Goal Line Technology

[Spike 12,049]

Goal line technology or video refereeing is a pain in the arse of the NRL (Australian Rugby league). Every fucking try is sent to the video ref. I hope this doesn't happen to Football.

[KonohasOrangeFlash 2,607]

About time. Welcome to the 21st Century, Football.

[DDA 9,770]

At last next season there is one less trick the ref's can try pulling on us in their cynical attempts to fuck us over. Long overdue.

[Fernando 6,534]

I saw this article and thought was interesting and wanted to share it with you guys.

I thought it merited it's own thread, unless one exist, about what's next after goal line technology!

The Premier League has enthusiastically embraced goal-line technology this season. Never again will there be a goal disallowed - or a phantom goal given - for a ball incorrectly judged to be crossing or not crossing the line.

Trouble is, those sorts of decisions are only really relevant a couple of times a season. It's unusual enough for balls to bounce down onto the line as it is, but incredibly rare for those instances to be the difference between winning and losing. The hoopla surrounding the technology is little short of a joke. And an incident from Liverpool's clash with Sunderland on Sunday afternoon only served to highlight why the newly-ushered in technology is woefully short of what is actually required.

Liverpool opened the scoring in the 28th minute when Daniel Sturridge headed home from inside the box. The only trouble was, the England striker completely missed the ball with his head and only directed the ball into the net via a deflection off his right elbow.

We're not for one second suggesting that Sturridge did it on purpose (though he was pretty shameless in celebrating his "header"). It was more one of those fortunate accidents for the striker, a bit of rub of the green that he got away with, and as he collected his Man of the Match champagne he openly admitted what had happened.

Furthermore, as far as we can tell, there's no reason to blame referee or linesman either: from the angles of where people were standing, it's reasonable to conclude that all were unsighted - and the incident happened at such high speed that it seemed to all the world as if a legitimate goal had been scored.

Yet as the GIF clip on this page shows, there is no way in the world the goal should have stood.

The goal proved critical: Liverpool would later lead 2-0 as Luis Suarez scored soon after, but Sunderland pulled one back to get it to 2-1 and looked in great form thereafter. The Black Cats were bitterly unlucky to concede a third and lose 3-1, with the final goal coming only as the home side were forced to push forward, thus leaving huge gaps at the back.

Supposedly stuffy and traditional sports such as rugby, cricket and tennis have adopted proper technology to allow officials to make informed decisions. So why is football still lagging behind?

The argument against is that a constant flow of appeals would slow the game down, but these days the technology is so fast that the delay would likely be no more than ten seconds.

Fair enough: don't disrupt open play without good reason. Surely, however, it's reasonable to double-check goals that are either scored or disallowed? That could be done as a matter of course and with minimal fuss by the fourth official, and would almost certainly be over before the celebrations (or remonstrations to the referee) had been completed. To all intents and purposes, the double-check via video replay would be invisible to the fans.

FIFA wanted to keep the game pure and free of technology for as long as possible. Fair enough, if that's your thing. But now that the genie is out of the bottle, why not implement technology properly and in a manner that is actually useful on a game-by-game basis, not simply a safety net to stop the once-a-season freak occurrence?

Until that's done, the much-talked-about technology that has been brought into the game will be an embarrassment merely by virtue of its limitations. As any Sunderland fan will tell you.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/early-doors/sturridge-handball-goal-proves-technology-actually-useful-163408046.html

--------------------

Thoughts and reaction on what people think the next step is? Is goal line technology just enough or more needs to be done?

[Jase 43,479]

  On 29/09/2013 at 21:39, Fernando said:

I saw this article and thought was interesting and wanted to share it with you guys.

I thought it merited it's own thread, unless one exist, about what's next after goal line technology!

The Premier League has enthusiastically embraced goal-line technology this season. Never again will there be a goal disallowed - or a phantom goal given - for a ball incorrectly judged to be crossing or not crossing the line.

Trouble is, those sorts of decisions are only really relevant a couple of times a season. It's unusual enough for balls to bounce down onto the line as it is, but incredibly rare for those instances to be the difference between winning and losing. The hoopla surrounding the technology is little short of a joke. And an incident from Liverpool's clash with Sunderland on Sunday afternoon only served to highlight why the newly-ushered in technology is woefully short of what is actually required.

Liverpool opened the scoring in the 28th minute when Daniel Sturridge headed home from inside the box. The only trouble was, the England striker completely missed the ball with his head and only directed the ball into the net via a deflection off his right elbow.

We're not for one second suggesting that Sturridge did it on purpose (though he was pretty shameless in celebrating his "header"). It was more one of those fortunate accidents for the striker, a bit of rub of the green that he got away with, and as he collected his Man of the Match champagne he openly admitted what had happened.

Furthermore, as far as we can tell, there's no reason to blame referee or linesman either: from the angles of where people were standing, it's reasonable to conclude that all were unsighted - and the incident happened at such high speed that it seemed to all the world as if a legitimate goal had been scored.

Yet as the GIF clip on this page shows, there is no way in the world the goal should have stood.

The goal proved critical: Liverpool would later lead 2-0 as Luis Suarez scored soon after, but Sunderland pulled one back to get it to 2-1 and looked in great form thereafter. The Black Cats were bitterly unlucky to concede a third and lose 3-1, with the final goal coming only as the home side were forced to push forward, thus leaving huge gaps at the back.

Supposedly stuffy and traditional sports such as rugby, cricket and tennis have adopted proper technology to allow officials to make informed decisions. So why is football still lagging behind?

The argument against is that a constant flow of appeals would slow the game down, but these days the technology is so fast that the delay would likely be no more than ten seconds.

Fair enough: don't disrupt open play without good reason. Surely, however, it's reasonable to double-check goals that are either scored or disallowed? That could be done as a matter of course and with minimal fuss by the fourth official, and would almost certainly be over before the celebrations (or remonstrations to the referee) had been completed. To all intents and purposes, the double-check via video replay would be invisible to the fans.

FIFA wanted to keep the game pure and free of technology for as long as possible. Fair enough, if that's your thing. But now that the genie is out of the bottle, why not implement technology properly and in a manner that is actually useful on a game-by-game basis, not simply a safety net to stop the once-a-season freak occurrence?

Until that's done, the much-talked-about technology that has been brought into the game will be an embarrassment merely by virtue of its limitations. As any Sunderland fan will tell you.

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/blogs/early-doors/sturridge-handball-goal-proves-technology-actually-useful-163408046.html

--------------------

Thoughts and reaction on what people think the next step is? Is goal line technology just enough or more needs to be done?

Merged it with this thread and moved to here. Was in the wrong place to begin with that new thread..

[Fernando 6,534]

  On 29/09/2013 at 21:42, BluesMaster said:

Merged it with this thread and moved to here. Was in the wrong place to begin with that new thread..

Thanks, so a thread does exist! Nice.

[Laylabelle 9,444]

More needs to be done but doubt it'll happen.They brought the linesmen behind the goal in who majority of the time is completely useless and misses vital moments...

[The_Flash 1,144]

I don't see he point of the extra guys are goal they just blankly ignore stuff just like the ref. this will get rid of some issues but not so many when the ref wants to engineer the result