Goal decision system: how things could have been different.

Matej Vydra scored late on against Fulham on Saturday to earn a point for West Brom in what many feel condemned Fulham to relegation. The goal was awarded following use of the goal decision system, one of the closest decisions made since the technology's incision this season.

Goal Decision System confirms crucial late equaliser
for West Brom (veooz.com)

It is a goal that were the wrong decision made, the outcome of the relegation zone could be completely different. Not only do they immediately effect the table they consequently effect; player confidence, form, managerial security, potential for different tactics to be used in other games in the season. What is effected by these decisions are exponential.

Lampard versus Germany (bbc.co.uk)

It was Frank Lampard's disallowed goal against Germany in South Africa 2010 World Cup Last 16 match that sparked Sepp Blatter's technology lagged brain in to finally exploring the simple necessity of goal line technology. Lampard's goal would have levelled the match and England would have gone on to win their second World Cup - only a goal of such high profile catalysed  the development of goal line technology.

It was 5 years previous that Lampard was on the wrong end of another goal line decision. Luis Garcia's "ghost goal" knocked Chelsea out of Champions League at the Semi Final stage in 2005. Following this incident and Sky's animation (right) proving the goal not to have crossed the line the goal line technology debate has been at the forefront of football fans' discussion. 

Apart from these two high profile incidents the Premier League has witnessed many a potentially season changing goal/save. So how might Premier League seasons have turned out differently had Goal Line technology been implemented earlier? Here are a few other incidents that goal line would have easily cleared up.

Clint Hill vs Bolton (March 2012):

Clint Hill's disallowed goal v Bolton (dailymail.co.uk)

On 10th March 2012, QPR and Bolton were the televised kick off in a game being dubbed as must win for both, Hill looked to have scored from a header with the score at 0-0 but the goal wasn't given. Replays showed the ball had clearly crossed the line. Bolton went on to win 2-1 and leapfrog QPR in to 17th place leaving Rangers in the relegation places. As it turned out QPR stayed up and Bolton were relegated that season.

Pedro Mendes v Man United (January 2005):

This may be the most blatant goal never to be given. The game finished 0-0 just keeping United's title challenge possible. The incident gave weight to the Garcia ghost goal in the argument for technology to be introduced in football. It probably didn't have a big effect on the final standings that season with United well off the pace of Chelsea and Spurs finishing in a lacklustre top half position.

Frank Lampard v Spurs (April 2011):

Similar to how Andy Gray describes Liverpool's fortuitous goal in the Champions League, it could be said 'what goes around comes around' for Lampard. His 40-yard strike didn't cross the line but was given by the referee. It was given almost under the same terms as umpires in Cricket would give a batsman out LBW if he had played a poor shot, Gomes' blunder did not help his or Spurs' cause here. The game ended 2-1 to Chelsea, keeping alive their title hopes and all but ending a potential second successive season in the Champions League for Spurs. Chelsea didn't have enough to win the league and Spurs ended six points adrift of 4th place.

Hypothetical outcomes aside, football fans can now be thankful for the success of goal line technology but some will feel it should have arrived a lot sooner and they will still always wonder: what if? 

Wayne Rooney: a scapegoat for being worth every penny?

It's a sad state of affairs when 'fans' choose to mock a man's 50 pence a second, £300k a week salary by throwing money at him. Unfortunately Crystal Palace 'fans' decided this was acceptable practice on Saturday evening, not that Rooney seemed too perturbed by the incident. Considering the irony it is no surprise he carried on with his job in a professional manner delivering the subsequent corner and later producing a wonder strike to seal a two-nil victory. It was a reminder of Rooney's worth and wealth of talent that Manchester United have been so keen to secure at any cost.

Rooney picks up coin thrown by Crystal Palace fans
(espn.co.ukfootball/sport/story/285789.html)

FA investigating coin incident (express.co.uk/sport/football)

Many fans have criticised the England striker's five-year contract, which is reportedly worth a staggering £78 million, insisting no footballer is worth that much money. A view that is jealous fueled and naively expressed, as if anyone would turn down such a significant pay-rise in their job despite considering today's economic climate. Rooney is paid that much because he is worth that much, even with Financial Fair Play's implications, clubs are willing to increase their top players' wages. The cost for United to sign a player of Rooney's calibre and then pay his 5 year contract, would far exceed £100 million let alone £78 million.

There has often been criticism for footballers' wages and their gulf between the rest of the British public arguing that the Armed forces, teachers, emergency services (the list goes on) should be earning more in comparison to someone who is just good at kicking a football. An extremely valid argument but it is the society we live in that dictates footballers' outrageous salaries. TV revenue is huge in the Premier League, ever since Rupert Murdoch revolutionised televised sport in 1992, sportsmen and women's wages have grown and an almost exponential rate. The entertainment value of Premier League, Champions League and Europa League football is at an extraordinary level, hence the contention for rights to air. TV broadcasting companies pay extortionate amounts of money to secure the rights to broadcast these events; BT sport recently forked out £900 million for the rights to broadcast Champions League and Europa League football for the next three years. 

These figures are the catalyst for the players' wages and are by no means to blame. Morality aside, the entertainment value of teachers, firemen and Royal Marines is not at the level of footballers. Manchester United play Olympiakos tonight, live on ITV Sport, with millions of viewers expected to tune in and Rooney expected to entertain those views. Using the basic economic rule of supply and demand; Wayne Rooney is worth every penny

Sam Allardyce: proof "new manager syndrome" is not the only option for club owners

West Ham moved to 10th in the Premier League, seven points clear of the drop after their fourth straight victory in the league. Sam Allardyce finds himself in a position of stark contrast to that of two months ago. Some people are calling for him to win a Manager of the Month award for February for which he has instantly and quite comically dismissed. A lot of credit must go to the West Ham hierarchy, David Gold and David Sullivan, who stuck by Allardyce when it mattered. They insisted he was the right man to keep the Hammers' up and their faith has been well and truly repaid; a prime example of why club owners are naive to expect a 'new manager syndrome' will always get instant results and revitalise a season.

That is not to say there is some substance to the 'new manager syndrome' invigorating the squad and improving the team in the short term, but in the long term no club, with the exception of Crystal Palace and possibly Sunderland, which has sacked a manager in the Premier League this season are in a indisputable better position. Additionally it is only Palace who have appointed a manager, proven in the Premier League. Tottenham are a slight red herring as their aims do not involve survival and are completely different to the other sides, as are Sunderland who are definitely better off with Gus Poyet at the helm, but their rash sacking of Steve Bruce, currently flourishing at Hull, was the catalyst to their early season capitulation under Di Canio. Although Sunderland are still in danger of going down, and Spurs are still struggling to capitalise on Manchester United's shortcomings this season and look set to miss out on Champions League again. Palace, after their appointment of Tony Pulis, have been the only clear beneficiaries of the manager merry-go-round.

Graphic: How teams who have sacked managers have fared?

West Brom, Swansea, Fulham and Cardiff all hoped their managerial changes would be as successful as Crystal Palace's or even Sunderland's but this has not been the case. Fulham have had a nightmare season, on and off the pitch with both aspects effecting one another to highly detrimental levels; Rene Meulensteen who replaced Martin Jol has since been replaced himself just 14 weeks later by Felix Magath - it remains to be seen if he can keep Fulham up. Ole Gunnar Solskjaer has replaced Malky Mackay and in two months in charge Cardiff's relegation prospects have increased dramatically. Both Pepe Mel of West Brom and Gary Monk of Swansea have taken over from managers who were sacked unexpectedly with their team in not an awful lot of immediate danger and very much expected to survive the drop but are currently just one and three points above the drop respectively and will be eagerly looking over their shoulders at the teams below them.

Despite Crystal Palace, Sunderland and Tottenham Hotspur's positional improvements of three, two and two places respectively it is West Ham who, after deciding to keep Sam Allardyce, will feel most content with their managerial decisions boasting a great improvement in results jumping from 19th to 10th since the board publicly backed him on January 6th. Ironically a public backing is often known as a dreaded 'vote of confidence' which ultimately result in a managers sacking just days later. It seems, with safety in sight West Ham are an example for many other struggling clubs to follow.

Why the Champions League group stages are so important.

The Champions League returns tonight with the Last 16 round kicking off with Bayer Leverkusen hosting PSG and Barcelona travelling to the Etihad to face Manchester City. In Wednesday's fixtures Atletico Madrid play AC Milan and Arsenal meet Bayern Munich at the same stage they were defeated by the Germans last season.

It is often said this is where the competition really begins to flourish after the minnows and Europa League candidates have exited the competition in the Group phase. But there is a more important result following the group stage, that being the positioning of the group's qualifiers.

Arsenal will host Bayern again knowing their failure to top their group may cost them further progression in a competition they have never won. Manchester City will go in to their tie with Barcelona also rueing a missed opportunity to pip Bayern to top spot in their group. 

Facing these high calibre clubs so early on in the knockout phase and with their guaranteed advantage of playing away from home first for winning their group can not only knock them out of the Champions League but additionally detrimental to their entire season. Arsenal fans will be the first to tell you that.

Mourinho and Pellegrini: a financial war of words.

Jose Mourinho continued to express a reserved ambition for Chelsea's title credentials in Monday's press conference. Similarly, he continued his war of words with Manchester City manager Manuel Pellegrini suggesting the Chillean needed to revise his sums after suggesting Mourinho's "little horse" is a rich one. 
                                                                                                     Daniel Geey outlines Financia Fair Play regulations
Mourinho said Pellegrini, a highly educated engineer, didn't "need a calculator to do... £55m minus £32m is £23m. So Chelsea in this transfer window is, speaking roughly 23 million pounds less... this is to work with financial fair play." Financial fair play is an area Manchester City have been heavily criticised for with suggestions they will fail to meet it's demands in the coming years. City seem to be neglecting their FFP responsibilities but it remains to be seen how serious a punishment UEFA will enforce for failing to meet the requirements. Many experts have doubted whether UEFA will exclude clubs from it's senior competition for failing to adhere to financial fair play, cynically citing the loss of a major contender like City would result in less TV revenue for UEFA.

The figures show Manchester City have spent more in recent years, but only by about £75m, not too much in football relative terms. It is probably only equivalent to three or four more high profile players but these players are supposed to be the difference when it comes to the title race and hence why Mourinho has used metaphors such as "jaguar" and "little horse" when contrasting Manchester City and Chelsea. Mourinho pointed out City "have a team for now" whereas Chelsea, as Mourinho has reiterated the past few weeks, whilst playing down his side's title chances, want to "build a team for the next ten years." When Chelsea won 1-0 at the Etihad last week Chelsea fielded a team with an average age of 24.8 years, whereas City fielded a side with an average age of 27.6 years, 2.8 years more experienced, adding weight to Mourinho's team for the future but additionally adding emphasis to the importance of City's title challenge this season. 

With Financial Fair Play looming it seems imperative Manchester City win the league this season, mostly for the importance of preventing a large spending spree again in the summer. And a spree on experienced players, rather than the youth Chelsea have already invested and are already benefiting from. If Chelsea become champions for the first time in four years it would be a huge showing of intent for the coming years. Mourinho is fully aware of this and this is exactly why he has been keen to single out Manchester City as favourites, not that he doesn't believe they are favourites but in true Mourinho fashion; mindgames.