Goal Mouth Technology

Davidth88

Ok, After the clear goal that 'never was ' last night in the Juve vs Chelsea game , what do people think about some sort of goal mouth ' magic eye ' ?

Although I suppose these sort of incidents only happen maybe 4-5 times a season in the ' top flight ' .

I am torn , because this to me would be a slippery path to a TV ref , now is that such a bad thing ?

To me yes , because one of the best things about footy as opposed to say the ' odd shaped ball game ' is the lack of stopages / delays to the game.

Anyway , goal mouth technology , what do people think ?

CHD

As a Chelsea fan its easy to say yes after last night but im not too pushed because we scored straight after.Liverpool robbed us before though!

Anyway, No they shouldn't bring it in imo. Football is grand how it is.If they bring this in why not have sin binnings, timeouts and give managers 3 chances to call up ref's decisions.In a way its part of the beauty of the game that these things happen and in a way they even themselves out.


Leave football alone Blatter.

Chardee MacDennis

CHD wrote: »

Liverpool robbed us before though!

lol keep telling yourself that if it helps...

keane2097

CHD wrote: »

If they bring this in why not have sin binnings, timeouts and give managers 3 chances to call up ref's decisions.

This is a trivially foolish argument imo. You can't bash one idea by implying that other, completely unrelated ideas, would be bad.

I also loath the sort of thinking David Ellery used to espouse:

"If there were no bad decisions in a game there'd be nothing to talk about down at the pub".

Give me a fcuking break - we're in serious trouble if this is the best argument the anti- side can come up with and still win...

Benedict XVI

They are alreday using two extra officals behind the goal to get a closer look at Penalty box incidents in the UEFA U-19 qualifing and the FIFA meeting in NI a few weeks back agreed to extend this to professional leagues.

http://www.manchester.com/Sport_News/Extra_assistant_referees_to_be_used_in_professional_league-19051247.html

This would be a good start

redout

CHD wrote: »

As a Chelsea fan its easy to say yes after last night but im not too pushed because we scored straight after.Liverpool robbed us before though!
.

Chelsea robbed United in the FA cup final when Giggs scored. So what goes around comes around.

No technology by the way. Game has done fine all these years as it is.

leninbenjamin

goal mouth technology would be the least intrusive form of technology, i don't see why it shouldn't be implemented if it could be perfected.

Benedict XVI

redout wrote: »

No technology by the way. Game has done fine all these years as it is.

Why are some football fans so backward ?

The game is far from prefect, how many times have penalties been given when they should not have been and vise versa, how may times has a ball crossed a line and not been given when it should have and visa versa.

There is nothing wrong with introducing changes that help the integrity of the game.


Oh and BTW do you want to allow the keeper to pickup back passes from now on, what about getting rid of numbers on shirts, and I hate the substitution rule too, they should get rid of that.

noodler

CHD wrote: »

As a Chelsea fan its easy to say yes after last night but im not too pushed because we scored straight after.Liverpool robbed us before though!

Anyway, No they shouldn't bring it in imo. Football is grand how it is.If they bring this in why not have sin binnings, timeouts and give managers 3 chances to call up ref's decisions.In a way its part of the beauty of the game that these things happen and in a way they even themselves out.


Leave football alone Blatter.

I felt we were robbed. Instead of having Cech sent off AND getting a peno we only got a goal. Could have made the 90 minutes alot easier.

If goal line tech isn't introduced soon then I don't know what I'll do.

It is instantaneous and definitive so what the hell is the problem?

redout

Benedict XVI wrote: »

Why are some football fans so backward ?

The game is far from prefect, how many times have penalties been given when they should not have been and vise versa, how may times has a ball crossed a line and not been given when it should have and visa versa.

Thats all part of the exceitement and magic of the game and what makes it so great. Take it away and you remove a piece of the game in my opinion.

noodler

redout wrote: »

Thats all part of the exceitement and magic of the game and what makes it so great. Take it away and you remove a piece of the game in my opinion.

Bullcrap for me. Goal line tech is definitive but we will still have different views on penalty decisions or handballs etc.

Third_Echelon

10 or so years after goal mouth technology was first seriously talked about, the football family as FIFA like to call themselves are still sitting on their hands.... There has been some testing of new rules etc in youth tournaments etc, but it has now come to the point where I think the TV ref is needed....

There are too many bad decisions made by referees/linesmen these days and too much is resting on these decisions that by not having some sort of accurate technology to help them is getting beyond ridiculous.

Rugby has introduced it and it works (it does have more natural stoppages in play though, so I am aware of the flow of the game argument). Football does have stoppages at times... injured players, ball out of play etc. Out of 45 minutes in a half, generally only 22 mins of this actually has the ball in play if you look at statistics on this... Having a TV ref for these big decisions I don't think would hamper the game that much. There would have to be some sort of usage limitation like they have with timeouts in American Football. Soccer doesn't have this, so maybe they could pitch one of their substitutions against a TV ref request for a decision. If you lose it, you lose the use of a sub. If you have used all your subs already you can't make a TV ref request?? I don't know.. it might work..

American Football is a hard game to draw a comparison with is it is naturally a stop-start type of game and TV refs for big decisions don't intrude into the natural rhythm, but if mistakes are made on the decisions, the ref will overturn the decision if they can prove beyond all reasonable doubt that their initial decision on the pitch was incorrect.

How many times have seasons been ended by dodgy goal line decisions, bad offside/not-offside decisions, yellow/red cards to the wrong player, 3 yellow cards given to a player... It's all these things that annoy football fans all over the world. I for one would welcome some sort of trials of this technology to see how it works... If it does not fit, then at least it was tried and some other way of assisting refs with human error can be looked at.

keane2097

redout wrote: »

Thats all part of the exceitement and magic of the game and what makes it so great. Take it away and you remove a piece of the game in my opinion.

This is truly a facepalm argument.

Incorrectly awarded/not awarded goals are an integral part of the enjoyment of soccer for you? It's so ridiculous...

paddyb125

If it did happen it would give us a lot less to talk about!

redout

keane2097 wrote: »

This is truly a facepalm argument.

Incorrectly awarded/not awarded goals are an integral part of the enjoyment of soccer for you? It's so ridiculous...

Maybe for one who is close-minded. Its a part of the magic and History of the game. Would we have been better off if the "Hand of God" was never awarded, what about Hursts goal against Germany in the 66 World cup final, Schillaci against Ireland at Italia 90. I am sure that there are many more memorable moments that have all added to the magic and history of the game over the years. Technology in general is taking away from the game.

keane2097

redout wrote: »

Maybe for one who is close-minded. Its a part of the magic and History of the game. Would we have been better off if the "Hand of God" was never awarded, what about Hursts goal against Germany in the 66 World cup final, Schillaci against Ireland at Italia 90. I am sure that there are many more memorable moments that have all added to the magic and history of the game over the years.

What you're saying basically is that tremendous injustices are something the game would lose its magic if we got rid of. Bullshít.

Also, how would we lose the history of the game? It's history.

Benedict XVI

redout wrote: »

Maybe for one who is close-minded. Its a part of the magic and History of the game. Would we have been better off if the "Hand of God" was never awarded, what about Hursts goal against Germany in the 66 World cup final, Schillaci against Ireland at Italia 90. I am sure that there are many more memorable moments that have all added to the magic and history of the game over the years. Technology in general is taking away from the game.

So to honour the magic and history of the game I propose we should allow back passes to keepers (1990s), no substitutions should be allowed (1960s), numbers should be removed from shirts (1920s/30s), and two points awarded for a league win (1980s) etc etc.

Quint

Goal line technology would be a good thing. Arguing against it, it like saying having bad refs is a good thing, it gives us something to talk about.

For the record, the free kick last night was awarded for a handball after it clearly hit Tiagos chest. Funny that Hiddink didn't mention that

leninbenjamin

redout wrote: »

Maybe for one who is close-minded. Its a part of the magic and History of the game. Would we have been better off if the "Hand of God" was never awarded, what about Hursts goal against Germany in the 66 World cup final, Schillaci against Ireland at Italia 90. I am sure that there are many more memorable moments that have all added to the magic and history of the game over the years. Technology in general is taking away from the game.

that was then, this is now... nowadays the game is much faster than it ever was before. referee's have to cope with greater althleticism, pace and reactions in players. they have much more off the ball movement to keep an eye on. they are overseeing teams willing to a hell of a lot more to win a game than before due to the financial rewards, through diving, off the ball fouls, intimidation, exploiting loopholes in the rules and much much more. It is not just unrealistic of the game to expect one man to keep complete control over it, it's physically impossible given the limits of human perception. And as the media coverage of the game ever increases, the pressure placed on the refs is rising exponentially, to the extent that we're seeing many leaving the game prematurely.

The game is slowly be damaged by this. It cannot continue, refs have to be given more assistance from FIFA, be it technology, extra assistans, whatever. You cannot possibly argue that the current state of affairs, where players hound the ref everyweek, occasionally engaging on what would be called assault off the field, is part of the 'magic' of the game... it's intolerable and should be stamped out, but this cannot happen until people's faith in referee's is at least partially restored.

and for the record, arguing on an irish forum that England winning the world cup was a good thing :rolleyes:

Tom65

CHD wrote: »

Anyway, No they shouldn't bring it in imo. Football is grand how it is.If they bring this in why not have sin binnings, timeouts and give managers 3 chances to call up ref's decisions.In a way its part of the beauty of the game that these things happen and in a way they even themselves out.

That's a ridiculous argument though. The things you mention would involve changing the current rules, goal line technology would involve enforcing them.

Guy:Incognito

redout wrote: »

No technology by the way. Game has done fine all these years as it is.

Here here. While we're at it, those heavy crossbar things are too obtrusive, I demand a return to tape crossbars. 14lb Stitched leather footballs ftw!

redout

FIFA set to snub Chelsea calls for goal-line technology
By David McDonnell 12/03/2009

Fifa president Sepp Blatter will ignore Guus Hiddink's calls for goal-line technology to be introduced because he says trials have proved it unworkable.

Didier Drogba's free-kick against Juventus on Tuesday crossed the line but was not given, leading to Hiddink asking for technology to be introduced to ensure such problems are a thing of the past.

But Blatter, in Manchester yesterday, said trials had so far failed.

"We tried a microchip in the ball and also the hawk-eye system used in tennis," said Blatter. "But both ideas proved too complicated and wouldn't work. So for now there are no plans for goal-line technology."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/2009/03/12/fifa-set-to-snub-chelsea-calls-for-goal-line-technology-115875-21191633/


Despite a raft of high-profile refereeing errors this season, including Didier Drogba's free-kick for Chelsea against Juventus on Tuesday night, Blatter remains unconvinced the technology exists to introduce any such system effectively.

Fifa is set to trial a system featuring two additional assistant referees, one placed in each half, to aid decision making, but Blatter admits he is reluctant to implement a system which could delay the game, as is the case in rugby, tennis and cricket.

Clubs dismiss Uefa and Fifa goal-line decisionHe said: "I do not think, and the Fifa Congress are of the same view, that you can afford to stop the game, and with the camera system HawkEye showed us, there is a delay in announcing the decision and the situation can change.

"The chip in the ball technology, which Adidas and Kairos trialled, was not accurate enough and the problem is that you have to put the chips in millions of balls made by lots of different companies.

"The International Football Association Board is of the opinion that football will remain, for the time being, a game for human beings with errors on the field of play. We will try to improve referees but you will never erase errors completely."


Thank christ for that.