Use of goal-line technology approved by FIFA

[54]

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11676/7742882/No-goal-line-technology-next-term

 

Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore has confirmed that goal-line technology will not be introduced until 2013 at the earliest.

 

FIFA are due to make a decision in July on the introduction of goal-line technology with two systems currently being tested.

 

English football has been beset with a number of goal-line incidents this season, and the calls have been growing for its introduction.

 

But because the Premier League season would start within just a month of the FIFA decision, should it be positive, Scudamore admits that they would not 'logistically' be able to implement it.

 

"It's imminent and we'll look to put it in front of our clubs as soon as we practically can in terms of implementation," he told Sky Sports NewsHD.

 

"But it is unlikely to be for next season given the time scales involved - FIFA approving it and the start of our season for time, many logistical things would need to happen so unlikely for next season but as soon as we can."

 

Blackburn

 

Meanwhile, Scudamore insists that the Premier League have no regrets about the Blackburn ownership issue.

 

"We don't sit here regretting that the owners bought the club," he said of Venky's.

 

"What you do regret for them and the Blackburn fans are the performances of the team that led to them being relegated.

 

"But people can't possibly expect us to sit in London running clubs."

 

Scudamore added: "We put a framework in place for owners to run clubs and they passed all the financial rules.

 

"The decisions they made were for them to make. It's harsh but that's the ultimate reality.

 

"I think there's very little danger that Blackburn as a club will be threatened, but the idea I can give the fans any comfort regarding the future success of the club is out of the question."

 

However, Scudamore urged Blackburn fans to look to Newcastle for hope.

 

He said: "Mike Ashley made unpopular decisions but they are on the brink of qualification for European football."

 

[Guest je85]

Booooooooooooooooooooo.

[Dr Venkman]

Goal-line technology I can tolerate wouldn't want it for any other decisions though.

 

thats my worry though. goal line tech will be brought in then they'll say exactly the same about using technology for re-viewing penalty incidents and on it'll go.

 

out of interest what would be so bad about that? it'd be fair.

[madras]

Goal-line technology I can tolerate wouldn't want it for any other decisions though.

 

thats my worry though. goal line tech will be brought in then they'll say exactly the same about using technology for re-viewing penalty incidents and on it'll go.

 

out of interest what would be so bad about that? it'd be fair.

how long would every corner take while they sift through every minor confrontation ?

would it lead to someone employed by the club sat infront of a bank of screens to check each and every single incident so they can claim ?

how long would it take for incidents we still can't decide on, could we end up having play brought back 3 or 4 mins after the incident ?

on each goal will the opposition be claiming  (from their tele view) of an earlier incident that would rule out the goal ? will that sort of thing follow every contentious decision ?

[mrmojorisin75]

Goal-line technology I can tolerate wouldn't want it for any other decisions though.

 

thats my worry though. goal line tech will be brought in then they'll say exactly the same about using technology for re-viewing penalty incidents and on it'll go.

 

out of interest what would be so bad about that? it'd be fair.

how long would every corner take while they sift through every minor confrontation ?

would it lead to someone employed by the club sat infront of a bank of screens to check each and every single incident so they can claim ?

how long would it take for incidents we still can't decide on, could we end up having play brought back 3 or 4 mins after the incident ?

on each goal will the opposition be claiming  (from their tele view) of an earlier incident that would rule out the goal ? will that sort of thing follow every contentious decision ?

 

it's not like you have a fucking debate about it though is it?

 

put a person in specific charge of video monitoring who has the power to overrule referees on certain key decisions such as penalties, handballs, red cards etc.

 

if he doesn't inform the ref to stop the game within 0.5 - 1 minute (have to be tested) of the incident happening then the chance is gone

[Stifler]

Thats it introduced next week.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

It's hardly fair to use goal-line technology if you don't use offside technology to see if the guy should have been in play to score in the first place. Just shows how the march of technology, once allowed to begin, will be unstoppable.

[alpal78]

It's hardly fair to use goal-line technology if you don't use offside technology to see if the guy should have been in play to score in the first place. Just shows how the march of technology, once allowed to begin, will be unstoppable.

 

Chomp chomp! Nice try

[AyeDubbleYoo]

That's genuinely my problem with using technology - the goal line just seems an arbitrary place to introduce it. There are many, many incidents that happen more regularly and affect the results of games and Championships much more than that. Handball, offside, diving, penalties.

 

I know the goal line is the easiest place to introduce it like, but that seems a weak argument to me.

[Disco]

Fuck 'em. We telt 'em and they didn't listen. Hope we benefit from it again, again and again and then Woy comes out and goes 'well we told you it was needed'.

[toonpete1892]

The commentators said it themselves, 'you win some, you lose some'. As much as I want goal/touch line technology introduced (and I draw the line at that), its part of football and it gives us one more thing to talk about.

[matta]

The commentators said it themselves, 'you win some, you lose some'. As much as I want goal/touch line technology introduced (and I draw the line at that), its part of football and it gives us one more thing to talk about.

 

Goals over the line should give you something to talk about aswell!

[Yorkie]

It's hardly fair to use goal-line technology if you don't use offside technology to see if the guy should have been in play to score in the first place. Just shows how the march of technology, once allowed to begin, will be unstoppable.

 

At first, it just appears to be sensors in the ball to see if it's crossed the line... but next about you've got T-800s charging round the pitch causing a shit-storm.

[Stifler]

That's genuinely my problem with using technology - the goal line just seems an arbitrary place to introduce it. There are many, many incidents that happen more regularly and affect the results of games and Championships much more than that. Handball, offside, diving, penalties.

 

I know the goal line is the easiest place to introduce it like, but that seems a weak argument to me.

I don't want tech involved in every incident. A goal though is the most important decision in the game and the whole purpose of the game. I'm quite happy with goal line tech being introduced and every other matter to be settled by the referee including offsides. We don't need it to be like American sports with constant breaks in play. A goal decision would be instant and as close to 100% accuracy as you could get.

 

With everything else we just need to bring in a newer and better generation of ref's and linesmen and have more clarity on certain rules. We also need it to be where your either a referee or a linesman, you can't be either one on one week and another the next. We also (this is mostly aimed to our domestic referee's) need to start clamping down on refers you give the decisions to the big clubs and the big names week in and week out regardless or the fail being by them or non existent. Foreign referees need to learn that it is a contact sport, yes theirs a such thing as too much force and reckless challenges but a good challenge shouldn't be punished because contact was made or someone got out muscled in the air.

[Kaizero]

That's genuinely my problem with using technology - the goal line just seems an arbitrary place to introduce it. There are many, many incidents that happen more regularly and affect the results of games and Championships much more than that. Handball, offside, diving, penalties.

 

I know the goal line is the easiest place to introduce it like, but that seems a weak argument to me.

 

It's more that the other situations happens on the field of play, and thus feels more natural to attribute to human error. However, a ball crossing the line is just beyond human error to not recognise. I'd accept human error in offside calls rightly/wrongly allowing a goal to stand and so on, but not that nobody gives a shit that the ball has crossed the line into the goal. I don't want technology beyond goal line technology, but the game really needs that.

 

Basically, every ref error in the field of play with cards and free kicks and so on will have an effect on the game, theoretically. You can speculate a tons of ways how decisions make a game go either way. However, a ball in the goal is a ball in the goal. That's a definite. No matter what (pending it's not offside/falsely offside) it would have a major effect on the game. A bad penalty call still needs to have the penalty go in for it to be a talking point and so on.

 

Hope that made sense, felt I started ranting at the end there.

[Stifler]

The commentators said it themselves, 'you win some, you lose some'. As much as I want goal/touch line technology introduced (and I draw the line at that), its part of football and it gives us one more thing to talk about.

What happens if you lose it in say the FA Cup final in the dying minutes when you score but it isn't allowed and you needed that goal to win but instead you lose on penalties, next year though your in the 3rd round of the FA Cup and you are cruising 4-0 up and you get a goal given to you that never crossed the line to make it 5-0 with only minutes left to play.

 

Now would you consider that balancing itself out?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I sort of get it, but if a player is offside and makes a shot that may or may not be over the line, it just seems strange to use technology to award him a goal when the offside is an equally important factor in whether the goal should stand.

[Stifler]

That's genuinely my problem with using technology - the goal line just seems an arbitrary place to introduce it. There are many, many incidents that happen more regularly and affect the results of games and Championships much more than that. Handball, offside, diving, penalties.

 

I know the goal line is the easiest place to introduce it like, but that seems a weak argument to me.

 

It's more that the other situations happens on the field of play, and thus feels more natural to attribute to human error. However, a ball crossing the line is just beyond human error to not recognise. I'd accept human error in offside calls rightly/wrongly allowing a goal to stand and so on, but not that nobody gives a shit that the ball has crossed the line into the goal. I don't want technology beyond goal line technology, but the game really needs that.

 

Basically, every ref error in the field of play with cards and free kicks and so on will have an effect on the game, theoretically. You can speculate a tons of ways how decisions make a game go either way. However, a ball in the goal is a ball in the goal. That's a definite. No matter what (pending it's not offside/falsely offside) it would have a major effect on the game. A bad penalty call still needs to have the penalty go in for it to be a talking point and so on.

 

Hope that made sense, felt I started ranting at the end there.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

[Stifler]

I sort of get it, but if a player is offside and makes a shot that may or may not be over the line, it just seems strange to use technology to award him a goal when the offside is an equally important factor in whether the goal should stand.

Yes but it's two complete decisions. The decision of weather the player is offside or not needs to be made as soon as the player receives the ball, what happens next shouldn't be down to the referee or linesman, the linesman needs to make the offside decision before and regardless of what follows.

 

They are two separate incidents, the outcome of one shouldn't determine the outcome of the other.

[Guest Realist]

**explodes into thread** let me sum up the opinion of people opposed to goal line technology: "wahh I'm an asshole." 

 

 

[leffe186]

I sort of get it, but if a player is offside and makes a shot that may or may not be over the line, it just seems strange to use technology to award him a goal when the offside is an equally important factor in whether the goal should stand.

Yes but it's two complete decisions. The decision of weather the player is offside or not needs to be made as soon as the player receives the ball, what happens next shouldn't be down to the referee or linesman, the linesman needs to make the offside decision before and regardless of what follows.

 

They are two separate incidents, the outcome of one shouldn't determine the outcome of the other.

 

But it clearly does. If he's offside, then what happens next is automatically nullified. If he's not, then it isn't. They're obviously not separate. I see where Ian W is coming from, although I would still be happier with just getting the goal-line decisions right first. I'd be even happier if those utterly pointless cunts loitering by the goal were allowed to judge other decisions too.

[Dinho lad]

Ooooh, so it HAS to happen to England to finally something to be done. 

[Stifler]

I sort of get it, but if a player is offside and makes a shot that may or may not be over the line, it just seems strange to use technology to award him a goal when the offside is an equally important factor in whether the goal should stand.

Yes but it's two complete decisions. The decision of weather the player is offside or not needs to be made as soon as the player receives the ball, what happens next shouldn't be down to the referee or linesman, the linesman needs to make the offside decision before and regardless of what follows.

 

They are two separate incidents, the outcome of one shouldn't determine the outcome of the other.

 

But it clearly does. If he's offside, then what happens next is automatically nullified. If he's not, then it isn't. They're obviously not separate.

By that statement every decision in the game is linked. I was more of getting to the point that each decision should be taken at the time on it's own merit. You can argue that a throw in being awarded to one team and not the other is linked to a goal 3 minutes later, it is in reality because possession changes from what it should have been, play is dictated differently, different passes are made etc.

 

The point that everyone is trying to make has already been said by Kaizaro.

[M4]

This isn't some chaos theory shit. It's two decisions that are within the same 10-20 seconds, same phase of play, and the direct consequence of one another.

[Stifler]

Ooooh, so it HAS to happen to England to finally something to be done. 

Yes, exactly. 2 years ago FIFA were laughing because it happened against, no tech, you are sore losers, now though it's went our way, whats the betting their stance changes?, well Ukraine were robbed of a equaliser (if you accept the referees decision to allow play despite and offside infringement) which could have potentially lead to a Ukraine fight back and sent out England.

 

It's like only a month ago, Chelsea and English club won the CL on penalties against a German team, all of a sudden the head of FIFA was saying penalties should be scrapped, non of this had ever been mentioned before, many teams have won and lost on penalties, Italy won the world Cup on penalties in 2006 and nothing was mentioned against them, Germany sending England out in tournaments over the years.