After yesterdays glaring blunders by the referees, linesmen and 4th referees, first when England were denied a goal which every TV viewer around the world could see had crossed the goal-line and second when Argentina were awarded a goal when every TV viewer could see that Tevez was off-side, it is now going to be difficult for FIFA to resist bringing in the use of technology to assist referees’ decisions. It occurred to me that even though the final results seemed justified by the rest of the play, we cannot know what the impact of the correct decisions would have been. If England had been awarded their goal they would have started the second half level and in a different frame of mind. If Argentina’s goal had been disallowed and Mexico had scored first the players’ attitudes and the play could have changed in a fundamental way.
FIFA’s attitude to the use of technology borders on faith in a bygone age which no longer exists.
Like the proverbial ostriches – they do not wish to know what they do not know.
Thinking about what might have been, I was reminded of Donald Rumsfeld’s press conference at NATO HQ, Brussels on June 6th, 2002., when as U.S. Secretary of Defence he said:
“The message is that there are no “knowns.” There are thing we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know. So when we do the best we can and we pull all this information together, and we then say well that’s basically what we see as the situation, that is really only the known knowns and the known unknowns. And each year, we discover a few more of those unknown unknowns”.
There is actually a compelling music to the words but this quotation is often mocked especially by opponents of the US invasion of Iraq. I have quoted it disparagingly myself in discussions and presentations about the dangers of forecasting.
But of course what he said is rather profound. (more…)




On comments to blogs and sticks and stones…
June 27, 2010As a relatively recent blogger I find the nature of comments to posts is intriguing. So far less than 2% of the views have resulted in comments.
I categorise comments to blogs tentatively as:
Types 5 and 6 are not very pleasant to read but perhaps they are better than no comment at all in that they represent people sufficiently engaged to comment. I think they cannot be fulfilling their own purposes since every offensive remark only seems to discount any content that might be present. Comments of Type 2 and 8 are the most irritating. Types 7 and 3 are the most appreciated.
Sticks and stones may break my bones but ………
Share this:
Tags:blog comments, blogs, Imponderables
Posted in Blogs, Philosophy | Comments Off on On comments to blogs and sticks and stones…