SuperKev
Striker
The more officials - I'd have 3 refs and 8 assistants and the assistants would have a proper f***ing decision making role instead of standing there like a lemon.
Really
-
The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
Goal line technology
- Thread starter super-niall
- Start date
- Status
The more officials - I'd have 3 refs and 8 assistants and the assistants would have a proper f***ing decision making role instead of standing there like a lemon.
Really
bahtat
Striker
what do you mean finally, 1st tested at St Mary's about 2 weeks ago
PTR
Striker
You were post 18, and it was already mentioned twice before that
Can't see the argument against. These nobbers who actually WANT mistakes annoy me... "well it gives you something to talk about". Well, so do genital warts, go get them instead.
V
Valiant
Guest
Mignolet will be in goal. All eyes on him ...
viccarlton
Striker
This will cause more arguments than it solves.
AlpineExile
Striker
How?
AC Mack
Striker
Let's hope not.
I've no real problem with it in itself, but the knock on effect could be a real issue.
Read between the lines. He was responding to a poster who said it will be the beginning of the end.
You were post 18, and it was already mentioned twice before that
Can't see the argument against. These nobbers who actually WANT mistakes annoy me... "well it gives you something to talk about". Well, so do genital warts, go get them instead.
The argument against is that once implemented in one area, it's a guarantee that people will be calling for it in other areas too, which is when the problems will begin to mount.
viccarlton
Striker
How definite is it going to be? There will be instances when people, whether it be fans, management or players that will dispute whether the ball was completely 100% over the line, and then declare that the technology is not foolproof.
We will therefore be back to square one, yes there will be times when the obvious *ball over the line * decisions will be got right, but I'm arguing about how accurate will it be for the 10 down to 1mm decisions.
We've all seen how the players bend the rules at corners haven't we.
AlpineExile
Striker
That's what has been tested, and which will no doubt continue to be checked up upon if it does happen.
Nope. But I do know a lot of fans who don't know what the rules are ... as you think they bend the rules, are you one of them?
viccarlton
Striker
No, I'm not one of them.
My choice of words was poor, the whole of the ball has to be over all of the line for it to be in/out depending on whether you're wanting a goal, throw in or taking a corner, will the technology they intend using guarantee that it can detect a ball was 100% over the line, in the very tight instances I mentioned previously?
We all know that it will get the one's that are 4/6/8/12 inches over the line correct.
AC Mack
Striker
Have we?
AlpineExile
Striker
That is what was meant to be tested earlier on in the trials, so - assuming they're being honest with us - the answer is: YES.
viccarlton
Striker
Please see previous post, or as I said bad choice of words by me.
What I meant was years ago when I was a lad ( and believe me it was years ago) players took corners with the ball in the quadrant, nowadays, as in most everything else, players look to gain as much advantage as they can in every instance that they can,as in when they move the ball as far over the line as they can claiming " but it's not all over the line, so it must be legal"
Now do you get my drift, or shall I draw a diagram?
But you do see what I'm getting at don't you?
Last edited:
Texasmac
Striker
The technology is not the problem. The problem will be anything that promotes the notion that Terry, Rooney , Gerard, etc can encourage team mates to stop a game, or crowd the ref until the ref has reviewed the replay.
Or worse they'll give managers challenges to decisions like they do over here, then when the challenges come in they can throw in adverts.
Or worse they'll give managers challenges to decisions like they do over here, then when the challenges come in they can throw in adverts.
AC Mack
Striker
AlpineExile
Striker
Nope. Other than that you appear to be technophobic.
steven
Striker
This is it, really. The only reason I'm in favour of it is that it will end the "well, Alan, does this reopen the argument about goal-line technology?" tedious horseshit that we're treated to every time something like that happens.
viccarlton
Striker
Not a technophobe at all, so I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.
Do you honestly think that this goal line technology will be bulletproof and get everything correct?
I've been watching the cricket on Sky tonight, one batsmen is given out l.b.w. by the umpire (there are no referalls) Paul Allott says something like " Ooo I think the umpire was a bit hasty there" replay is shown he says " too high, just going over leg stump", they then show Hawkeyes interpretation, ball is shown to be just clipping the top of leg stump, Allott says "hmmm still think the umpire was hasty, batsman should have got the benefit".
Now this little tale sort of proves your argument for you, if we accept the technology.
My point is that there will be umpteen arguments over the marginal decisions, not the obvious ones that the ref/linesman obviously got wrong.
PTR
Striker
To people saying it might not be "perfect". So what. As least it will be neutral and consistant and improvable. Unlike refs.
Same situation in Tennis - the players don't think its infallible, but it might have an error of 1%, rather than a human's of 5%. Which is better.
Better is better.
Same situation in Tennis - the players don't think its infallible, but it might have an error of 1%, rather than a human's of 5%. Which is better.
Better is better.
- Status
