Goal line technology

[crazyg]

Eggfuckinzackly.
There is no way a linesman could've got that 'decision' right. So if he can't see it how can he give it, and what happened to giving the strikers the 'benefit of the doubt'?

More technology is not the answer though, and would ruin the game if you ask me. A possible solution that i've touted for a while is 4 linesmen, 1 in each half on both sides. Even then, it'd be almost impossible to get sundays call right but at least they'd be a hell of a lot closer.

To a point I agree with what you're saying and proposing. On Sunday, the lino was not only behind play. but on the wrong side of the pitch - at least 65 yards from the incident, to give any meaningful decision. He guessed, and guessed wrong. According to the Laws of the game, unless he was 100% certain that the ball had gone out, he cannot make a judgement, and the goal should have stood. Remember, this same lino didn't see Walker's push on Stirling in the Tottingham match from an even closer position. Suddenly, he seems to have acquired fighter pilot vision.

If a lino had been on that side, whilst he may not have been up with the play (it was a fast break), he may have been in a position to make a better decision, as it would have been a lot closer to him. Again, though, he may have come to the same decision. Only a TV replay could confirm what actually happened, which, apparently, was almost instantaneous that he got it wrong.

In the right hands, a video review would resolve most contentious issues relatively quickly, as most are questions of fact. There are not many occasions when a VAR review should be necessary, but most of these are game changing events, and, as we have seen this season to our detriment, been wrong,

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

For me this is going to be the biggest thing when video replays come in. The play must come to a definite conclusion i.e. 100% obvious foul, offside, ball out of play/ hitting the net etc etc. Imagine the problems if in the last minute of a big final the linesman flags for offside or for ball out so the defence stops and the ball ends up in the net. On replay it's shown to be onside or in play. The attackers say "goal" the defenders say "we stopped because of the flag". Imagine the farce of having to come back at a later date to play a final again.
People say players will have to learn to ignore the flag and play on. I have my doubts about this beacuse we all seen a lot of players/teams can't even do this at the moment for an non-head injury, for like 30 seconds half stop playing then eventually a player sees half have stopped and thinks "fuck it" and kicks it out. Despite the fact they have been told to play on for a non-head injury unless the ref stops the game.

The solution is that in the future Linesmen don't use their flags to signal for ALL offsides, instead they have a button which they press which alerts the ref that a "possible" offside has occurred, this alerts the Video Van people who then review the action and make a decision, meanwhile the players are oblivious to what's going on so they play on, if it was offside the ref blows the whistle and play is stopped, if not offside, nobody knew it was even a possibility. Not going to be a straightforward transition from the old system to this, but it's do-able.

 

[Bigga]

Can I offer this from about 5 years ago...?

http://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/threads/blatter-his-eyes-hath-seen-the-light.260441/

Read if you can be bothered, but it addresses 90% - 95% of all issues.

Most kinks are worked out as we go along and, most importantly, refs can't cheat.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

Can I offer this from about 5 years ago...?

http://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/threads/blatter-his-eyes-hath-seen-the-light.260441/

Read if you can be bothered, but it addresses 90% - 95% of all issues.

Most kinks are worked out as we go along and, most importantly, refs can't cheat.

Just read that thread from start to finish mate, 90-95% of the issues may be being discussed but they've hardly been addressed, but that's just semantics.

Challenges are not the way forward IMO as that simply adds another variable to a situation which is already going to be tricky to implement as it stands.
It needs to have as few rule changes to the game as possible, as few "new dimensions" added as possible.
It also needs to be a system that works "automatically" much like goal-line technology currently does.
No rule changes.
No unnecessary stoppages.
Each new technology need to be introduced as a stand alone innovation, bit by bit....

(1st - goal-line technology
2nd - Video ref for offside decisions
3rd - Video technology for penalties ...etc) (just an example)

....let it bed in, let it be accepted, allow people to be confident that it works, when it does, introduce more.

It isn't going to be "built in a day" but it's the only way that the masses will accept it.

 

[Bigga]

Just read that thread from start to finish mate, 90-95% of the issues may be being discussed but they've hardly been addressed, but that's just semantics.

Challenges are not the way forward IMO as that simply adds another variable to a situation which is already going to be tricky to implement as it stands.
It needs to have as few rule changes to the game as possible, as few "new dimensions" added as possible.
It also needs to be a system that works "automatically" much like goal-line technology currently does.
No rule changes.
No unnecessary stoppages.
Each new technology need to be introduced as a stand alone innovation, bit by bit....

(1st - goal-line technology
2nd - Video ref for offside decisions
3rd - Video technology for penalties ...etc) (just an example)

....let it bed in, let it be accepted, allow people to be confident that it works, when it does, introduce more.

It isn't going to be "built in a day" but it's the only way that the masses will accept it.

I agree it won't be 'built in a day' and my view is more towards a 'finished product', but my intention was to keep the game flowing as much as possible, whilst addressing injustices as much as possible.

Your version actually gives CBlue's view credence as if you implement your vision then the game stops every few minutes unless checked.

If you have checks, what part of the game's inconsistencies gets left out...?

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

I agree it won't be 'built in a day' and my view is more towards a 'finished product', but my intention was to keep the game flowing as much as possible, whilst addressing injustices as much as possible.

Your version actually gives CBlue's view credence as if you implement your vision then the game stops every few minutes unless checked.

If you have checks, what part of the game's inconsistencies gets left out...?

I don't think it will stop every few minutes though. The implementation of goal-line technology hasn't made the game stop any more so than it did previously (does it?) and that's my intention for the rest of it. Who challenges goal-line technology? Nobody. We all accept it as a piece of technology that works. If a tiny use of Video technology were introduced and proved to work surely it'd be accepted in the same manner (?) Or am I being naive?

My suggestions are to keep as much of the present system in place as is possible; the referee referees the match, the linesmen run the lines, those three continue to do the the majority of the jobs they are currently doing; only with the new system the referee can either ASK for a little help with a single specific area of the game which already brings a stoppage to the game (ie- initially for offside decisions which lead to a goal OR initially for contentious goals OR initially for contentious incidents of foul play) or he can be TOLD he needs a little help ie he made the wrong decision (initially for offside decisions which lead to a goal OR.....etc(AS ABOVE))

No new stoppages? The game flows like it already does and the ref controls the majority of the decisions as he currently does; only now he now has the ability to ASK for help if he's unsure, and he now has the bonus of being TOLD if he's dropped a big hairy one. Bit by bit it becomes accepted and over time the remit of the VideoVan will encompass other areas of the game.

The issue I raised before about the linesmen not flagging for offside and using an "alert system" to raise attention was in response to the one grey area in all of this which is where the linesman flags (incorrectly) for offside and the game stops but after review it was proved to be onside.

So in answer to your question, initially LOADS of inconsistencies get left out, but over time......

 

[Bigga]

Mmm...

I really want to agree with your version, but there are too many things that the ref doesn't control. He, actually, becomes obsolete in many ways here. I feel that refs make monumental fook ups almost every game. What happens if they are having a particularly bad game? Does that mean the VR person is constantly pulling him up for stuff? That would lead to a lack faith in their own judgement and, if that's going to be the play, at what point does the fook up get pulled up and do you stop a passage of play to address it?

I really hate sounding like CBlue, but he would have a stronger argument here!!

At least, with the other offering, the ref has some sort of control mechanism with the teams, IMO.

Have to think about my response better as right now I have kids doing my head in!

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

It's certainly causes a lot of head scratching doesn't it. I don't envy those who really do have to make these decisions because whenever you think you've cracked it somebody comes along and points out an obvious fly in the ointment, as you have above.

As for CBlue's stance, I think at some point we've all got to just have a little faith that it won't be twisted towards corrupt decision making, but after this season, how can we do that?

Anyway, it's about time for me to start shouting "COME ON BOYS!" with an ever increasing level of aggression in my voice, so I'm off.