blonde poker forum

Quote on the england balls up below

“It is obvious that after the experiences so far at this World Cup it would be a nonsense not to re-open the file on goal-line technology,”

Quote on the tevez balls up

“Personally I deplore it when you see evident referee mistakes but it’s not the end of a competition or the end of football, this can happen,” said Blatter.

“The only thing I can do is yesterday I have spoken to the two federations (England and Mexico) directly concerned by referees mistakes.

“I have expressed to them apologies and I understand they are not happy and that people are criticising.

“We will naturally take on board the discussion on technology and have first opportunity in July at the business meeting.”

Goal line technology should never happen imo. 

Only highlighted cos it happened to England and we make the most noise. 

+1, i thought the arguement against it was based on grass roots so that football is the same at every level it played.

100% correct decisions would make modern football even more boring with less talking points

The grass roots argument doesn't work for me.   Rugby league and now union has the video ref for the top flight games - but people aren't up in arms that it makes it different to the 'grass-root' game (or even games in the second divisions).  Local games of football don't involve millions of pounds, and so they wouldn't expect to have expensive technology.  Top flight football games have loads of TV cameras, and these can be used to make suspension decisions after the match - these aren't available at grass-root football, but it doesn't ruin the game.

Wimbledon has hawkeye, but only on two courts (soon to be 4 I believe), and I don't see it ruining the game.  If anything, it enhances it.

Grass-roots football IS different to the top-flight game.  The pitches that are played on, the facilities, the officials, etc.  In the Europa league they had additional officials on the pitch, and to be honest I didn't think they did much at the time.  But if they'd been used in the World Cup, a lot of these dubious decisions we're talking about would have been made correctly.

No one's talking about 100% correct decisions.  We're talking about key issues, such as the ball crossing the line, maybe certain red-card or penalty decisions, etc.  Would it really make it boring if these decisions were made correctly?

The 'grass-roots' argument is bollocks, unless we're going to have a world cup final with no linesmen. and jumpers for goalposts

The 'grass-roots' argument is bollocks, unless we're going to have a world cup final with no linesmen.

The 'grass-roots' argument is bollocks, unless we're going to have a world cup final with no linesmen.

Exactly.

Just for example; 

Frank Lampard shot crosses the line.  Refs not sure.

Where does the ref (or 5th ref in stands) stop and check the replay?  While play is carrying on?  When the ball is next out of play?  What happens if German keeper hoofs it and Klose gets onto the end of it now and scores.  They go back and check the replay and Lampards goal stands.  Now does Klose goal not count?   

Stop play straight away?  Play stops, everybody stands still?  Positional play is always important, and now play has stopped England can re-position themselves so they can prevent Germanys counterattack.  Also to restart where does the ball go?  Who gets the ball?
But surely if he blows to see a replay, he already kinda knows it went in?  Also imagine the uproar from players and fans, when Ref blows for replay.  Turns out its not in = More abuse, bitterness towards Ref.  Stupid pundits saying 'he should of gone with gut instinct, Ref doesnt have the bottle to make decisions always resorting to video ref.'

The argument about it only takes seconds still doesnt give answers to any of the above. 
So many holes, its unreal and this was only towards an obvious goal which wasnt.  Imagine when you go into offside decisions, penalty decisions, corners, free kick, throw ins decisions.  How many holes?  How many answers you'll need. Where does it stop?

I hate the argument because Tennis, cricket hawkeye and Rugby L video ref use it, Football should.  Completely different games where action can easily be stopped in obvious places.

Also Grass roots argument is bollocks.  But Football is a worldwide game.  Why should only top leagues and worldwide tourneys have it.  i.e. New Zealand players who have never experienced this stopping every minute cos Fabio thought that last tackle should of been a foul.  Hardly promotes fairness.  Who can play the best, only which team can manipulate the video replays the best?


This is all IMHO.  Flame away. 

  

Just for example; 

Frank Lampard shot crosses the line.  Refs not sure.

Where does the ref (or 5th ref in stands) stop and check the replay?  While play is carrying on?  When the ball is next out of play?  What happens if German keeper hoofs it and Klose gets onto the end of it now and scores.  They go back and check the replay and Lampards goal stands.  Now does Klose goal not count?   

Stop play straight away?  Play stops, everybody stands still?  Positional play is always important, and now play has stopped England can re-position themselves so they can prevent Germanys counterattack.  Also to restart where does the ball go?  Who gets the ball?
But surely if he blows to see a replay, he already kinda knows it went in?  Also imagine the uproar from players and fans, when Ref blows for replay.  Turns out its not in = More abuse, bitterness towards Ref.  Stupid pundits saying 'he should of gone with gut instinct, Ref doesnt have the bottle to make decisions always resorting to video ref.'

The argument about it only takes seconds still doesnt give answers to any of the above. 
So many holes, its unreal and this was only towards an obvious goal which wasnt.  Imagine when you go into offside decisions, penalty decisions, corners, free kick, throw ins decisions.  How many holes?  How many answers you'll need. Where does it stop?

I hate the argument because Tennis, cricket hawkeye and Rugby L video ref use it, Football should.  Completely different games where action can easily be stopped in obvious places.

Also Grass roots argument is bollocks.  But Football is a worldwide game.  Why should only top leagues and worldwide tourneys have it.  i.e. New Zealand players who have never experienced this stopping every minute cos Fabio thought that last tackle should of been a foul.  Hardly promotes fairness.  Who can play the best, only which team can manipulate the video replays the best?


This is all IMHO.  Flame away. 

 

+1 excellent post that

Just for example; 

Frank Lampard shot crosses the line.  Refs not sure.

Where does the ref (or 5th ref in stands) stop and check the replay?  While play is carrying on?  When the ball is next out of play?  What happens if German keeper hoofs it and Klose gets onto the end of it now and scores.  They go back and check the replay and Lampards goal stands.  Now does Klose goal not count?   

Stop play straight away?  Play stops, everybody stands still?  Positional play is always important, and now play has stopped England can re-position themselves so they can prevent Germanys counterattack.  Also to restart where does the ball go?  Who gets the ball?
But surely if he blows to see a replay, he already kinda knows it went in?  Also imagine the uproar from players and fans, when Ref blows for replay.  Turns out its not in = More abuse, bitterness towards Ref.  Stupid pundits saying 'he should of gone with gut instinct, Ref doesnt have the bottle to make decisions always resorting to video ref.'

The argument about it only takes seconds still doesnt give answers to any of the above. 
So many holes, its unreal and this was only towards an obvious goal which wasnt.  Imagine when you go into offside decisions, penalty decisions, corners, free kick, throw ins decisions.  How many holes?  How many answers you'll need. Where does it stop?

I hate the argument because Tennis, cricket hawkeye and Rugby L video ref use it, Football should.  Completely different games where action can easily be stopped in obvious places.

Also Grass roots argument is bollocks.  But Football is a worldwide game.  Why should only top leagues and worldwide tourneys have it.  i.e. New Zealand players who have never experienced this stopping every minute cos Fabio thought that last tackle should of been a foul.  Hardly promotes fairness.  Who can play the best, only which team can manipulate the video replays the best?


This is all IMHO.  Flame away. 

Just for example; 

Frank Lampard shot crosses the line.  Refs not sure.

Where does the ref (or 5th ref in stands) stop and check the replay?  While play is carrying on?  When the ball is next out of play?  What happens if German keeper hoofs it and Klose gets onto the end of it now and scores.  They go back and check the replay and Lampards goal stands.  Now does Klose goal not count?

Just for example; 

Frank Lampard shot crosses the line.  Refs not sure.

Where does the ref (or 5th ref in stands) stop and check the replay?  While play is carrying on?  When the ball is next out of play?  What happens if German keeper hoofs it and Klose gets onto the end of it now and scores.  They go back and check the replay and Lampards goal stands.  Now does Klose goal not count?   

Stop play straight away?  Play stops, everybody stands still?  Positional play is always important, and now play has stopped England can re-position themselves so they can prevent Germanys counterattack.  Also to restart where does the ball go?  Who gets the ball?
But surely if he blows to see a replay, he already kinda knows it went in?  Also imagine the uproar from players and fans, when Ref blows for replay.  Turns out its not in = More abuse, bitterness towards Ref.  Stupid pundits saying 'he should of gone with gut instinct, Ref doesnt have the bottle to make decisions always resorting to video ref.'

The argument about it only takes seconds still doesnt give answers to any of the above. 
So many holes, its unreal and this was only towards an obvious goal which wasnt.  Imagine when you go into offside decisions, penalty decisions, corners, free kick, throw ins decisions.  How many holes?  How many answers you'll need. Where does it stop?

I hate the argument because Tennis, cricket hawkeye and Rugby L video ref use it, Football should.  Completely different games where action can easily be stopped in obvious places.

Also Grass roots argument is bollocks.  But Football is a worldwide game.  Why should only top leagues and worldwide tourneys have it.  i.e. New Zealand players who have never experienced this stopping every minute cos Fabio thought that last tackle should of been a foul.  Hardly promotes fairness.  Who can play the best, only which team can manipulate the video replays the best?


This is all IMHO.  Flame away. 

Its so simple to implement it untrue.

Behind each goal you have a  red light / green light / sign whatever.
Dedicated person / persons view the replay, if a mistake has been made light is turned on. Play stops and is brought back to that point. Max 10-20 secs later.
suitable for did the ball cross the line situations.
no mistake no light carry on.

As for Offside each team should have 3 challenges per match, which can only be used after a goal has been scored. This makes life far easier for a linesman if it is a close call. He can give the attacking team the benefit of doubt as it can be
proved retrospectively offside or not.

Suitable only for top flight football

The UEFA cup was scoffed by presenters/pundits, but when they were called into action, they got it right 100% of the time.

This would not be costly for grass roots football, but may cause games to be called off for lack of officials.

To change would be a nightmare whichever way you go, I say stay as it is.

Still don't hear any arguments against the introduction of technology, only your personal inability to provide pragmatic solutions.  No one is saying the game should be stopped every few seconds/minutes. 

Your argument about positional play in regards to Lampard's 'goal' is ludicrous of course. The players should have been back in their own halves ready for the restart from the centre spot.  Instead the wrong decision was made.

But what if they stopped play to check and found it wasn't a goal? Englands crappy, often out of position defenders would have a chance to check in a manual and find out where they should be stood ready for a counter attack.

Read my other post.  With the technology there's no need to stop the game if the ball hasn't crossed the line.  The same way you don't answer your phone if it doesn't ring.

So what happens when the German counter leads to a goal?

Lol at the debate about the Germans going down the other end and scoring.

Obv Lampards goal counts and the German counter attack doesn't. As after Lampards goal the Germans would have to kick off from the centre circle not the keepers hands.
 

So what if the German counter leads to a foul of some description which was a sending off offence?

Would that sending off then be quashed because they shouldn't have been there in the first place?

So what if the German counter leads to a foul of some description which was a sending off offence?

Would that sending off then be quashed because they shouldn't have been there in the first place?

If the sending off is related to the actual game then the sending off doesn't count, in effect everything that happens after the ball crosses the line is deemed to never have happened. Of course if Ashley cole decks Klose with a left hook then he would be sent off as that is an off the ball incident.

What if someone gets their leg broken after the ball crosses the line?

What if someone gets their leg broken after the ball crosses the line?

But if the technology is done right then the goal decision should be instant. There'd be no German counter unless it wasn't a goal.

The physio comes on the field and calls for a stretcher. They then go to hospital, have an x-ray, get put in plaster and the case is passed over to that players clubs medical staff.

Do you wait for them to get better before carrying on? :P

Serious point though, if red cards don't count you could have dirty teams exploiting that (if they know it's a goal).

Do you wait for them to get better before carrying on? :P

Serious point though, if red cards don't count you could have dirty teams exploiting that (if they know it's a goal).

What happens to the time that has been played out before a review is made?

Couple of scenarios, team 'scores' in the last minute of a match, game is played out until final whistle and replay checked. Would you award the goal after the end of the match or add another few minutes on?

What if there was a freak passage of play (several minutes+) without a stoppage?

Also to those that are saying that it would have to be extended to everything like corners and yellow cards, it just doesn't. Whether or not the ball goes in the net is clearly the biggest game-changing mistake that can be made so surely that should be the mistake that we make the most effort to eliminate?

Good thread, good arguments on all sides. 

I do like people scoffing at my what ifs?  But they all have to be answered so theres consistency.  All situations have to be looked at, even the most obscure ones.

Hope not to offend, but i LOL at people saying its so easy to implement more technology.


IMHO 6 officials are the way to go.  Big decisions missed by the 4 officials this world cup:  Lampards shot, goalside ref easily sees it.  Teves offside goal, gs ref confirms it.  Henry's handball against Ireland, and Ireland are on the flight home from South Africa.

They run bad

FYP