Goalline and Other Technology

[gio's side step]

What happens if a player puts it over from underneath the crossbar? Does that mean they can appeal to have another go?

Human error is part of the game whether you're a player or an official.

thats a crazy comparison. if tevez goes through in the last minute at wembley and slams it in off the bar and sends us all mad only for the ref not to give it we would all be devastated. human error in all sports is fine when it comes down to the players but it would make it a much fairer playing field if the ref could use the technology thats available to him.

Devastation is all part of being a football fan. We invest emotions into things which are human. Not technological. Equally, we experience joy at things which aren't always 'truthful'. The problem is, football has accelerated to a point, where there is so much at stake, because of the financial implications. For example, if technology would aid a team avoiding relegation, because going down would virtually send them bust, or a team qualifying for CL football, then the debate intensifies. This is the problem for referee's today. Too much coverage. Too many replays. Too much dehumanising.

 

[Steviesleftpeg]

Acutally I didn't do my reply justice.

I strongly believe in human error, the law of karma etc. If it happens to us, it'll happen to them eventually.

But goal line technology is imminent. So i guess we'll have the embrace it any way. All I'm concerned about is that it is fast, and reliable. Something like Hawk-Eye or a micro-chip would be fine (as long as it takes no longer than it would do for the ref to consult his linesman).

But on another note to improve the standard of referring decisions etc, I think it is time we allowed foreign refs into the premiership. Theres so many foreign players in the prem its mad. You see people like Phil Dowd talking to the likes of Silva and Tevez, but they don't speak english!!

I don't think it would destroy the art of english referring as conversely English refs could go abroad and do what they do. If anything that would be useful, as I think Italian, Spanish and Germany refs are more in tune with the European game (which i quickly stamping its mark on the prem), and this would give the same opperuntity for other english refs who don't get to do European games (mike jones, twatenburg etc).

Overall it would create a better standard of refereeing in Europe, not just England. Granted certain leagues could afford better refs than others, but they are all Fifa approved at the end of the day, and Bigger money would mean better ref training, and more people keen to be involved.

 

[Lescott]

Against - it would ruin hours of post match arguments in the pub.

 

[davymcfc]

thats a crazy comparison. if tevez goes through in the last minute at wembley and slams it in off the bar and sends us all mad only for the ref not to give it we would all be devastated. human error in all sports is fine when it comes down to the players but it would make it a much fairer playing field if the ref could use the technology thats available to him.

Devastation is all part of being a football fan. We invest emotions into things which are human. Not technological. Equally, we experience joy at things which aren't always 'truthful'. The problem is, football has accelerated to a point, where there is so much at stake, because of the financial implications. For example, if technology would aid a team avoiding relegation, because going down would virtually send them bust, or a team qualifying for CL football, then the debate intensifies. This is the problem for referee's today. Too much coverage. Too many replays. Too much dehumanising.

not just being a football fan but imagine you were an olympic 100 meter runner and it was down to you and someone else to win the gold medal. neck and neck on the line with no video replay and they wrongly award the gold medal to your rival. you wouldnt say that devastation is just part of being in sport because the true devastation in this case is the injustice. if a runner went out and came second and it wasnt neck and neck they would be upset by their own performance. that is what sport is about. being able to beat your opponent fairly and if you lose, knowing that you have lost because your opponent earned it.

 

[talkativesprout]

Potential / disputed goals yes
Sending offs / Violent conduct yes
Both massive match changing events

All others no.
Sorry to simplify things right down.

i Think any oher techno intrusions would spoil the flow of the game

 

[gio's side step]

Devastation is all part of being a football fan. We invest emotions into things which are human. Not technological. Equally, we experience joy at things which aren't always 'truthful'. The problem is, football has accelerated to a point, where there is so much at stake, because of the financial implications. For example, if technology would aid a team avoiding relegation, because going down would virtually send them bust, or a team qualifying for CL football, then the debate intensifies. This is the problem for referee's today. Too much coverage. Too many replays. Too much dehumanising.

not just being a football fan but imagine you were an olympic 100 meter runner and it was down to you and someone else to win the gold medal. neck and neck on the line with no video replay and they wrongly award the gold medal to your rival. you wouldnt say that devastation is just part of being in sport because the true devastation in this case is the injustice. if a runner went out and came second and it wasnt neck and neck they would be upset by their own performance. that is what sport is about. being able to beat your opponent fairly and if you lose, knowing that you have lost because your opponent earned it.

Hang on, firstly, we are talking about football. Football is the particular case in question. I'm suggesting that with something so clear cut in relation to scoring a goal, i.e. goal line technology, there is a case. My other concerns, were in relation to bringing in technology, in terms of the game in general, other referee decisions etc. And your comparison is illogical. Because the race is over, i.e. the same in horse racing. Anything neck and neck at the end of the event itself, would tend to always be referred to a replay, which confirms the result. Elite athletics is not a sport with a referee or judge on the line, determining who crosses the line first. So not sure what your point is?

 

[davymcfc]

not just being a football fan but imagine you were an olympic 100 meter runner and it was down to you and someone else to win the gold medal. neck and neck on the line with no video replay and they wrongly award the gold medal to your rival. you wouldnt say that devastation is just part of being in sport because the true devastation in this case is the injustice. if a runner went out and came second and it wasnt neck and neck they would be upset by their own performance. that is what sport is about. being able to beat your opponent fairly and if you lose, knowing that you have lost because your opponent earned it.

Hang on, firstly, we are talking about football. Football is the particular case in question. I'm suggesting that with something so clear cut in relation to scoring a goal, i.e. goal line technology, there is a case. My other concerns, were in relation to bringing in technology, in terms of the game in general, other referee decisions etc. And your comparison is illogical. Because the race is over, i.e. the same in horse racing. Anything neck and neck at the end of the event itself, would tend to always be referred to a replay, which confirms the result. Elite athletics is not a sport with a referee or judge on the line, determining who crosses the line first. So not sure what your point is?

i was referring to the point about being devastated in sport. when we played leeds a few years ago leeds won with a penalty that was clearly outside the box and smith tripped up over his own foot. that was a game that until then we were completely dominating. leaving the ground everyone was angry and upset...at the ref. if we had gone out there and been played off the park and leeds had beaten us 2-1 by being the better team then we still would have been angry and upset but at our own team. that is what sport is about. as i said earlier all major decisions where play DOES stop then i think a team should be able to challenge it because it wont ruin the fluidity of the game as the game has already stopped.

 

[Carver]

Blatter's argument about it having to be at all levels is nonsense. Hawkeye, Video replays & Snicko are only used in tennis, cricket, rugby union/ league and other sports at the very highest level. It is accepted in these sports that if you have it, you use it. If you haven't then you rely on the officials. Even though the officials make mistakes in these sports consequenses for disagreeing with an oficial's ruling are far greater and ultimately greater respect is shown.

For football, only goal line incidents should be monitored. The Liverpool / Sunderland decision was just a poor decision by the referee's assistant.

For goal line incidents only the referee can have control over it. After the incident if the attacking team immediately regains control of the ball from a clearance (within 5 seconds?) the referee must wait until they have ''lost control of the ball" before review. If upon review the ball is not over the line, then play restarts in the appropriate manner:

'losing control of the ball'

In subsequent play the referee awards a free kick, or the ball goes out of bounds. Play restarts by the appropriate means (to either side).

In subsequent play the defensive side retain posession, the ball remains within bounds and the ball remains within posession of the defensive side, including passing, for a period of 5/ 10 seconds. After stopping the game, play restarts by an uncontested drop ball to the defensive side at the position where the referee blows to stop the game.

In subsequent play a goalkeeper catches the ball. After stopping the game, play restarts with the ball in the goalkeeper's hands.

Reviews will be very few and far between but the technology will be there for the referee to use on goal line decisions if he feels that he or is assistant needs clarification. It cannot be used for every penalty appeal or free kick otherwise teams will use this as a time wasting opportunity.

 

[CBlue]

For it all the way. How ever, it will never happen until all the old farts (Sept Blatter) are farmed out to grass because with this technology they won't be able to manipulate games.

This seems to be a common misconception. Introducing VR technology would create an extra avenue to manipulate the game e.g. City score against the rags - nothing wrong with the goal - referee can't disallow it. Introduce VR & the referee can now go back & look for anything that could be used as an excuse to disallow the goal.

 

[Gazza]

Against; who wants the game so totally santitised that it's boring and predictable?