IN - or NOT?

[paultheroyal]

Surely from that angle it is not in. How can it bounce behind the line, hit the post and come out. Law of physics and all that.....

End of day, it's now a goal, one point, we move on!

[Irvinchangeyaname]

Possibly

Looks like we'll never know.

Oh well, it was a decent point. Not like we've ever had a dubious goal heh!

[RoyalBlue]

Surely from that angle it is not in. How can it bounce behind the line, hit the post and come out. Law of physics and all that.....

I was running the line once for a game involving my daughter's team. She was in goal when the very same thing happened, only she caught the ball on the way back out. Ref waved play on but, being a fair (stupid?) guy, I flagged and told him I thought ball had crossed line before coming back out. Goal awarded. Needless to say I was very popular with the opposition and shunned by my daughter and her team (in my mind there is no real satisfaction for a true competitor in winning by cheating). Agonised over the decision for a long time - had my eyes deceived me, surely law of physics says it can't happen? - until I saw almost the identical thing happen in two other games. Law of physics might say no but law of spin says yes!!

[Big Foot]

Y24 - OUT

Looking back at tele replays and it's inconclusive

[Maguire]

North Stand - IN

Looked straight at the lino and he flagged immediately so I knew it was a goal.

[TFF]

Now I've seen it on the telly it probably wasn't a goal but, like Mags says, the lino said it was - so it stands. Ho hum.

[PieEater]

The OS has gone from "inconclusive" to definitely not in:

His team had played very well and led 1-0 into the final stages when Jay Bothroyd was credited with an equaliser for Cardiff; the goal being given by the linesman even though TV replays showed the whole of the ball did not cross the whole of the line.

and

Of course, it wasn't over the line. I've seen the replay

[handbags_harris]

Top of Y25, next to the Y25/4 stairwell, my immediate reaction was it's nowhere close. Shot comes in, Fed scrambles back, ball hits bar and down. The ball appeared to fall OUT, not IN from my angle and I was amazed that the linesman, who didn't have the perceived advantage of about 30 feet of height that I had, flagged immediately. I couldn't understand how, and still can't understand how he could be so sure when he's level with me about 14-15 yards out and flagging, yet I can't tell if it's in or not. The only point I am going to concede on this one is that when the ball bounced my view was completely obscured by Federici.

[cmonurz]

I guess this thread would serve as proof to some that technology doesn't necessarily solve anything. For me the replays (having not been at the game) clearly show the ball crossing the line. And yet for others the replays clearly show that the ball did not go in. Bizarre. Understandable, as it's a close one.

As for the physics of it, the ball must have had spin on it.

I think if we were watching those replays and it was a disallowed Reading goal, we'd be pretty disappointed.

[Wycombe Royal]

I guess this thread would serve as proof to some that technology doesn't necessarily solve anything.

However the technology being used here isn't the technology that would actually be used for goal line decisions.

[cmonurz]

I guess this thread would serve as proof to some that technology doesn't necessarily solve anything.

However the technology being used here isn't the technology that would actually be used for goal line decisions.

Of course, just making the point that the technology currently available is still inconclusive.

[Stranded]

I guess this thread would serve as proof to some that technology doesn't necessarily solve anything. For me the replays (having not been at the game) clearly show the ball crossing the line. And yet for others the replays clearly show that the ball did not go in. Bizarre. Understandable, as it's a close one.

As for the physics of it, the ball must have had spin on it.

I think if we were watching those replays and it was a disallowed Reading goal, we'd be pretty disappointed.

No it proves that the technology currently in place wouldn't work as it's not on the goal-line.

[Snowball]

I was in G5 row C.

When the shot hit the bar came down, I immediately thought f-ck it, so sure was I that it was a goal. It didn't enter my head for a second that it wasn't. Seemed "obvious" to me at the time.

I thought the ref had awarded it. Then, for about a second I thought the linesman waving madly was SAYING it WASN'T over the line and I thought we'd robbed Cardiff. Didn't last more than that precious second tho'.

I don't remember people around me saying, "No way was that a goal."

It was only after the game when fans were saying, "The radio said it definitely wasn't over the line..." that I started to have doubts.

But watching the slo-mo on Sky it looks clearly over the line

[Snowball]

The "technology" at the game, is a camera placed around about G5, and not the best HD Cam ever.

1 Micro-Chips in the ball, and a sensor in the goal

2 Cameras in both goal-posts or just behind the goalposts

3. Non-tech, but goal-line adjudicators like in the Europa Cup.


Nothing might ever be perfect, but we can get a lot closer to accurate.


One day some club will be relegated from the Prem, or miss going up into the Prem, because of a goal like this. Imagine if we now went on a run and eventually missed the automatic places by a single point. OK, "that game, that non-goal" would be a long way in the past, but what if last night's game had been the 46th game and Cardiff had needed to take a point to get second, and keep us OUT of second?

[Hugo Boss]

Was sat in the Upper West last night, right in the corner next to the away fans. I didn't think it was in personally and still can't see how the lino could have called it from where he was. Agree with AP though (and Dellor, begrudgingly) that we should have had the game killed long before that though.

Once again though, it highlights the desperate need for goal-line technology.

[Wycombe Royal]

I guess this thread would serve as proof to some that technology doesn't necessarily solve anything.

However the technology being used here isn't the technology that would actually be used for goal line decisions.

Of course, just making the point that the technology currently available is still inconclusive.

It is available though - it was trialled at Hogwood and from what I remember it worked.

[bigmike]

IN

Whole ball needs to be over the line therefore that shows that the ball was not in... Either way the lino was a good 10 to 15 yards away from the line and could not have been certain so he should not have given it.

Hey ho its not as if we didnt have enough chances to win the game.. we should have been 2 - 0 up at that stage anyway

[Stranded]

The "technology" at the game, is a camera placed around about G5, and not the best HD Cam ever.

1 Micro-Chips in the ball, and a sensor in the goal

2 Cameras in both goal-posts or just behind the goalposts

3. Non-tech, but goal-line adjudicators like in the Europa Cup.


Nothing might ever be perfect, but we can get a lot closer to accurate.


One day some club will be relegated from the Prem, or miss going up into the Prem, because of a goal like this. Imagine if we now went on a run and eventually missed the automatic places by a single point. OK, "that game, that non-goal" would be a long way in the past, but what if last night's game had been the 46th game and Cardiff had needed to take a point to get second, and keep us OUT of second?

Already happened (well in reverse) Bolton scored a perfectly good winner against Everton that was 3 yards in but not given. The swing in points cause by that decision saw Bolton drop and Everton survive.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

IN

Whole ball needs to be over the line therefore that shows that the ball was not in...

too many look at something like that and see the bottom of the ball bouncing over the line and assume that means it's a goal. It doesn't.

At very most it was like this middle picture, which means no goal.



At the time I didn't think it was in. In fact it didn't even cross my mind that it might have been in, and I don't recall any Cardiff players appealing either, but I can see how a badly positioned linesman could get it wrong. It was probably clearer from the East Stand.

Either way the lino was a good 10 to 15 yards away from the line and could not have been certain so he should not have given it.

That's just something trotted out by managers looking for an excuse. It has no part in the laws of the game. The refs have to give what they think happened, and that's it. There are no decisions they have to be 100% sure about.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

Whats all this crap along the lines of "If the Lino's not sure then he cant give it" ?? When did they write that into the laws then?

They just give it as they see it for every decision they make, right or wrong.

We dont have any camera shots in line with the goal, all we have is the main camera showing the ball bounce and not breaking the goalline. Which means, if it wasn't in, it was by the tiniest of margins. Only evidence we have suggests it was more than likely a goal, Lino gives it, as would most. We were on the bad end of a very close call. Tough Luck basically.