IN - or NOT?

[Leamington Royal]

Lino gave it. The referee agreed. It was a goal. Get over it.

That's obvious. The point is linesman are going to carry on getting these decisions wrong because their brains aren't wired to call it accurately. Bring on touchline technology Mr Blatter!

[Svlad Cjelli]

Firstly, I've never seen an offside decision overruled by a referee. .

The first goal we conceded this season was ruled out at first as "offside"
and the ref over-ruled the linesman. Maybe you weren't at that game.

wasn't that a "not interfering" or "came off a Reading player" type judgement though, rather than the ref insisting the guy wasn't actually ahead?

It is very rare to see a ref overrule a linesman insisting that a player was level.

It was a "came off a Reading player" decision, I think.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

If an assistant referee is good 10 to 15 yards behind play and gives an offside chances are that the referee will overrule him because he is not in a position to give the decision. The assistant cannot have been certain that it was a goal he guessed ... If he continues his carrer guessing he wont get very far.

Every decision is pretty much a guess. Things happen so quick you can only ever go by what you think you saw than by what factually happened.

The real fact is that there is no rule at all that says a linesman has to be 100% sure to award a goal. As I said earlier, it's just the result of useless pundits trotting out these nonsense cliches that fans, and even players and managers, treat as fact. How many times have you heard the complaint "they know the rulebook, but they don't know the game" when the real issue is with those who know the game, but don't know the rulebook?

[Stranded]

Lino gave it. The referee agreed. It was a goal. Get over it.

I'm not sure the ref agreed more gave sway to a colleague who he felt had a better view, he was happy to play on til the flag went up.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

Lino gave it. The referee agreed. It was a goal. Get over it.

That's obvious. The point is linesman are going to carry on getting these decisions wrong because their brains aren't wired to call it accurately. Bring on touchline technology Mr Blatter!

The common argument against goal line technology, that I can never get my head round, is "you can't bring it in as it would need to be applied to every level of the game, not just the top?" Why? Every other sport that uses replays etc gets on fine with it only being used at the top. It's not as if bringing it in would mean the game's played to different rules.

[Snowball]

The common argument against goal line technology, that I can never get my head round, is "you can't bring it in as it would need to be applied to every level of the game, not just the top?" Why? Every other sport that uses replays etc gets on fine with it only being used at the top. It's not as if bringing it in would mean the game's played to different rules.

Wimbledon only has the tech stuff for Centre Court and Court Number 1

Do they have "Fourth Officials" at Sunday League games?

Mine rarely had linesmen.

[Selma Park]

IN

That's making me feel a bit dizzy - no fcuking idea even looking at that, and certainly no idea from the North Stand watching it live

[Svlad Cjelli]

Lino gave it. The referee agreed. It was a goal. Get over it.

That's obvious. The point is linesman are going to carry on getting these decisions wrong because their brains aren't wired to call it accurately. Bring on touchline technology Mr Blatter!

The common argument against goal line technology, that I can never get my head round, is "you can't bring it in as it would need to be applied to every level of the game, not just the top?" Why? Every other sport that uses replays etc gets on fine with it only being used at the top. It's not as if bringing it in would mean the game's played to different rules.

Answered in this blog : http://endtoendstuff.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/goal-line-technology/

[Leamington Royal]

The common argument against goal line technology, that I can never get my head round, is "you can't bring it in as it would need to be applied to every level of the game, not just the top?" Why? Every other sport that uses replays etc gets on fine with it only being used at the top. It's not as if bringing it in would mean the game's played to different rules.[/quote]

Answered in this blog : http://endtoendstuff.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/goal-line-technology/[/quote]

Agree with most of that (video replay a definite no-no). Surely if the ref has an unmissable tone in his ear if the ball crosses the line, then he will have blown for a goal long before any counter attack or other incident can happen?

[Wycombe Royal]

Lino gave it. The referee agreed. It was a goal. Get over it.

That's obvious. The point is linesman are going to carry on getting these decisions wrong because their brains aren't wired to call it accurately. Bring on touchline technology Mr Blatter!

The common argument against goal line technology, that I can never get my head round, is "you can't bring it in as it would need to be applied to every level of the game, not just the top?" Why? Every other sport that uses replays etc gets on fine with it only being used at the top. It's not as if bringing it in would mean the game's played to different rules.

Well we aren't playing "at the top" so we wouldn't be using it anyway if that was the case.......

[loyalroyal4life]

not completely over!

[Wycombe Royal]

not completely over!

it is impossible to tell!

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

The common argument against goal line technology, that I can never get my head round, is "you can't bring it in as it would need to be applied to every level of the game, not just the top?" Why? Every other sport that uses replays etc gets on fine with it only being used at the top. It's not as if bringing it in would mean the game's played to different rules.

Answered in this blog : http://endtoendstuff.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/goal-line-technology/

that doesn't remotely answer the question I posed.

As for the "delaying the game....or what happens if while there's a decision being reviewed and the other team score?" issue, well tough shit, really. If it should have been a goal then any subsequent attack is void.

It depends on how quickly they can review goalline incidents. It would be much easier with cameras inside the goal, not relying on long distance shots. With the refs having a mic, you don't need to wait for the ball to go deal before making a decision.

[Ferris]

From Y23, I immediately thought it was in. From the replay I don't think it is.

In any case, shall we move away from this and just blame Fedders for getting lobbed?

[Terminal Boardom]

What is inconsistent is that the authorities use video evidence when dealing with foul play after the game has finished. How long a ban will Joey Barton be banned for his punch last night? Clearly visible on tv.

[Svlad Cjelli]

The common argument against goal line technology, that I can never get my head round, is "you can't bring it in as it would need to be applied to every level of the game, not just the top?" Why? Every other sport that uses replays etc gets on fine with it only being used at the top. It's not as if bringing it in would mean the game's played to different rules.

Answered in this blog : http://endtoendstuff.wordpress.com/2010/11/11/goal-line-technology/

that doesn't remotely answer the question I posed.

As for the "delaying the game....or what happens if while there's a decision being reviewed and the other team score?" issue, well tough shit, really. If it should have been a goal then any subsequent attack is void.

It depends on how quickly they can review goalline incidents. It would be much easier with cameras inside the goal, not relying on long distance shots. With the refs having a mic, you don't need to wait for the ball to go deal before making a decision.

It does answer the question, by saying that the precedent of "equipment must be the same at all levels" was blown out of the water the day that refs and linos were given radio communications. That shoots the question down completely - and agrees with you.

As for the "delaying the game...." in theory maybe, but it opens up a horrible can of worms and would massively change the game - imagine the best goal ever in the world scored and then disregarded because it should never have happened. Imagine a leg-breaking foul and sending-off that happen in time that should never be played. Imagine the ball doesn't go out of play for 5 minutes and then a goal is retrospectively awarded after when it does - do you play those 5 minutes again or just write them off? What if a team's made a substitution in that time.... the problems are countless and would just complicate.

Instant notification of line decisions is the answer - and that's all that's needed. The technology exists and works now, too.

[royalsteve]

IN

That's making me feel a bit dizzy - no fcuking idea even looking at that, and certainly no idea from the North Stand watching it live

when it bounces it looks in as behind line, but then hits the post which indicates either:-

1) went in, serious spin meant it bounced out and hit post
2) never went in

cant blame lino or ref....then again if there is doubt then it shouldnt be given

[royalsteve]

not a clue

re: goal line tech

im okish with goal line tech only, not a fan but that only and as long as the delay is only secs......but for anything else leave it to the officials

just worried it would be the start of changing the game

[royalsteve]

From Y23, I immediately thought it was in. From the replay I don't think it is.

In any case, shall we move away from this and just blame Fedders for getting lobbed?

hmm, feds isnt 12 ft tall though is he....but i guess the question is should he have been so far from his line.....prob not

[Ferris]

feds isnt 12 ft tall

Then maybe we should get a 'keeper who is to avoid stuff like this happening again.