Blatter opens door to techonology debate

[fatshaft]

Finally, the old duffer starts to see sense......


http://www.boxofficefootball.com/sepp-blatter-says-sorry-to-england-and-mexico/

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.”

[Alverton]

Goal line technology should never happen imo. 

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

[roscopiko]

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

[gatso]

anyone know why they didn't just use 5 on-field officials for this tourney? I thought the trial with the guy on the goalline in the europa league went well. is it because they're 2 different federations?

[kinboshi]

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?

[TightEnd]

they'll fudge it and go with the Europa League model I reckon

[roscopiko]

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?

I'm not saying the grass roots thing is right, I just thought thats the excuse they had used for not introducing it in the past?

[Wardonkey]

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

[Potless]

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

FYP

[gatso]

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

both teams could get a couple of their subs to do a half each

[fatshaft]

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

Exactly.

[Murph1984]

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

Exactly.

Yeah this.

And in the longrun,spending a sizeable outlay to get technology involved is going to be a lot cheaper.

Apart from the logistical problems(there is already a shortage of officials in football) of needing to have 6 officials(ref,2 lino's,2 behind the goals and a 4th official) at every single professional game,the cost will also far outweigh the cost if implementing technology.

The inventor of hawk-eye also stated that sports such as tennis and cricket gain significent amounts of money by having commercial sponsors for it.

[Alverton]

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. 







   

[EvilPie]

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. 

  

Never thought about it like that. WP sir.

[chrisbruce]

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