I read an article about UEFA president Platini on BBC News this week. The article was based on one of the problems with football - goals that are not seen, and therefore not counted, by the referee.
In the last World Cup, England was denied what seemed a clear goal to those of us who watched live and then was proven a clean goal by all the camera replays. Since then, some football talk has been centred around the topic of adding technology to the game so no goal would be missed. There have been a number of "hats tossed into the ring" offering ways to solve the problem. Some believe the ball should contain a chip that would make a signal "go off" when it crossed the goal line. Some think there should be a device like the ones used in tennis or cricket to visually track the ball. Both of these technologies have been tested in the past and neither "passed muster". The rulemaking division of FIFA is inviting ideas about technology that would be useful to ensure no goals would be missed.
However, I believe UEFA president Platini is "on the right track". He believes all we need is "an extra pair of eyes" at the goal line. That is how they solved the problem in hockey. This season UEFA Champions League games are being played with an extra official at the goal line. I think this is the best way to keep the integrity of the game and ensure that the referee is being supported in his decisions. Being the referee and having all your decisions challenged by players, managers, fans and 20+ cameras is an impossible situation. Support is needed.
I hope they choose to continue with the extra official at the goal line and not add technology. Adding technology would not only change the game by undermining the referee, but it would take football away from all the countries that don't have the money to come "up to code" if this type of technology becomes standard.
1) "hats tossed into the ring" OR to "toss your hat into the ring" - When you "toss your hat into the ring", you are joining in a competition. Applying for a new job is the same as tossing your hat into the ring. The job is essentially a competition of the most qualified people. Sending your resume is joining the competition. If there is a bonus to be won at work, you can toss your hat into the ring by asking to be considered for the bonus. If working the hardest will win the bonus, then you have to work harder than usual to be considered as a contender. Just offering an opinion or a suggestion during a meeting can be the same as tossing your hat into the ring because it brings attention to you. If your opinion is the best, then you can "win" the discussion. Therefore, offering an opinion is the same as joining a competition or tossing your hat into the ring.
2) to "go off" - Surprisingly, this phrasal verb has more than one meaning. To "go off", as used in the above passage, is the same as to "set off" something. Any item, like an alarm, needs something to occur so the alarm will sound. Whatever the "thing" needed to make the alarm sound is what makes the alarm "go off". In the case of a fire alarm, smoke would make it "go off".
Another definition of to "go off" is to get very angry. Usually this includes yelling and violent behaviour. If your boss has a very bad temper, this means that they can get very angry at small things. If you know that leaving coffee cups on the reception desk makes your boss very angry, you would say that leaving coffee cups on the desk makes your boss "go off" (or... it "sets off" your boss).
3) to "pass muster" - When something "passes muster", it is good. Something that "passes muster" also "passes inspection". If you are searching for a new car because you current car doesn't have any cup holders, then a new car with 4 cup holders would "pass muster". Anything, including a person, that requires a positive review by an authority, needs to "pass muster". If you have hired a new assistant for your manager, then once your manager agrees that the new assistant shows all the skills required, then the new assistant as well as your ability to hire assistants would both "pass muster".
4) to be "on the right track" - This is used in all types of situations. To be "on the right track" means that your ideas agree with mine. Being "on the right track" is completely a matter of opinion. If the website designer for your company decides that the home page should contain photos of management AND you agree with this opinion, then you would say the designer "is on the right track". However, if you do not agree with the opinion of the designer, then you would say they are "not on the right track".
5) an "extra pair of eyes" - This is a literal expression. In the case of the extra official at the goal line, we are talking about having an extra person, with their eyes, watching the ball. We use this expression often at the office. If your marketing manager comes to you to ask for "an extra set of eyes" to check the new ad before it goes to print, then they want you to look at or edit the ad. We often discuss needing "an extra pair of eyes" to check our projects at work. Sometimes the expression is less literal. It can mean that we don't trust our ability (and the computer's) to edit our own work or just that we like having someone else edit and therefore approve of our work.
6) to be "up to code" - For something to be "up to code" means that it follows or agrees with the rules that apply. A car seat for your child must be "up to code" before it can be sold in the stores. Because rules change, they suggest not to buy used/old car seats as they may not be "up to code" or agreeing with current regulations. Anything that does not agree with current regulations is simply "not up to code".
You can use this expression in a less literal way. At the office, an older computer program may not be "up to code" (literal) for security. A bad or sexist joke told at the office can be "not up to code" (literal or figurative depending upon regulations at the workplace). However, the behaviour of a worker at the office can also be "not up to code". Perhaps they say offensive things or just act in a way that makes the other workers feel uncomfortable. This person's behaviour must be addressed by the manager and if the person changes so that the other workers become happy with their behaviour then they would be considered to have brought "up to code".
No comments:
Post a Comment