Goal Line Technology

[losesome]

Well well Septic Bladder has spoken and now says that GLT is a must .

Funny it was this dinosaur that kept it away for so long.

 

No doubt now he will claim it was by his instigation that we will now get GLT and once again he has saved world football.

 

The bottom line is that England have got away with something and Septic doesn't like it so if it's the last thing he does (and lets hope it is !!!! ) he will make sure we can't get away with it again.

 

Mind you if has proven one thing that most supporters know , What does the 5th official do !!!!

Now we have it confirmed - NOWT

[oafc-latics]

Blatter has said he doesnt want the game to be interrupted by looking at TV replays which would stop the flow. Kind of like rugby which I think has it sorted. If the ref or linesmen arent sure then a fourth official decides. This can be replicated at pretty much every football league ground that is being filmed.

 

If Hawkeye can send a signal to the ref within a second then that's fair enough, but it needs 30-odd cameras around the pitch as opposed to one. Giving a fourth official a monitor still relies on human judgement, but just gives them the benefit of a second look, which would have sorted the Ukraine incident, and the Chelsea goal in the FA Cup semi. But for an incident that we had away at Bournemouth it wouldnt be solved and you get on with the game. (might be wrong match but i know we had a shout that I remember PD being annoyed about).

 

On a side note, how do the failed fifth officials make a decision, if any? They've got them batons but they never even give corners/goal kicks.

[Keepingthe Faith]

How far back in the passage of play do you go?

 

If you're just assessing the goal-line then Ukraine equalised.

 

If you step back to the offside, they didn't.

 

Let's, for argument sake, say the referee missed a trip on Rooney at the other end of the pitch 15 seconds before Ukraine broke clear. Does the decision become a penalty to England at the other end?

 

I think it is time for such technology. But how it's used in conjunction with TV pictures needs to be carefully thought through.

I would submit, just the goal line howler decisions, the rest remains as is.

 

The bigger problem for my money, is the hatred for anything English, within UEFA and by Sepp Blatter

Edited June 20, 2012 by Keepingthe Faith

[Keepingthe Faith]

Blatter has said he doesnt want the game to be interrupted by looking at TV replays which would stop the flow. Kind of like rugby which I think has it sorted. If the ref or linesmen arent sure then a fourth official decides. This can be replicated at pretty much every football league ground that is being filmed.

 

If Hawkeye can send a signal to the ref within a second then that's fair enough, but it needs 30-odd cameras around the pitch as opposed to one. Giving a fourth official a monitor still relies on human judgement, but just gives them the benefit of a second look, which would have sorted the Ukraine incident, and the Chelsea goal in the FA Cup semi. But for an incident that we had away at Bournemouth it wouldnt be solved and you get on with the game. (might be wrong match but i know we had a shout that I remember PD being annoyed about).

 

On a side note, how do the failed fifth officials make a decision, if any? They've got them batons but they never even give corners/goal kicks.

Are they a de-flagged linesman buzzer stick?.

[bossrocks]

How far back in the passage of play do you go?

 

If you're just assessing the goal-line then Ukraine equalised.

 

If you step back to the offside, they didn't.

 

Let's, for argument sake, say the referee missed a trip on Rooney at the other end of the pitch 15 seconds before Ukraine broke clear. Does the decision become a penalty to England at the other end?

 

I think it is time for such technology. But how it's used in conjunction with TV pictures needs to be carefully thought through.

I think its only being envisaged for the goal line incident only, i.e. the goal. You'd go no further back than that.

 

I don't think its necessary for league football. Yes its incredibly frustrating when a decision goes against you and its possible that such a decision could determine relegation/promotion but ultimately, over the course of a 46 game season, they do tend to even themselves out.

 

I'd rather referees were more accountable for their (often bad) decision making.

 

In a knockout, high profile competition like the Euros, World Cup or Champions League I do think its different and GLT should be introduced.

[UpTheLatics]

 

I think its only being envisaged for the goal line incident only, i.e. the goal. You'd go no further back than that.

 

I don't think its necessary for league football. Yes its incredibly frustrating when a decision goes against you and its possible that such a decision could determine relegation/promotion but ultimately, over the course of a 46 game season, they do tend to even themselves out.

 

I'd rather referees were more accountable for their (often bad) decision making.

 

In a knockout, high profile competition like the Euros, World Cup or Champions League I do think its different and GLT should be introduced.

 

I think that is a near-superb assessment of the argument both for its introduction and the boundaries of GLT. 100% agree.

[philliggi]

I don't think its necessary for league football.

 

In a knockout, high profile competition like the Euros, World Cup or Champions League I do think its different and GLT should be introduced.

 

can see your argument, but i have to say i completely disagree with it. however they implement any new technology, it needs to be something that can be used right across the world, in any professional league or cup competition.

 

if almost identical decisions happen in 2 different games involving united, the first, (scored against them) is ruled out in the champions league final after using goal line technology. the second (scored by them) on the last day of the domestic season should be ruled out but isn't due to the league not using such technology. ultimately they go on to win the league by 1 decisive goal.

 

there would be uproar. even we would be saying its bent. we don't play offsides in some competitions and not others. this has to be the same.

Edited June 20, 2012 by philliggi

[jsslatic]

The whole 'it creates a talking point' thing irritates me. You don't go to the football (or watch it on the box) for a bit of controversy. Kids don't grow up playing the game with the intention of getting the ball to arguably cross the school jumpers so they can have a great time arguing with their mates about whether it went in. You play football to win and the team who puts the ball between the posts the most should be the winners.

 

If technology will help then use it.

[Dave_Og]

 

ultimately, over the course of a 46 game season, they do tend to even themselves out.

 

Sorry but that's a lazy cliche. By definition the more successful teams are much more likely to get positive decisions for them - penalties, goals, corners etc. as they inevitablty tend to spend more thime in the opposition's half than the less successful teams would.

[qwerty]

It goes in the other teams favour he doesn't want it it goes in England's favour he wants goal line technology the guy is the new hitler but for sport

[slystallone]

It's got to be a few years ago now; possibily after Lampards "goal" in the World Cup - but 4-4-2 ran an article on GLT. It stuck with me as one of the team they interviewed was previously a lecturer on my sports science course back in '99. Along with a few others; they have created the technology that they said was ready to be launched. It was tested (at an U-17's competition & a Scandanavian lower league full season IIRC) and was passed fit for purpose by all bar FIFA.

Again; IIRC i think they said the ref would have the definitive correct decision less than 2 seconds after the incident.

 

I'm with a few others. If the technology is there, is realistic and dependable - it should be used for GL decisions.

[UpTheLatics]

 

Sorry but that's a lazy cliche. By definition the more successful teams are much more likely to get positive decisions for them - penalties, goals, corners etc. as they inevitablty tend to spend more thime in the opposition's half than the less successful teams would.

 

It's been proven time and again that decisions - any decision in a match - if given correctly every time would have the slightest effects on a league table, such as Fulham finishing 10th instead of 11th.

 

The simple fact of the matter is GL decisions are incredibly rare, yet every offside decision that is called incorrect and results in a goal fails to get a tenth of the outrage reaction.

[rudemedic]

 

 

It's been proven time and again that decisions - any decision in a match - if given correctly every time would have the slightest effects on a league table, such as Fulham finishing 10th instead of 11th.

 

The simple fact of the matter is GL decisions are incredibly rare, yet every offside decision that is called incorrect and results in a goal fails to get a tenth of the outrage reaction.

Actually I think that wasn't true this season, if every decision was given correctly this season United would have won the league.

That may have been due to the closeness of the title though, where a single incorrect decision changes a result and therefore in a close title race changes the Champions.

[De_La_Vega]

I just don't get it. A tiny problem when measured against cheating and offsides, both of which happen every day and could see the ref aided by technology. The guy was offside moments before the 'goal' and it wasn't exactly close.

 

Also, to those who criticise 'bad' refs, I would suggest a winding in of the necks. Players and the rampant professionalism that seems to be an accepted part of the game make the red's job almost untenable given the speed of the game now.

[4froale]

Isn't it funny how the most corrupt man in football says that this is NOW a necessity to have goal line technology?

 

I wonder what he was thinking when Lampard's "goal" crossed the line by at least 2 foot in Bloemfontein?

 

Cant put in to words how much it naffs me off , weve been campaigning for it to years and been ignored and then when we finally get a bit of luck our way he says it is a must to have it on. swiss prick.

[Diego_Sideburns]

 

Is this what Blatter has in mind for goal-line technology?

[Matt]

Is this what Blatter has in mind for goal-line technology?

 

No. No it isn't.

[LeeAnt]

Of the two proposed technologies being looked at only GoalRef is a vaible solution.

GoalRef is relatively cheap to intorduce and provides an instant result which is relayed to the officials. I can see SKY pushing for Hawkeye as this will work best with TV viewers (Showing endless replays etc) but football should not be about what TV viewers want.

 

As with the Rangers debate it will be interseting to see if the interest of fooball as a whole rarther than the interest of money are the guiding forces behind any decision.

[losesome]

Of the two proposed technologies being looked at only GoalRef is a vaible solution.

GoalRef is relatively cheap to intorduce and provides an instant result which is relayed to the officials. I can see SKY pushing for Hawkeye as this will work best with TV viewers (Showing endless replays etc) but football should not be about what TV viewers want.

 

As with the Rangers debate it will be interseting to see if the interest of fooball as a whole rarther than the interest of money are the guiding forces behind any decision.

 

 

Since when has the interest of football or the fans been of any consequence.

Money is the only thing that talks and what sky want sky will ultimately get !!!!!!!!

So hawk eye it is or for Rangers fans - Hawkeyethenoo

Edited June 22, 2012 by losesome

[bossrocks]

Sorry but that's a lazy cliche. By definition the more successful teams are much more likely to get positive decisions for them - penalties, goals, corners etc. as they inevitablty tend to spend more thime in the opposition's half than the less successful teams would.

Yes, but we're not talking about penalties and corners - we're only talking about goal line incidents - "did the ball cross the line?"

 

We weren't a particularly successful team last season and the only two goal line decisions I can recall were both against Bournemouth, one away and at home. One against us and one for us. As a less successful team, you're arguing that we'd have more of these decisions go against us than for us. This wasn't the case.

 

As I mentioned in my previous post, I'd prefer more effort was made to improve the general standard of refereeing.

Edited June 30, 2012 by bossrocks