2018. Can England withstand FIFA idiots running the footballing country for the 4 years leading up to the world cup?

    would someone please drop a house on blatter?

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • walter

    You’re so right Harper. I am a ref myself and I know most top refs would welcome the help from technology because like you say it the refs are always the victims when they don’t see a thing correct. The refs get the blame and the big boys in the stand go and eat their big meals and drink champagne.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • wags

    Whats done is done. What about having a post solely about Arsenal transfers, and solely for us fans, who we would like to see (realistically) come to the club, in what position and why, i think it would be intersting to hear what you all think it is we need to go that bit further.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • TJ14

    Why do we need someone to talk about transfers? You seem to be in the know. You have told us that it is a dead cert Joe Cole is going to Man Utd?? Or have you now changed your mind. Surely this proves that idle speculation is pointless.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • TJ14

    You stop the game straight away. The officials were ‘unsure’ if it crossed the line. Therefore, they should stop the game, then check it out. If it was not over the line, then carry on and the game continues from the keeper. May cause issues initially, but it surely is better to get the decision right.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • TJ14

    db10, the issue with the chip in the ball is the cost. Was listening to a debate on this the other night and it can cost up to 300-500k per game to have the equipment installed for the chip in ball solution.

    Apparently, Hawkeye have pitched to provide the solution. They have offered to do for free as long as they get the sponsorship revenues.

    The issue with Hawkeye that the FIFA people are wary of is whether it will work in all weather. Cricket and Tennis are fairweather games so it is more straightforward.

    I have a feeling something will be done soon.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • wags

    not changed my mind as such, but the point remains he WONT be at arsenal, so if not i couldnt give a toss where he goes. If ya want to look back over the years iv not been wrong about a lot of things, for all you know i cud work at the club in some manner, maybe i have a couple of my own sources. Maybe i just know what i see.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...
  • harper

    JiN, video replay would not enter into that incident – the issue for that incident is GOALLINE TECHNOLOGY. The two get muddled by a lot of people. The Lampard goal would very easily be resolved if FIFA had agreed to adopt goalline technology.

    Video replay for offsides, fouls, penalties – that’s something else. There’s legtitimate debate and disagreement about that. But goalline technology is a no-brainer, it’s black and white. The technology clearly tells you if it was a goal or not.

    GD Star Rating
    loading...