Having see that DRS can be a farce isn’t it about time we did away with it and just left it to the on-field umpires? And can you imagine what will happen with the goal line technology? If the attacking side claim a goal, match stops. If the defending side say it wasn’t in, game stops. If the ref and linesmen are :red not sure, game stops. The major advantage of football against other sports is that it is fast and constantly on the move, all this will do is stop the game flowing. And anyway, how many goal line issues have there been in the last five years, very few, but if we bring this in there will be at least one or two every week. It will give the players even more excuse for surrounding the ref and linesman. Discuss. (At least until the season starts and we can argue about actual games!)
WHS :red
With the two systems for goal line technology that have been approved by FIFA a decision is not reviewed by a team the way a dismissal is in cricket. With the Hawk-Eye system that the Premier League is to use, the ball is monitored by cameras around the goal, and when the ball completely crosses all of the line a signal is sent to a watch worn by the referee with 1 second, so no need to stop play, apart from because a goal has been scored. The same is the case for GoalControl, a system developed in Germany and preferred by FIFA for use at the recent Confederations Cup.
When FIFA first started looking at GLT they wanted systems that didn’t interrupt play, so your fears for the game would never have been realised. It was part of the specification. For the few times it will be required I think GLT will help the game. It is just a pity the cost is too high for our level of football.
On the cricket DRS this week, a number of problems occured, which need to be rectified, and I think the whole use and rules over the lbw decisions need to be reviewed. The most notable case was the Trott decision in the second innings. The square leg hot spot camera would have shown that Trott had got an inside edge, however, due to operator error it was unable to show the Trott delivery, and so unable to be used in the DRS. This is where another error has occured. Umpire Erasmus has not followed the rules, which are that if a part of the system is unavailable to be used, the decision must stay with the on-field umpire.
We still won the cricket though. I think we would be a lot more unhappy with DRS had we lost.
And our footballers are going to accept the Refs decision on this when they don’t accept anything else? But thanks for the “Heads up” on how it is supposed to work, let’s hope it does or there will be a riot. Can you imagine if the ref didn’t get the signal and a goal is scored at the other end? Why oh why can’t we just accept the decision of the man in charge as we used to?
WHS.
The simple fact of the matter is that if the ‘man in charge’ got decisions correct then there would no need for technology, but as officials are 99% morons we will have technology thanks
The simple reason is that top level sport, and especially football, has so much money in it now the governing bodies can’t afford not to. A single goal can make the difference between winning the league and getting promoted to the Premier League, and if that goal is missed by the officials then they are, unfortunately, going to be in a tricky position. By introducing GLT which gives the referee both a visual and an audible alert that the ball has crossed the goal line, they are hopefully eliminating the possibility that it is missed.
As the technology is around I think it would be stupid not to use it. Look at all the other sports that use it to make important decisions: rugby for tries, and also goal kicking; tennis for line calls; cricket for dismissals. For football not to use it would bring in too many arguements about why is it not being used. Look at what happened after Lampard’s goal was disallowed at South Africa 2010. If the technology had been used then, which it was around to use, pretty much, I believe England would have won that game. It was missed, we lost, we have to move on from that single incident, but for it to happen again would be worse for the game.
There have been a number of incidents in the Premier League in the two years since then, which may or may not have had impacts on European qualification, relegation or even winning the league, all of which bring significant amounts of money to a club. It can’t be allowed to continue, and now that it is being introduced I welcome it.
So the game is unlikely to stop very often…
Defending teams will only use it when a goal is given, so the game has stopped anyway, and attacking teams will only use it if their goal is not given, which would indicate they have the upper hand in the game and the breather will be welcomed by the opposition.
If it starts getting abused they’ll probably bring in a review limit like in cricket.
So what about offsides that are incorrectly given? Surely they are just as important. Refereeing isn’t an enviable job I wouldn’t do it. At the top level everything they do is scrutinised by hundreds cameras they are human and will make mistakes especially as the majority of players are trying to con them at every opportunity. As for players surrounding the ref, the best idea I heard was Brian cloughs. He said if players do it fine the manager and the managers would soon put a stop to it.
Personally I think its a no brainer, goal line technology has to be brought in and should have been a few years back now. One of my mates is a touch line judge in rugby league and he reckons it takes 10 or 20 seconds for a decision to be reviewed. As is said in above posts it is unlikely to happen once in a game, never mind two or three times. Surely 10/20 seconds won’t delay a game that much and a correct decision would be made.
Two that stand out for me are Lampbard v Germany in the world cup and Pedro Mendes for Spurs at Old Trafford (which was only six or seven yards over). I felt like i’d been mugged seeing both on the replays, had they been reviewed I would have been celebrating. But for me goal line decisions should be the only thing reviewed, if they start looking at offsides, penalties etc you really would be opening a can of worms and I agree it would ruin the game as it would be too stop start. Technology in rugby, tennis and cricket has made the games fairer in my opinion, why shouldn’t it be the same in football?
Whilst I see everyone’s point the fact that ONLY the goal line is covered means that there will still be controversy. What if the cross that brings a goal was over the line? What if he was clearly offside? What if? What if? The fact remains that most refs do a decent enough job and wrong decisions tend to even themselves out over a season. You can bet your life a manager will say a missed penalty decision cost them the game or the league whilst totally ignoring other decisions that went their way, we all do it.
I still say trust the man in charge, tell the managers to shut up and get on with it and stop our games becoming computerised jokes.
Was Agar stumped? Half the population said “Yes” half said “No” and that was after it had been shown umpteen times on the TV. Society challenges authority as a matter of course nowadays and rightly so, but surely not at sport, surely we can trust our refs etc to be unbiased if nothing else. Discuss.
PS They have shown the Hurst goal a million or more times and we still don’t know for sure if it was in. But one thing proves it was to me, the reaction of a person, Roger Hunt, who turned away when he could have headed the rebound home. Technology may not know if it was in but Hunt did and so did the Russian linesman!
WHS.
PPS The other sports mentioned tend to be "Stop/Start affairs which football most certainly isn’t.
WHS.
Being a football “traditionalist” I completely understand your view WHS, I would rather not see technology in football however for me there has been far too many massive goal line decisions over the last few years when the wrong decision has been given. I felt sick as a parrot when the Lampard and Mendes goals were not given, cheated almost. Goal line technology would ensure the majority of goal line decisions were correct, maybe not all of them, but certainly most of them.
As for Geoff Hursts goal in 66 i’ve seen that one a few times. It was well in :unsure:
Witton play tonight so I think we can close this now but not before I say, “Bring back the Cross bar tape, the old leather boots and ball and the need for three defenders between the attacker and the goal for him not to be offside. I also want, long shorts that cover the knees and “Hacking” to be perfectly legal and why oh why do we need nets”!!!
Sadly even this dinosaur knows technology is here to stay.
It won’t take anywhere near that long. The referee gets a visual and audible alert within 1 second of the ball crossing the line. Neither team has to review it. Once the referee gets the alert the goal is awarded.
