Guest WalkervilleMag Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Could well mean a scoreboard installed at SJP. Scoreboards are for Prawn Sarnie brigades Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Hardly worth the money and effort. And more like 4 or 5 I bet clubs who have been relegated, lost cup games etc.. think its worth the time and effort. They should be happy with the ref and linesmans decision tbh, it's the same for both teams and you could argue with any decision. Like when Mendes scored for spurs and it was about 15ft behind the line? Its not really the same for both teams is it? Unless the ref gets a mjor decision wrong for both sides in that game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Hardly worth the money and effort. And more like 4 or 5 I bet clubs who have been relegated, lost cup games etc.. think its worth the time and effort. They should be happy with the ref and linesmans decision tbh, it's the same for both teams and you could argue with any decision. They should be happy with a wrong decision that denies them points that they've won fair and square by the rules of the game? The linesman is at pitch level 30 yards away behind a goalpost. How can he see through a goalmouth scramble? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSG Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 When I see stuff like this it always reminds me of the time Southampton scored a beauty through a group of players, but because the nets were so small it bounced back out off the advertising board behind the net and the ref thought the keeper saved it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest optimistic nit Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 were going to have to agree to dissagree blueyes.gif I don't agree to that. well fuck you then Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
womblemaster Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 about time!! all for it. I feel it should also be used when a red card is issued. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NSG Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 about time!! all for it. I feel it should also be used when a red card is issued. And when we see it on the video screen get out our foam hands and sing "another one bites the dust". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 about time!! all for it. I feel it should also be used when a red card is issued. That I would leave down to the discretion of the ref. That's why he's there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 about time!! all for it. I feel it should also be used when a red card is issued. And when we see it on the video screen get out our foam hands and sing "another one bites the dust". "DUM DUM DUM DUM, ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST" Smoggies will be doing it in no time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlufPurdi Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Dont use it, Federer says it's wrong and I, for one, believe him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Dont use it, Federer says it's wrong and I, for one, believe him. Brings up an interesting point. I can definitely see Mourinho and even Big Sam complaining about decisions from Hawk-Eye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 22bnw Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who would have the authority? The ref or Hawk-Eye? What if the ref completely and utterly disagrees with decision made by the technology? Hawk-Eye should only be there to be used if the referee or the other officials don't know at all what decision to make. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who would have the authority? The ref or Hawk-Eye? What if the ref completely and utterly disagrees with decision made by the technology? Hawk-Eye should only be there to be used if the referee or the other officials don't know at all what decision to make. He wouldn't have referred it to video if he was that sure. Moot point tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 22bnw Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who would have the authority? The ref or Hawk-Eye? What if the ref completely and utterly disagrees with decision made by the technology? Hawk-Eye should only be there to be used if the referee or the other officials don't know at all what decision to make. He wouldn't have referred it to video if he was that sure. Moot point tbh. Hawk-Eye isn't video though is it? I thought it detected when the ball had crossed the line using sensors in the ball and at each end of the line? Whenever the ball crosses the line, the ref is automatically told via a buzzer or an ear-piece or something? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 The ref is hardly going to ever be in a position to be sure though, is he? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who would have the authority? The ref or Hawk-Eye? What if the ref completely and utterly disagrees with decision made by the technology? Hawk-Eye should only be there to be used if the referee or the other officials don't know at all what decision to make. He wouldn't have referred it to video if he was that sure. Moot point tbh. Hawk-Eye isn't video though is it? I thought it detected when the ball had crossed the line using sensors in the ball and at each end of the line? Whenever the ball crosses the line, the ref is automatically told via a buzzer or an ear-piece or something? So why would he need to refer it at all? If he hears a buzzer - goal. If not - play on... Struggling to see what you're saying... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 22bnw Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who knows what I'm trying to say? I'm just dead against it, it takes some of the excitement out of football. "Was it a goal? Hawk-Eye said not" - thats the future of goal-line related arguments - how boring is that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who knows what I'm trying to say? I'm just dead against it, it takes some of the excitement out of football. "Was it a goal? Hawk-Eye said not" - thats the future of goal-line related arguments - how boring is that. I'd rather they get the crucial decisions correct. We can all argue about every other incident that occurred during the course of the match. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who knows what I'm trying to say? I'm just dead against it, it takes some of the excitement out of football. "Was it a goal? Hawk-Eye said not" - thats the future of goal-line related arguments - how boring is that. As others have said, how often does it happen? When it does its pretty clear one way or the other if its a goal. Hopefully there would be more exciting things to talk about after a game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 22bnw Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Its just not right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 It's the future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 It's good although you do have to wonder about the the margin of error in this type of thing. Watching Wimbledon today, there was one point which I thought was out (and the replay seems to confirm it) yet Hawk-Eye ruled it in by probably less than a millimetre. I think it was the point that really rattled Federer, didn't he say 'there's no way in the world that ball was in' or something? Anyhow, when it's that close, surely the ref should have final say? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Verlaine Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 It's ridiculous to say that it would ruin the game by allowing people to make the correct decisions. That line of argument basically states that if we don't talk about the ref at the end of the game then it was a shit game, whereas in fact the opposite is true. Additionally, the addition of technology that irrefutably proves/disproves an incident one way or the other would surely go some way to alleviating the antics of players nowadays, which would- one imagines- speed up, rather than slow down the game. Opponents clearly haven't thought this through properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Additionally, the addition of technology that irrefutably proves/disproves an incident one way or the other would surely go some way to alleviating the antics of players nowadays, which would- one imagines- speed up, rather than slow down the game. Opponents clearly haven't thought this through properly. Alright let's not have a ref at all and make sure every decision is correct through replays and see if the game speeds up or slows down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Parka Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 Who would have the authority? The ref or Hawk-Eye? What if the ref completely and utterly disagrees with decision made by the technology? Hawk-Eye should only be there to be used if the referee or the other officials don't know at all what decision to make. He wouldn't have referred it to video if he was that sure. Moot point tbh. Hawk-Eye isn't video though is it? I thought it detected when the ball had crossed the line using sensors in the ball and at each end of the line? Whenever the ball crosses the line, the ref is automatically told via a buzzer or an ear-piece or something? Thats "Cyclops" Hawkeye is more of a CGI thing used in cricket and tennis. All computer generated/calculated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now