Dissapointed- The goal that Never was.

[KC Royal]

Haven't read the whole thread so i may be going over old ground here, but im surprised that more of our players didn't mention anything to the ref. Its also interesting that Watford weren't pursuing a replay whilst we were open to the idea, probably because Watford were happy with the result at the end of the day. One of their players said the goal "kick-started them" and they played better afterwards.

[Sarah Star]

Yesterday, everyone was shouting 'lino, lino give us a goal!'

[Franchise FC]

Hawkeye would work perfectly well in football. You wouldn't even have to stop the game.

Fourth official in the stand with the technology can have the result in no more than 10 seconds. Plenty of time to stop scenario a and b there. An incident like Sat wouldn't even need the technology as you can tell instantly that the ball was nowhere near the goal and play on.

The game has to stop for hawkeye, and incidents like Saturday shouldn't need video or any other technology. Human eyes should've been enough.

Do you know how long it takes to get the ball from one end of the pitch to the other ? 10 seconds rules out exactly none of the scenarios.

No it doesn't need to stop. The ref is wired up with a headset anyway, so if the ball crosses the goalline between the posts he hears a very loud beep in his earpiece the second it happens. A quicker indication to him than he'd get from a linesman flagging and pressing the buzzer on his flag handle.

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but that's not how hawkeye works. What you're describing is a completely different system that involves having a chip in the ball. Hawkeye works by using several cameras and computer software on a normal ball.

[Southbank Old Boy]

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but that's not how hawkeye works. What you're describing is a completely different system that involves having a chip in the ball. Hawkeye works by using several cameras and computer software on a normal ball.

In cricket it does yes. I think the makers of Hawkeye have made it as Dirk describes for football though

The orginal hawkeye was for tennis, and it was just a bleep when the ball landed past the line

[Franchise FC]

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but that's not how hawkeye works. What you're describing is a completely different system that involves having a chip in the ball. Hawkeye works by using several cameras and computer software on a normal ball.

In cricket it does yes. I think the makers of Hawkeye have made it as Dirk describes for football though

The orginal hawkeye was for tennis, and it was just a bleep when the ball landed past the line

But Hawkeye (ala cricket) is now used in tennis (with 3 challenges allowed per set) - using ordinary tennis balls.

And FIFA have ruled OUT the use of balls with chips - hence the furore when the company that had invested so much got told that they weren't going to get any payback (about this time last year IIRC)

[Southbank Old Boy]

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but that's not how hawkeye works. What you're describing is a completely different system that involves having a chip in the ball. Hawkeye works by using several cameras and computer software on a normal ball.

In cricket it does yes. I think the makers of Hawkeye have made it as Dirk describes for football though

The orginal hawkeye was for tennis, and it was just a bleep when the ball landed past the line

But Hawkeye (ala cricket) is now used in tennis (with 3 challenges allowed per set) - using ordinary tennis balls.

And FIFA have ruled OUT the use of balls with chips - hence the furore when the company that had invested so much got told that they weren't going to get any payback (about this time last year IIRC)

Yes but neither of those points make any difference to what Dirk was saying, that there is a system out there (which I think is a Hawkeye system but I'm happy to be proven wrong) which could give instant feedback to the referee when the ball goes out of play. The fact that FIFA have ruled them out doesn't mean it's not a good idea, or that they won't change their mind at some point either

I'm a bit lost as to what your point is about the ordinary tennis balls, they've always been ordinary from what I can remember

[earleyroyal]

Mr Holt has his say - no surprises!

· Reading's players should have stepped in to stop phantom goal farago
By Oliver Holt 24/09/2008
o


Let's be clear about one thing in the furore over the phantom goal awarded to Reading in their 2-2 draw with Watford on Saturday - if one player in Reading's side had any real courage or honesty, it wouldn't have stood.
It's as simple as that. I've heard all the garbage from Reading manager Steve Coppell about how it's not up to the opposition to right a wrong from the officials.
Well, I'm sorry, but when it's as blatant as this, I think it is.
When an injustice is that obvious and that unfathomable, the merest modicum of fair play demands that someone in Reading colours speaks out.
I can only think Watford boss Aidy Boothroyd was speaking out of some sort of misguided loyalty to Coppell and his team when he said: "If someone stops you and gives you a present, you don't say 'no', do you?"
Er, well, actually Aidy, when the present's got 'stolen' written on it in large letters, yes, you do.

S'not like him not to check his quotes before going to print is it?

I think there should be a competition between him and Martin 'West Ham' Samuel to see which journalist can produce the most drivel on their chosen subject in 5 minutes, and more pertinently to see if anyone gives a toss about their opinion.

Edit: maybe it was Boothroyd that said it, not Coppell

[Dirk Gently]

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but that's not how hawkeye works. What you're describing is a completely different system that involves having a chip in the ball. Hawkeye works by using several cameras and computer software on a normal ball.

I hate to out-pedantic your pedantry, but Hawkeye is actually a trade-name, not the name of the technology. The Hawkeye company develops a different set of technology to meet the requirements of each sport.

Full details of what was tested at Hogwood Park is here : http://www.hawkeyeinnovations.co.uk/?page_id=1076

Please note where it says :

It is vital that the desired information is communicated to the referee in a quick, discreet manner. The IFAB has stipulated that an “instant” system must be implemented: Hawk-Eye will provide an answer is less than 0.5 seconds.

I also hate to name drop, but Keith Hackett was the one who, in May, told me just how well the system worked.

[SCIAG]

Finerain- he had a go at Hunt during the next match. Before the match he said Hunt had done no wrong.

I think someone should wait behind Ollie's car and give him a present when he appears. It should have "STOLEN" written on the paper. I think Holt would accept it, somehow.

[Franchise FC]

I'm sorry to be pedantic, but that's not how hawkeye works. What you're describing is a completely different system that involves having a chip in the ball. Hawkeye works by using several cameras and computer software on a normal ball.

I hate to out-pedantic your pedantry, but Hawkeye is actually a trade-name, not the name of the technology. The Hawkeye company develops a different set of technology to meet the requirements of each sport.

Full details of what was tested at Hogwood Park is here : http://www.hawkeyeinnovations.co.uk/?page_id=1076

Please note where it says :

It is vital that the desired information is communicated to the referee in a quick, discreet manner. The IFAB has stipulated that an “instant” system must be implemented: Hawk-Eye will provide an answer is less than 0.5 seconds.

I also hate to name drop, but Keith Hackett was the one who, in May, told me just how well the system worked.

And subsequently FIFA told the company that they would not be pursuing the technology - so it doesn't actually matter how well it works !!

[Southbank Old Boy]

And subsequently FIFA told the company that they would not be pursuing the technology - so it doesn't actually matter how well it works !!

That wasn't the point though

The point was it was suggested that something like hawkeye is introduces. then for some reason you said you had to stop for hawkeye etc etc

Why don't you just admit you were wrong

The fact that FIFA seem to have said no to this technology at the moment is a totally different discussion

[Ian Royal]

Mr Holt has his say - no surprises!

· Reading's players should have stepped in to stop phantom goal farago
By Oliver Holt 24/09/2008
o


Let's be clear about one thing in the furore over the phantom goal awarded to Reading in their 2-2 draw with Watford on Saturday - if one player in Reading's side had any real courage or honesty, it wouldn't have stood.
It's as simple as that. I've heard all the garbage from Reading manager Steve Coppell about how it's not up to the opposition to right a wrong from the officials.
Well, I'm sorry, but when it's as blatant as this, I think it is.
When an injustice is that obvious and that unfathomable, the merest modicum of fair play demands that someone in Reading colours speaks out.
I can only think Watford boss Aidy Boothroyd was speaking out of some sort of misguided loyalty to Coppell and his team when he said: "If someone stops you and gives you a present, you don't say 'no', do you?"
Er, well, actually Aidy, when the present's got 'stolen' written on it in large letters, yes, you do.

S'not like him not to check his quotes before going to print is it?

I think there should be a competition between him and Martin 'West Ham' Samuel to see which journalist can produce the most drivel on their chosen subject in 5 minutes, and more pertinently to see if anyone gives a toss about their opinion.

Edit: maybe it was Boothroyd that said it, not Coppell

Can anyone honestly say that they think the referee would have overruled the linesman and overturned his decision if Harps had run up whilst all the Watford players were protesting and said:

"'scuse me ref, you've got that dead wrong. It's a goalkick/corner"

Bollocks would he. Not that someone shouldn't have done it, but at the same time half the players wouldn't have been close enough to see what happened. It's a bit much to expect a player to run 20 yards to tell a ref he's cocked up when it's in your favour.
No footballer is going to risk the potential comeback by just walking/throwing the ball into their net either.

[floyd__streete]

Can anyone honestly say that they think the referee would have overruled the linesman and overturned his decision if Harps had run up whilst all the Watford players were protesting and said:

"'scuse me ref, you've got that dead wrong. It's a goalkick/corner"

Of course he wouldn't have. Only an idiot would think that.


An idiot: earlier.

[Ian Royal]

Can anyone honestly say that they think the referee would have overruled the linesman and overturned his decision if Harps had run up whilst all the Watford players were protesting and said:

"'scuse me ref, you've got that dead wrong. It's a goalkick/corner"

Of course he wouldn't have. Only an idiot would think that.


An idiot: earlier.

LOL

Thats something I can happily agree with you on Floyd. Hope to manage that more often this season.

[papereyes]

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexami ... qqqx=1.asp

lol

[Archie's penalty]

I love Stephen Hunt - he's such a simpleton.

[Dirk Gently]

I love Stephen Hunt - he's such a simpleton.

Read the article though and what actually happened is quite different from what the headline suggests.

The headline suggests the dialogue was before the lino gave the goal, but read it properly and it's clear it was long after the goal was given, and SHunt was telling the linesman that the goal had been given and not to worry about it.

[Archie's penalty]

I love Stephen Hunt - he's such a simpleton.

Read the article though and what actually happened is quite different from what the headline suggests.

The headline suggests the dialogue was before the lino gave the goal, but read it properly and it's clear it was long after the goal was given, and SHunt was telling the linesman that the goal had been given and not to worry about it.

I read the article through. That's why I found it funny. I love the way he speaks.

[Ashfordroyal]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRIarQrY ... re=related
Hitlers View!

[Bill Oddie's Beard]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRIarQrYvvM&feature=related
Hitlers View!

Pretty poor compared to the other versions of that floating around.