By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Basically says the Premier League perfer the Wimbledon Hawkeye system due to 'both cost and ease of implementation and use'. I think we all know that means they're recommending it as the cheaper option. Should be looking at the other 3 technologies from Germany, all of which use censors, and would therefore give immediate answers as to whether the ball's crossed the line or not. Instead, we're going to have to have a break in play while all the tourists go 'ooooOOOOO' at the replays on the big screens Farce
Shit but local
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 12:49 - Apr 11 with 1303 views
I'm all for technology but over the course of a season how many "over the line" discussions are there compared to offsides, penalties, dives etc.
It's a step in the right direction but the others need addressing too.
Many claim it will slow the game down but it's got so farcical with players throwing themselves to the ground that the right decision needs to be made irrespective.
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 13:26 - Apr 11 with 1277 views
On the subject of persistent diving, the solution is simple and God himself doesn't know why no league implements it. I've said it 100 times - retrospective punishment. If a panel looks back at instances of possible diving through a match afterwards (like they do on MOTD and every fooball programme) and find cases of blatant diving, ban the player as you would for foul play, 1 game, 2, 3, whatever. You can add more games on for persistent divers. They'd soon get the message as managers would drill it in them not to do an Ashley Young, plus in their money-oriented little brains they'd realise they're losing out on match bonuses by being banned from playing.
Shit but local
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 13:41 - Apr 11 with 1261 views
From BBC Sport's Richard Conway: BBC Sport has learned that the Premier League meeting in London has passed goal-line technology for use next season, with British-based Hawk-Eye awarded the contract.
The FA will also install a system at Wembley Stadium in time for the Community Shield in August.
A raft of financial regulations have also been ratified by the 20 clubs.
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 13:47 - Apr 11 with 1249 views
Goal-line technology a step closer on 13:47 - Apr 11 by PinnerPaul
Presumably Hawk Eye have adapted their current cricket/tennis system so that it gives the ref an instant decision, as per the system approved by FIFA.
Their current system is NOT a real picture but based on a computer simulation.
The head honcho was once asked if, in relation to cricket, if his system was 100% accurate.
He rused to answer, just saying it was more accurate than the naked eye.
The football system MUST be instant, otherwise laws will need to be re-written and the FA can't do that unilaterally.
Exactly, the decision has to be instantaneous. I got into an argument with a mate last week about this. His argument of 'oh it'll only take 30 seconds' missed the point completely! Don't see why an automated system isn't being considered, apart from the fact that it's probably more expensive..
Goal-line technology a step closer on 14:07 - Apr 11 by QPunkR
Exactly, the decision has to be instantaneous. I got into an argument with a mate last week about this. His argument of 'oh it'll only take 30 seconds' missed the point completely! Don't see why an automated system isn't being considered, apart from the fact that it's probably more expensive..
ssn report..HAWKEYE have the contract.
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 14:52 - Apr 11 with 1209 views
Goal-line technology a step closer on 14:07 - Apr 11 by QPunkR
Exactly, the decision has to be instantaneous. I got into an argument with a mate last week about this. His argument of 'oh it'll only take 30 seconds' missed the point completely! Don't see why an automated system isn't being considered, apart from the fact that it's probably more expensive..
Not many of us seem to be bothered by this punk!
Even the lovely Harry said he was worried by the possible delay to games, saying "Lets see how we go"!!!!!
Current laws don't allow for anything other than instant decision, those who want video review of everything simply haven't thought it through.
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 13:59 - Apr 12 with 1180 views
This technology will correct about a dozen decisions a season maximum - it's a plaster trying to cover the gaping wound of FIFA's failure to implement technology to help referees.
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 14:37 - Apr 12 with 1173 views
still cant believe that no-one can see the technology is the one we already use. the tv monitor when frank lampard scored v germany in the last world cup the whole world could see it was a goal 1 ref and 1 lino didnt all that would be needed is a 4th or 5th official who can signal the referee to bring back play for serious errors of misjudgement only a goal that should stand a handball (thierry henry v ireland springs to mind) diving (ashley young take note) etc etc
all top class world games are filmed from all angles and broadcast the world cup finals and euros the qualifing internationals too all champions league games and europas all premier league games too and other top leagues italy spain etc
no one is saying we need technology for barnet v aldershot or the pub team on a sunday morning down dog shit lane here the referees decision is final
but in a game ruled by money then the big mistakes in big games are what need addressing and the technology is already there give the 4th official a proper fkin job ffs make him watch tv !! simples
[Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
cooky from plymouth
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 17:20 - Apr 12 with 1156 views
Goal-line technology a step closer on 14:37 - Apr 12 by plymhoop
still cant believe that no-one can see the technology is the one we already use. the tv monitor when frank lampard scored v germany in the last world cup the whole world could see it was a goal 1 ref and 1 lino didnt all that would be needed is a 4th or 5th official who can signal the referee to bring back play for serious errors of misjudgement only a goal that should stand a handball (thierry henry v ireland springs to mind) diving (ashley young take note) etc etc
all top class world games are filmed from all angles and broadcast the world cup finals and euros the qualifing internationals too all champions league games and europas all premier league games too and other top leagues italy spain etc
no one is saying we need technology for barnet v aldershot or the pub team on a sunday morning down dog shit lane here the referees decision is final
but in a game ruled by money then the big mistakes in big games are what need addressing and the technology is already there give the 4th official a proper fkin job ffs make him watch tv !! simples
[Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
Who decides what is a 'serious error or misjudgement"?
You have to give one person the power to refer/correct/clarify decision?
If that's the ref, how does he do that while play is going on and if him OR the 4th official what do you do with everything that could happen while 4th official is playing Alan Shearer on the sideline?
Bonkers!
0
Goal-line technology a step closer on 10:08 - Apr 13 with 1138 views
I've never thought that goal-line technology was enough. Never mind linesmen not being in position to see that the ball was across the line, referees are basically MASSIVELY incompetent. I must admit that I was slightly cheered (for all the wrong reasons) by the Zamora sending-off. It appears that there is already some review system currently active (excuse me if I missed the announcement of this).
The only problem is that this doesn't seem to be working anywhere near well enough.
I've always appreciated how well the review system works in cricket, but I acknowledge that football is much faster and therefore different. But shouldn't there be some acceptable compromise?
How much do match officials get paid? An absolute pittance compared to players, I presume. So employ more of them. Never mind the 4th official, get the 5th to the 8th-plus officials in, and if they spot something, the 4th official decides and calls it. Overrules the ref and corrects the game, end of (well maybe not, this is a work in progress).
Also have a lot of time for QPunkR's retrospective punishments.
Goal-line technology a step closer on 13:26 - Apr 11 by QPunkR
On the subject of persistent diving, the solution is simple and God himself doesn't know why no league implements it. I've said it 100 times - retrospective punishment. If a panel looks back at instances of possible diving through a match afterwards (like they do on MOTD and every fooball programme) and find cases of blatant diving, ban the player as you would for foul play, 1 game, 2, 3, whatever. You can add more games on for persistent divers. They'd soon get the message as managers would drill it in them not to do an Ashley Young, plus in their money-oriented little brains they'd realise they're losing out on match bonuses by being banned from playing.
Ditto. I've too mentioned on here about the need for retrospective bans. Won't help the game at the time to begin with but if players start realising they'll be missing games (and I'm sure the managers won't be happy either) then maybe, just maybe, they'll stop doing it.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
