I'm assuming you're stopping play to assess these situations? Otherwise, how can a VR intervene if he spots a clear error? He would still be assessing whether the ball crossed the line or whether it was a dive or not wouldn't he?
So your contention is that VR would only be for the referee? None of the teams have a chance to challenge a ruling? Effectively, where we are now but a get out clause for the ref? A constant stopping of the game for the ref to check/double check decisions?

The on field referee and video referee can communicate via a headpiece and microphone. The on field referee asks 'did the ball cross the line?', and the video referee answers 'yes it did, you can award the goal'. In the meantime, the game has to stop, but can be restarted with a drop ball if the ball hasn't crossed the line. Don't see the problem.

JFC...is this what is going to happen if VR was ever introduced? None of these pictures are conclusive evidence either way - the angle of the camera has to be taken into consideration. A camera would need to be mounted along the goal line for this technique to work (which isn't even being considered by the law makers) or you would need some form of camera triangulation. For goal line technology you have 2 options; camera's in the posts/crossbar or chip technology. The issue with camera's in posts/crossbar is that they require a clear an unobstructed view of the ball - not possible in all situations. The issue with the chip technology is that it hasn't been accurate enough during testing (I'm not sure about recent tests but this is why it was rejected previously).

When do you stop the game to review it? Do you wait until the defending team launch the ball up the pitch resulting in a 4 on 1 breakaway? Or, do you wait until the attacking team is about to put the ball in the back of the net after a scramble knowing, in both situations, that the original shot didn't cross the line?
If a ball is cleared up the pitch & a defender takes out an attacker who is free on goal do you still send off the defender if the review shows it crossed the line? What happens if the defenders challenge forces the attacker to permanently leave the field?
Sorry to over complicate this with real game situations.

Within ten seconds of the referee not awarding a goal for England against Germany at the World Cup, the entire TV viewing audience knew the referee had dropped a clanger. Within a minute, the only people in the Stadium who didn't know the referee had dropped a clanger, were the refereeing team and some of the players. This can't be right and can't be allowed to continue.

It will never come in until Twatter and his bent cronies are pensioned off in FIFA. Then again is corruption so endemic there it may never come in at all.

Within 3.5 seconds of Germany taking a goal kick, the ball was in the back of England's net. 10 seconds is way too long to wait to assess a decision - the remit of goal line technology is that it has to provide a result within 1 second of the incident & be 100% accurate. The Germany situation wouldn't have happened in this tournament due to the extra officials behind the goal - it has been resolved. What hasn't been resolved are the incidents that are too close to call even with VR.

-- Sun Jun 24, 2012 10:20 am --


The chances for corruption are greatly increased with the use of technology, plus you have all those lucrative contracts that need signing & the back-handers involved in making it happen.

WTF? How the hell are the chances for corruption increased when there's a fully qualified referee sat in front of a monitor checking for refereeing errors?

WTF? How the hell is corruption carried out now? Who is the faceless individual in the stand making the decisions? Who knows who has actually made the decision? Who's the faceless individual telling a ref on the pitch that he missed a clear decision? What are you actually asking for - do you really know?

I'm asking for a fully qualified Premiership referee to be sat in front of a monitor, communicating with the on field referee via a comset.