Goal-line technology has to be implemented...

Post by **1964white** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:47 pm

Clint Hill's header was a yard over the line & the linesman doesn't see it in the Bolton v QPR, if they can't get the important decisions correct it's time to come into the real world & use the technology that is available

McCormack had a goal chalked off at Pompey a few weeks ago

Time for a major change

Silky · Post by **Silky** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:50 pm

Yep... i dont understand why they dont implement this one...

I wouldnt want video refs in soccer, because it would take away from the game and slow things down too much... but apparently they can just put a little chip in the ball, the ref wears a band with a green light on it, and when the ball crosses the line, the light flashes...

Not slowing anything down and you get the right decision...

JUST DO IT!

and if thats the result that sends QPR down, you'd be pretty bloody dirty, wouldnt you?

HarryofOz · Post by **HarryofOz** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:10 pm

A chip in the ball - how can that work? The whole ball has to cross the line for it to be a goal. Where in the ball does the chip go?

Silky · Post by **Silky** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:13 pm

it'd be like a GPS thing i guess... it would know how big the ball was...

Im no scientist, but that's what i read...

HarryofOz · Post by **HarryofOz** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:17 pm

Silky wrote:it'd be like a GPS thing i guess... it would know how big the ball was...

Im no scientist, but that's what i read...

I'm not doubting you, I'm no scientist either. I would think the whole ball would have to be covered by some type of material that a sensor can read, but who knows.

Twiggster · Post by **Twiggster** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:27 pm

I am deffo in favour of goal line technology - AND instant replays of dives/fouls.
Ross' goal aginst Soton would have stood last week and we'd have won that game.
I don't buy the "takes too much time to replay" argument. How much time is wasted by players protesting about incidents and threatening the ref before the game restarts anyway?

Same time as it takes for the incident to be replayed and shown.
Todays game is fast and furious and needs technology to decide contested decisions.

weasel · Post by **weasel** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:39 pm

Yeah think there would be points at various locations on a ball so all points had crossed the line. The technology is out there and much more reliable than the human eye.

white.riot · Post by **white.riot** » Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:54 pm

Game would end up like RU or that American stuff - stop start. In the tap room after the game we want controversy to discuss over our ale.

MeeTa · Post by **MeeTa** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:30 am

As much as i want the refs to make the correct decisions so the outcome of every game is fair, im not a big fan of implementing to much technology. It will change the game, im not so sure it will change for the better

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 8:25 am

The simple fact of whether the ball was in the net or not is pretty fundamental. Unlike the controversy that surrounds decisions on a foul or a card there is no grey area, just a simple question of black or white. Unlike offside decisions it doesn't happen in every game and the technology is virtually instantaneous.

It would be one less thing for players to surround the ref about.

There is no excuse for not implementing goal line technology in the professional game.

Post by **1964white** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 8:37 am

Dr.Leeds wrote:The simple fact of whether the ball was in the net or not is pretty fundamental. Unlike the controversy that surrounds decisions on a foul or a card there is no grey area, just a simple question of black or white. Unlike offside decisions it doesn't happen in every game and the technology is virtually instantaneous.

It would be one less thing for players to surround the ref about.

There is no excuse for not implementing goal line technology in the professional game.

Fully agree Dr

Super League Rugby which is a far quicker game than football use technology if there is any doubt about a try scored

Most sports embrace technology, they must be laughing at the organisers of the beautiful game

gessa · Post by **gessa** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 9:04 am

Dr.Leeds wrote:The simple fact of whether the ball was in the net or not is pretty fundamental. Unlike the controversy that surrounds decisions on a foul or a card there is no grey area, just a simple question of black or white. Unlike offside decisions it doesn't happen in every game and the technology is virtually instantaneous.

It would be one less thing for players to surround the ref about.

There is no excuse for not implementing goal line technology in the professional game.

Totally agree Doc. I can't see it slowing the game at all,infact the opposite,stopping the game for a few seconds while the decision is made will take less time than now when the players surround the ref for a couple of minutes trying to change his mind,then him conferring with his assistant.Plus if the decision is made with technology the players would be more acceptable of it.

white.riot · Post by **white.riot** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 9:34 am

And the Kop stood with baited breath watching the big screen - goal or no goal. Players stood with hands on hips or sipping their energy drinks. NO GOAL - drop ball, play on. Time wasted, excitement and controversy removed from the world's most beautiful game. And then the cognoscenti move onto offsides, penalties, red cards and before long a game known for it's grace and speed is just like all the rest RU/RL/Yankee thing/Cricket [stop start]. It's the world's most popular game for a reason. 4 jumpers and ball and away we go. If you can't have technology at every 'official' game you shouldn't have it at any game. This stuff costs money and is the last thing some teams in some countries need. No excuse needed - it's just not required. Hands off please. Controversy is part of the game.

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 10:13 am

white.riot wrote:And the Kop stood with baited breath watching the big screen - goal or no goal. Players stood with hands on hips or sipping their energy drinks. NO GOAL - drop ball, play on. Time wasted, excitement and controversy removed from the world's most beautiful game.

No need.

Ball does, or doesn't cross line. Striker turns to celebrate but is incensed to find goal hasn't been given. Some of his colleagues run to protest to the assistant. Players from both sides surround the referee to make their point. Ugliness and bookings ensue. The kop suggests through the medium of song that the linesman was too busy masturbating to watch the ball. Several minutes pass and the beautiful game restarts. TV viewers miss subsequent beauty while the director shows endless slow-mo replays of the ball possibly crossing the line.

Or...

Ball does, or doesn't cross the line. The beautiful game continues. Within seconds a computer has confirmed that the ball did indeed cross the line. The referee is informed via his earpiece, blows his whistle and points to the centre circle. The players have no recourse to protest. The attacking side is appropriately rewarded for its endeavours. Fans celebrate. Ugliness is removed from the atmosphere. The game is alive.

After all. What is more beautiful about the beautiful game than a goal being scored and the happy delerium of tens of thousands?

white.riot · Post by **white.riot** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:02 am

Dr.Leeds wrote:
No need.

Ball does, or doesn't cross line. Striker turns to celebrate but is incensed to find goal hasn't been given. Some of his colleagues run to protest to the assistant. Players from both sides surround the referee to make their point. Ugliness and bookings ensue. The kop suggests through the medium of song that the linesman was too busy masturbating to watch the ball. Several minutes pass and the beautiful game restarts. TV viewers miss subsequent beauty while the director shows endless slow-mo replays of the ball possibly crossing the line.

Or...

Ball does, or doesn't cross the line. The beautiful game continues. Within seconds a computer has confirmed that the ball did indeed cross the line. The referee is informed via his earpiece, blows his whistle and points to the centre circle. The players have no recourse to protest. The attacking side is appropriately rewarded for its endeavours. Fans celebrate. Ugliness is removed from the atmosphere. The game is alive.

After all. What is more beautiful about the beautiful game than a goal being scored and the happy delerium of tens of thousands?

A scientist speaks - leave this kind of thing to the artists who understand that emotion/controversy and pace are key. Footballers don't protest. Naïve award 2012 is yours. Betting suspended

By the way the most beautiful thing I ever saw on a football pitch was the Pele dummy in 1970. No goal just a jaw dropping moment of supreme artistry from the best player ever. Hands off our game.

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 1:30 pm

white.riot wrote:
A scientist speaks - leave this kind of thing to the artists who understand that emotion/controversy and pace are key. Footballers don't protest. Naïve award 2012 is yours. Betting suspended By the way the most beautiful thing I ever saw on a football pitch was the Pele dummy in 1970. No goal just a jaw dropping moment of supreme artistry from the best player ever. Hands off our game.

The motto of my medical school is "Ars Longa, Vita Brevis" The Art Is Long, Life Is Short. Pharmacologists, biochemists and microbiologists are the scientists. I am the artist who applies their good work.

Art is subjective. To me a Van Gough is more beautiful than a Picasso, a Titian more beautiful than a Pollock. I am happy to accept others may feel differently.

Undoubtedly Pelé's dummy was a thing of beauty, but does not compare to the sight of the Elland Road crowd rising as one as the net ripples. You just know, that as the ball trundled outside the post in 1970, most present would not have appreciated the artistry of it, but would have looked at the sky and uttered whatever is Portugese for "F**k's sake Pelé..."

The Subhuman · Post by **The Subhuman** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:27 pm

There should be two extra officials employed to sit on the crossbar during the game....that would keep WR happy

white.riot · Post by **white.riot** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:37 pm

faaip wrote:There should be two extra officials employed to sit on the crossbar during the game....that would keep WR happy

Football is a great game - it does not need technology. It wont end on the goal line once you let technology into the game. Before you know it there'll be stupid time outs and everything else the Yanks gave us to allow for the adverts.

The Subhuman · Post by **The Subhuman** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 2:42 pm

white.riot wrote:

Football is a great game - it does not need technology. It wont end on the goal line once you let technology into the game. Before you know it there'll be stupid time outs and everything else the Yanks gave us to allow for the adverts.

I'm with you mate....I just liked the image

MeeTa · Post by **MeeTa** » Sun Mar 11, 2012 3:08 pm

white.riot wrote:

Football is a great game - it does not need technology. It wont end on the goal line once you let technology into the game. Before you know it there'll be stupid time outs and everything else the Yanks gave us to allow for the adverts.

agreed, hope technology stays away.