It's happened again

[Barbus]

Yet another instance of a ball miles over the line and a goal not given. This time not awarding a potentially winning goal in the Edinburgh derby.

Football is the worst, absolutely the worst, officiated sport I can think of. It's embarrassing.
Anyone still against goal line technology?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21646444

 

[PynchonForest]

I, as a ref, am all for technology. I think most refs are for it, because the pace of the game, coupled with the amount of dishonest behaviour by a fair percentage of players...this makes it tough to get enough right to be, shall we say, acceptable.

It is high time a LIMITED level of instant reply is utilized, and I think only for goals, period. Simulation should be dealt with after the fact, and the various FAs must start dealing with it in a harsher manner. Particularly if the simulation changes a result. I think a few three and four game bans would begin to weed that out, to a certain degree.

Things like offsides, NEVER on instant replay. If that can of worms is opened, it will ruin the sport.

 

[Fisher]

Hibs v Hearts... BOTHERED!!

 

[Gary]

I, as a ref, am all for technology. I think most refs are for it, because the pace of the game, coupled with the amount of dishonest behaviour by a fair percentage of players...this makes it tough to get enough right to be, shall we say, acceptable.

It is high time a LIMITED level of instant reply is utilized, and I think only for goals, period. Simulation should be dealt with after the fact, and the various FAs must start dealing with it in a harsher manner. Particularly if the simulation changes a result. I think a few three and four game bans would begin to weed that out, to a certain degree.

Things like offsides, NEVER on instant replay. If that can of worms is opened, it will ruin the sport.

Totally agree with you. I think technology should only be applied to places where a definitive yes or no is needed. Offsides could fall into that spectrum, but still, it would be a huge thing to implement. Incorrect offside decisions don't bother me too much, linesmen deserve so much credit for how they monitor attacking play.

Simulation... eh. I think mixing technology into that is asking for trouble. To me that would be admitting that it's part of the modern game and play should be halted while we work it out. Like you said, the sooner players are punished after the game, the sooner everyone stops flopping onto the ground. Why waste money on something that might just ebb out after a few years?

Just keep it goal-line I think.

 

[Ajlee17]

Hibs v Hearts... BOTHERED!!

The teams involved are irrelevant. It's the fact that a clear goal has been ruled out by a linesman and referee that can't see that it's bounced over the line (even more-so than Lampard v ze Germans). Sepp Twatter seriously needs to pull his f***ing finger out because this is embarrassing. Rugby has it. Cricket has it. Tennis has it. It wouldn't ruin the game if we had to stop for a few minutes to get the correct decision given.

 

[Gary]

Isn't it due to be implemented next season? I doubt he can incorporate it any faster.

 

[Your Dad's Ashamed Of You]

We should only have it if it's instant. Cricket has it but cricket does not flow like football. If it is instant/within about a second that the ball has crossed the line and the ref is sent a signal then fine but you should never stop a football game to review a decision.

 

[Rhods]

Yet another instance of a ball miles over the line and a goal not given. This time not awarding a potentially winning goal in the Edinburgh derby.

Football is the worst, absolutely the worst, officiated sport I can think of. It's embarrassing.
Anyone still against goal line technology?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21646444

Yes, I'm against it. A waste of money that only comes in useful to over-rule a handful of decisions each season. Why not introduce was-it-a-throw-in technology, or did-they-encroach on the free-kick technology, or perhaps lets-figure-out-how-many-fouls-either-way-there-were-during-that-corner technology (which would have a far greater influence on the outcome of most matches).

It would be far better to use the cash to improve the training and support to refs & refs assistants to improve the overall standard of refereeing in matches.

 

[incapable hulk]

Yes, I'm against it. A waste of money that only comes in useful to over-rule a handful of decisions each season. Why not introduce was-it-a-throw-in technology, or did-they-encroach on the free-kick technology, or perhaps lets-figure-out-how-many-fouls-either-way-there-were-during-that-corner technology (which would have a far greater influence on the outcome of most matches).

It would be far better to use the cash to improve the training and support to refs & refs assistants to improve the overall standard of refereeing in matches.

Cant agree.

The whole point of the game is to get the ball over the line, if teams are being denied goals - it harms a fundemental part of the game.

Goal line technology is a good thing.

 

[Strummer]

Throw-ins, encroachment and other minor arguments don't directly affect games.

Goals - and legitimate goals that are not given - do.

I wouldn't be in favour of reviewing every goal, but an additional official in the stands, with a TV feed as they have in rugby, would surely be useful.

 

[Barbus]

Yes, I'm against it. A waste of money that only comes in useful to over-rule a handful of decisions each season. Why not introduce was-it-a-throw-in technology, or did-they-encroach on the free-kick technology, or perhaps lets-figure-out-how-many-fouls-either-way-there-were-during-that-corner technology (which would have a far greater influence on the outcome of most matches).

It would be far better to use the cash to improve the training and support to refs & refs assistants to improve the overall standard of refereeing in matches.

You can't train them to have super-human powers. It's impossible for them to see everything, that's why cricket, tennis, rugby etc embraces technology to help the official get the big decisions right.

When very, very traditional sports like cricket and rugby union make football look like it's run by a bunch of luddites it makes you realise how far behind the times football is.

 

[Barbus]

I think 'goals' like Wigan's winner yesterday could easily be reviewed. Everyone working in the TV truck would have known about the handball before the Wigan players had barely started celebrating.

I don't know how anyone can argue that football is better off for legitimate goals not being awarded and non-goals being awarded, when most of them could very easily and quickly be called correctly.

 

[Rhods]

Good to see that Platini agrees with me

 

[Barbus]

I wouldn't brag about agreeing with Platini about anything. :wink:

 

[Army]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22001774 clever stuff

 

[Rigler]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22001774 clever stuff

Can't see why they need to make it so complicated, why not just have a ref in the stands looking at a replay?

 

[incapable hulk]

Can't see why they need to make it so complicated, why not just have a ref in the stands looking at a replay?

Because that makes far too much sense

 

[Kelvin's Local]

First one this season.

 

[bgd]

Can't see why they need to make it so complicated, why not just have a ref in the stands looking at a replay?

Because Sepp Blatter, I mean FIFA, will probably have a large cut in the sales of the equipment that HAS to be used. Such as the watch and cameras.

 

[Barbus]

Can't see why they need to make it so complicated, why not just have a ref in the stands looking at a replay?

Because it's always not as clear cut as the ball bounces 2 foot over the line than back out. More often it's a goalie scooping the ball or a defender making a clearence from somwhere areound the goal line, and quite often there are lots of players in the goalmouth obscuring the line of sight.
In those instances a video replay isn't conclusive enough or instant enough - something the detractors are demanding.

 

[Your Dad's Ashamed Of You]

Can't see why they need to make it so complicated, why not just have a ref in the stands looking at a replay?

Because you have to stop the game to do that. This system, assuming it works, lets the ref know in 1 second which is fine - you can't have gone up the other end and scored yourself in that time.