Use of goal-line technology approved by FIFA

[AyeDubbleYoo]

There is a technological solution to offside, look at a replay. There are many other things that are a matter of fact as much as whether a ball crossed the line or not.

 

I agree goal line decisions are harder for refs and easier for technology, obviously.

[SEMTEX]

Offsides are still debatable no matter what though. This is by far the simplest Yes or No decision available in football, and is for the most important part of the game. It's pretty easy to see why this'd be the first thing to be implemented.

[Matt]

There is a technological solution to offside, look at a replay.

 

It's not instant at all, you have to decide if someone was interfering with play or not. Introducing goal-line technology is an absolute no-brainer.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

There is a technological solution to offside, look at a replay.

 

It's not instant at all, you have to decide if someone was interfering with play or not. Introducing goal-line technology is an absolute no-brainer.

 

I never said it was instant.

 

FWIW my opinion is that goal-line decisions are so rare that it's almost irrelevant whether we introduce technology or not.

[SEMTEX]

There is a technological solution to offside, look at a replay.

 

It's not instant at all, you have to decide if someone was interfering with play or not. Introducing goal-line technology is an absolute no-brainer.

 

I never said it was instant.

 

FWIW my opinion is that goal-line decisions are so rare that it's almost irrelevant whether we introduce technology or not.

 

Whilst that may be true, this is still a huge change because it's only going to open the gates to other technological advances.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

All I want agreement on is the principal really. Either we think it's a good idea to use technology to correct officials or we don't.

 

If we do, I don't necessarily object to it, but let's use it for everything we possibly can. The thing I don't like is people pretending the goal-line decisions are unique in some way.

[JH]

Have to agree with Ian W like.

 

"Did it cross the line or not?!" makes up only about 1/4 of 'game changing decisions' - alongside offsides, penalties and 'sending off' challenges.

 

It's a start but it's only the beginning.

[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.

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 ?

 

Well you wouldn't use it for minor confrontation would you? A system where each team had a set number of challenges in each half (one?) would limit it.

 

Yes it would lead to each team having a guy watching screens, but if you limit the amount of challenges that's not a problem.

 

How long would it take? Give the video official or officials a minute to decide, no longer than it usually takes for players to harass a ref.

 

They might challenge on each goal yeah, but again if you limit the amount of challenges it'd stop it happening throughout the game.

[Parky]

All we need now is for refs to be drawn at random.

[Superior Acuña]

First they came for the goal line technology and I said nothing, because I was not a goal line.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't understand why goal line decisions should be so special, when many other game-deciding decisions will not be subject to review.

 

They should just have a video referee permanently reviewing pictures, constantly in radio contact with the ref, and be done with it.

 

Well IMO, decisions which historically could go one way or another were not subject to the subjective assessment of the referees/officials for the lulz, it was because there was no way to objectively know whether the ball had crossed the line or not. This is no longer the case and it is a very remediable deficiency of the game. There's nothing inherently nostalgic or sentimental about s*** disallowed goals or goals that never were

 

We'll probably always argue the toss over tackles etc, and that's fine. This isn't like that though whatsoever IMO. It is black and white.

 

Anyway, I wonder if this will eventually be implemented at every professional level of the game.

 

There are plenty of other decisions which are clear-cut. Notably offsides, wrong corners. I don't see how they can justify not using technology for them too if videos become involved.

[TaylorJ_01]

Football is over, going to start watching rugby.

[Guest bimpy474]

Football is over, going to start watching rugby.

 

http://gifsforum.com/images/gif/bertstare/grand/bert-bertstare-eccbc87e4b5ce2fe28308fd9f2a7baf3-999.gif

[Beren]

First they came for the goal line technology and I said nothing, because I was not a goal line.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't understand why goal line decisions should be so special, when many other game-deciding decisions will not be subject to review.

 

They should just have a video referee permanently reviewing pictures, constantly in radio contact with the ref, and be done with it.

 

Well IMO, decisions which historically could go one way or another were not subject to the subjective assessment of the referees/officials for the lulz, it was because there was no way to objectively know whether the ball had crossed the line or not. This is no longer the case and it is a very remediable deficiency of the game. There's nothing inherently nostalgic or sentimental about s*** disallowed goals or goals that never were

 

We'll probably always argue the toss over tackles etc, and that's fine. This isn't like that though whatsoever IMO. It is black and white.

 

Anyway, I wonder if this will eventually be implemented at every professional level of the game.

 

There are plenty of other decisions which are clear-cut. Notably offsides, wrong corners. I don't see how they can justify not using technology for them too if videos become involved.

 

Eh? How on earth are offsides and corners clear cut with technology? Papisto's second disallowed goal is still drawing differing opinions ffs

 

Who a ball touched last/what phase of play/when a ball left someone's foot are much more problematic to coordinate on a technological scale than whether a ball crossed a line or not (because it doesn't matter who touched the ball last before it did/didn't cross the line).

[loki679]

First they came for the goal line technology and I said nothing, because I was not a goal line.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't understand why goal line decisions should be so special, when many other game-deciding decisions will not be subject to review.

 

They should just have a video referee permanently reviewing pictures, constantly in radio contact with the ref, and be done with it.

 

Well IMO, decisions which historically could go one way or another were not subject to the subjective assessment of the referees/officials for the lulz, it was because there was no way to objectively know whether the ball had crossed the line or not. This is no longer the case and it is a very remediable deficiency of the game. There's nothing inherently nostalgic or sentimental about s*** disallowed goals or goals that never were

 

We'll probably always argue the toss over tackles etc, and that's fine. This isn't like that though whatsoever IMO. It is black and white.

 

Anyway, I wonder if this will eventually be implemented at every professional level of the game.

 

There are plenty of other decisions which are clear-cut. Notably offsides, wrong corners. I don't see how they can justify not using technology for them too if videos become involved.

 

Offsides aren't clear cut.  Look at Cisse's second from the other night, even after the replays, still frames etc etc people are still split over whether or not it was offside.  With the ball crossing the line there's no room for subjectivity, it either crossed the line or it didn't.

[merlin]

This is a good and necessary step forward - it should have been done years ago as is the case with tennis.

 

However, it is far from the only way in which technology should be used to improve the fair outcome of matches - Refs are already using ear-pieces and headsets to be in contact with other officials, so its a very small step to having things like penalties decided by a ref in the stands watching instant video replays and therefore being able to notify the referee if he has made an incorrect decision by awarding/not awarding a penalty. A penalty results in a goal around 8 times out of 10, so this can be a game-changing - and even a silverware deciding - decision....too important to get wrong.

 

Offsides are always going to be difficult - even a ref watching a TV replay can sometimes not be sure whether the player was offside if the camera angle is wrong, but in some cases, it is clear that the player was or wasn't, even if the linesman called it wrong. Players beating an offside trap don't score as often as players taking a penalty as the keeper/intercepting defender has a chance of preventing the goal so the offside matter is not as important as pen decisions in my view.

[Matt]

All I want agreement on is the principal really. Either we think it's a good idea to use technology to correct officials or we don't.

 

If we do, I don't necessarily object to it, but let's use it for everything we possibly can. The thing I don't like is people pretending the goal-line decisions are unique in some way.

 

It's not correcting officials, it's making the decision in the first place. The techonology trialled provides an instant and automated indication that the ball has crossed the line, there is no man in a box checking back a replay.

 

Goal-line decisions, ball in -out decisions are unique because they are the only instance where we have proven, instant automated technology. Offside as it currently stands in the laws is not a clear matter of fact decision.

 

Now if people actually think about what the officials have to do- this makes their lives much easier- especially on corners where linesmen can know they do not need to make goal-line calls and can position themselves better to get a view of offsides when you get a spot of pinball in the box.

[Superior Acuña]

First they came for the goal line technology and I said nothing, because I was not a goal line.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't understand why goal line decisions should be so special, when many other game-deciding decisions will not be subject to review.

 

They should just have a video referee permanently reviewing pictures, constantly in radio contact with the ref, and be done with it.

 

Well IMO, decisions which historically could go one way or another were not subject to the subjective assessment of the referees/officials for the lulz, it was because there was no way to objectively know whether the ball had crossed the line or not. This is no longer the case and it is a very remediable deficiency of the game. There's nothing inherently nostalgic or sentimental about s*** disallowed goals or goals that never were

 

We'll probably always argue the toss over tackles etc, and that's fine. This isn't like that though whatsoever IMO. It is black and white.

 

Anyway, I wonder if this will eventually be implemented at every professional level of the game.

 

There are plenty of other decisions which are clear-cut. Notably offsides, wrong corners. I don't see how they can justify not using technology for them too if videos become involved.

 

Eh? How on earth are offsides and corners clear cut with technology? Papisto's second disallowed goal is still drawing differing opinions ffs

 

Who a ball touched last/what phase of play/when a ball left someone's foot are much more problematic to coordinate on a technological scale than whether a ball crossed a line or not (because it doesn't matter who touched the ball last before it did/didn't cross the line).

 

I'd say the vast majority of offsides are clear cut, it's just a case of deciding whether any of the attacker is ahead of the defence. Most can be shown with a couple of replays on MotD to be correct or not. If they have to be ALWAYS 100% clear cut then that doesn't apply to goalline decisions either, some of those have been unresolved too.

 

And I'm pretty sure that incorrect offside decisions affect a lot more goals than goaline decisions, so surely they'd be worth the effort.

[Beren]

First they came for the goal line technology and I said nothing, because I was not a goal line.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't understand why goal line decisions should be so special, when many other game-deciding decisions will not be subject to review.

 

They should just have a video referee permanently reviewing pictures, constantly in radio contact with the ref, and be done with it.

 

Well IMO, decisions which historically could go one way or another were not subject to the subjective assessment of the referees/officials for the lulz, it was because there was no way to objectively know whether the ball had crossed the line or not. This is no longer the case and it is a very remediable deficiency of the game. There's nothing inherently nostalgic or sentimental about s*** disallowed goals or goals that never were

 

We'll probably always argue the toss over tackles etc, and that's fine. This isn't like that though whatsoever IMO. It is black and white.

 

Anyway, I wonder if this will eventually be implemented at every professional level of the game.

 

There are plenty of other decisions which are clear-cut. Notably offsides, wrong corners. I don't see how they can justify not using technology for them too if videos become involved.

 

Eh? How on earth are offsides and corners clear cut with technology? Papisto's second disallowed goal is still drawing differing opinions ffs

 

Who a ball touched last/what phase of play/when a ball left someone's foot are much more problematic to coordinate on a technological scale than whether a ball crossed a line or not (because it doesn't matter who touched the ball last before it did/didn't cross the line).

 

I'd say the vast majority of offsides are clear cut, it's just a case of deciding whether any of the attacker is ahead of the defence. Most can be shown with a couple of replays on MotD to be correct or not. If they have to be ALWAYS 100% clear cut then that doesn't apply to goalline decisions either, some of those have been unresolved too.

 

Well yes, the whole point of introducing the technology at all is that it would have to be 100% correct. With the proposed technology goal-line technology, they would be. There would be no more unresolved decisions whether the ball crossed the line or not. The same couldn't be done for offsides.

[Superior Acuña]

First they came for the goal line technology and I said nothing, because I was not a goal line.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't understand why goal line decisions should be so special, when many other game-deciding decisions will not be subject to review.

 

They should just have a video referee permanently reviewing pictures, constantly in radio contact with the ref, and be done with it.

 

Well IMO, decisions which historically could go one way or another were not subject to the subjective assessment of the referees/officials for the lulz, it was because there was no way to objectively know whether the ball had crossed the line or not. This is no longer the case and it is a very remediable deficiency of the game. There's nothing inherently nostalgic or sentimental about s*** disallowed goals or goals that never were

 

We'll probably always argue the toss over tackles etc, and that's fine. This isn't like that though whatsoever IMO. It is black and white.

 

Anyway, I wonder if this will eventually be implemented at every professional level of the game.

 

There are plenty of other decisions which are clear-cut. Notably offsides, wrong corners. I don't see how they can justify not using technology for them too if videos become involved.

 

Eh? How on earth are offsides and corners clear cut with technology? Papisto's second disallowed goal is still drawing differing opinions ffs

 

Who a ball touched last/what phase of play/when a ball left someone's foot are much more problematic to coordinate on a technological scale than whether a ball crossed a line or not (because it doesn't matter who touched the ball last before it did/didn't cross the line).

 

I'd say the vast majority of offsides are clear cut, it's just a case of deciding whether any of the attacker is ahead of the defence. Most can be shown with a couple of replays on MotD to be correct or not. If they have to be ALWAYS 100% clear cut then that doesn't apply to goalline decisions either, some of those have been unresolved too.

 

Well yes, the whole point of introducing the technology at all is that it would have to be 100% correct. With the proposed technology goal-line technology, they would be. There would be no more unresolved decisions whether the ball crossed the line or not. The same couldn't be done for offsides.

 

I'm sure I recall some goalline decisions where they remain debated after freezing a tv shot. And from what I've heard of chips etc. they are similarly not 100%.

 

Anyway, even if odd offsides like us at Old Trafford and Cisse the other night couldn't be resolved, freezing shots to see if a player was ahead of defence or not, would resolve many more goals incorrectly given/not given than goalline tech.

 

I'd say this whole obsession with goal-line technology is typical of humans have distorted perceptions and priorities - being afraid of flying but carelessly crossing a road, pumping loads of money into anti-terrorism but not day-to-day killers or climate change. Goal-line decisions affect a tiny amount of incorrect outcomes.

[Beren]

Goal-line technology isn't reliant on image processing AFAIK, so it wouldn't be reliant on freeze frame shots. See the GoalRef tech in the link below.

 

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/world-of-sport/goal-line-technology-does-164718522.html

 

I agree that it's a small, infrequently contested issue compared to offside decisions, but there's no reason not to improve/eliminate a problem which can be eliminated. There can be potentially large ramifications from these infrequently contested decisions though it must be said!

[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.

 

They're introducing the technology in the one important area where its easy to use without interfering with the game, how is that a weak argument?

 

It's one important area, it's not the one important area.

[Teasy]

Sorry removed my post when I realised I was replying to something you said last year..

 

 

It's one important area, it's not the one important area.

 

I said its the one important area where it can be used easily without interfering with the game, not that its the one important area full stop (as in the most important one).

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Sorry removed my post when I realised I was replying to something you said last year..

 

 

It's one important area, it's not the one important area.

 

I said its the one important area where it can be used easily without interfering with the game, not that its the one important area full stop (as in the most important one).

 

Yeah, I suppose you're right on that. It is the easiest place to introduce technology, but it doesn't really make a significant impact on fairness in the game. Which would be my reason for wanting technology.

 

Personally I would use no technology and educate people to accept the decision of the ref, but I realise that won't be happening.

[Teasy]

By the way, do we know which technology they've gone with?

[AyeDubbleYoo]

By the way, do we know which technology they've gone with?

 

They've name Hawkeye and Goal Ref, but also said other companies are free to bid.