Use of goal-line technology approved by FIFA

[Taylor Swift]

Eh? What I'm saying is that the fact the human mind is the best tool for some decisions is not a reason not to assist it with technology.

 

No the reason to not use replays is that it would likely break up the game too often. This doesn't, so your 'all or nothing' argument doesn't stack up.

 

I'm not really making the all or nothing argument, I'm countering the 'goal line should be it' argument.

 

I see your point obviously, but I don't think the interrupting the game thing is that clear cut. As other people have posted, there are many other points when the game stops and things could be looked at.

 

FWIW I just think that football is such a fluid game that technology is quite difficult to get right. For example, what about the situation I mentioned where the ball is flagged to have crossed the line but a replay shows the striker offside when scoring?

 

The technology is not supposed to handle offsides so what's your point? It handles goal line stuff and it will do so better than a human referee and cause no disruption to the game. What's there to discuss? If the assistant ref made the wrong offside decision then it would still be wrong whether the goal line technology exists or not. Implementing this would result in an end to controversy regarding goal line stuff. Whether a goal should or shouldn't have been given because of offsides or fouls in the lead up aren't important because those things already exist and can't be fixed without interrupting the game.

 

My point is that you've just moved the controversy to another part of the play, one that could be equally important to whether the goal should stand. And you've also struck a blow against the whole idea of technology in sport, which is presumably to ensure the correct outcome of the game. And also against the idea that technology is protecting the referee and linesman. TV replays will still show up a number of things which could have invalidated the goal that has been given by hawkeye.

 

None of this necessarily means we shouldn't use the goal line technology, we were just discussing what it might/should lead to and the validity of saying 'this should be it for technology'.

 

 

How will it strike a blow against the idea of technology in the game? One decision will now not be subjective and be pretty much guaranteed that the correct decision will be made. How is that bad for the game and for the future of technology in the game? The offsides thing is not relevant to this. That decision would have been made either way, whether the goal line tech exists or not. If the goal line tech works, it'll make all decisions that were previously controversial equivalent to a normal goal. Of course, normal goals today are still subjected to the same scrutiny. Did a foul occur in the build up? Was the throw in given to the correct team? Etc etc

 

What goal line tech will do is push this issue further. Like I said, ten years from now, hopefully someone will solve the offsides issue because it is a fact based thing, for the most part.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I think you popped into the discussion to push a different point. Obviously goal line technology will resolve the issue of whether the ball has crossed the line. If that's all we're debating then obviously I agree.

[mrmojorisin75]

In that case, the linesman will let more offsides go rather than signal because if you signal, the game comes to a stop. Are you going to give a goal to the striker when he was incorrectly ruled offside but when he shot, the keeper had already stopped moving? It introduces far too much confusion and would inevitably lead to way more disruption in the game. You say 30 seconds as if its a short amount of time. In actual fact, it's a substantial amount of time that would seriously affect the flow of the game. I am all for technology to help but not when it disrupts the game. The technology available today that fulfills this criteria is goal line and ball in ball it. Everything else will definitely disrupt the game.

 

The penalty thing is even more fraught with problems. First of all, not even everyone on here agrees with penalty decisions even when given three or four views. You can never really solve this problem without stopping the game, and that is something that should never be done. And of course, players complain when they don't get penalties but the other team usually plays on quick enough that the delay is in the order of seconds, not half a minute or so which would be required to view multiple replays from different angles. You can only use it to overrule penalty decisions that are given but again, the game will be subjected to significant delays. The next time there is a controversial penalty given, try timing it and you'll see that it's a relatively short amount of time, even taking into account all the players bitching.

 

there's teething trouble with anything new but it would ensure that teams played to the whistle in a very short space of time in the case of your goalkeeper/defence stopping example, and you may be right that refs would let some more marginal offsides go but that's what the rules say to do now anyway don't they?

 

as regards the interruption to flow you believe are inevitable i can't say myself definitevely and it'd obviously have to be trialled, but for me if the guy on the screens can't make the call in a pre-determined time frame (30 secs as an example) then the original decision stands, it'd be as simple as that...the point of technology would be to enhance the decision making process but it'll never be omnipotent, if a decision can't be made it can't be made

 

everything can be mitigated with enough planning and testing

[DJ_NUFC]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21970741

 

What a ridiculous man.

 

 

[Sima]

 

What a knacker

[Ishmael]

The cost implications argument is reasonable.

[ATB]

What a tool he and the whole UEFA/FIFA/FA etc are.

[toonpete1892]

The cost implications argument is reasonable.

 

This, although I do find it hard to believe that quoted price purely for CL football. I know a lad who works at Hawkeye and he has previously said at that price Hawkeye (or the other technology) would be laughing all the way to the bank.

 

EDIT: But the cost of installing, reconfiguring and monitoring the equipment would be many millions.

[Teasy]

But a lot of the clubs taking part in the Champions League will be getting the technology installed for their domestic competitions in the next few years anyway, so long term his cost analysis just for the Champions League is bollocks.

[Miercoles]

In other words, goal line technology (replay tech in general really) will make it harder to bribe people to fix games.

 

[Stifler]

The FA are set to decide which system they will be using next season for the Premiership.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Will be really interesting how this affects the game and the attitudes of fans.

 

Particularly looking forward to the debates about a goal which is proved over the line by technology but a video replay shows other incidents which should have led to it being disallowed. Wonder if fans will become even less willing to accept human error by officials in other aspects of the game too.

[merlin]

Will be really interesting how this affects the game and the attitudes of fans.

 

Particularly looking forward to the debates about a goal which is proved over the line by technology but a video replay shows other incidents which should have led to it being disallowed. Wonder if fans will become even less willing to accept human error by officials in other aspects of the game too.

 

Fans shouldn't HAVE to accept 'human error' by officials when the technology exists to correct it - I disagree totally with people who make excuses for the powers-that-be not using an official in the stand watching an instant replay of, say, a penalty decision when the ref is already carrying a head set to communicate with his line officlals etc. The amount of time taken to review such a decision these days is minimal and wouldn't affect the flow of a game at all - similarly with goals scored from a disputed off-side decision.

 

This works OK in other sports and there is no reason at all why football shouldn't be dragged into the 21st Century when there is so much money at stake in the modern game and an incorrect decision can mean the loss - or gain - of millions of pounds for a club.

 

How would any of the old traditional defenders of refs decision 'being final' would be just as happy to accept this if NUFC was victim of an incorrect pen decision in the final game of the season which sent the club into the Championship..?

 

Not many, I reckon.....

[Dave]

They've chosen Hawk-Eye.

[Teasy]

Would have thought the other options would be better but I suppose I haven't tested any of them so..

[Teasy]

Will be really interesting how this affects the game and the attitudes of fans.

 

Particularly looking forward to the debates about a goal which is proved over the line by technology but a video replay shows other incidents which should have led to it being disallowed. Wonder if fans will become even less willing to accept human error by officials in other aspects of the game too.

 

Now fans and pundits can spend more time analysing and complaining about the other incidents and not have to bother going through 100 replays of 10 different camera angles to decide whether the ball went over or not

 

As for this changing people's perceptions on technology in the game.  I think people who are already for technology will see this as a step in the right direction and see its success (if it is successful) as evidence that we should push it further.  While people who are generally against technology in the game will accept this but want it to go no further.

[Stifler]

Will be really interesting how this affects the game and the attitudes of fans.

 

Particularly looking forward to the debates about a goal which is proved over the line by technology but a video replay shows other incidents which should have led to it being disallowed. Wonder if fans will become even less willing to accept human error by officials in other aspects of the game too.

 

Now fans and pundits can spend more time analysing and complaining about the other incidents and not have to bother going through 100 replays of 10 different camera angles to decide whether the ball went over or not

And Sky can stop showing freeze frame replays taken a frame or two after the balls furthest point which depicts the officials in a good light or shows if a big club should have or shouldn't have had a big decision.

[Peppe]

They should implement a dive-line technology aswell.