[Archived] Man Utd Vs Tottenham

[SouthAussieRover]

How about taking the net away from the back of the goal?

It could add spice to a dull match, either by way of some yob behind the goals being taken out or the ball bouncing back off the wall and felling the goalkeeper

Edited January 5, 2005 by SouthAussieRover

[thenodrog]

Good bleeding gawd! Are these chaps for real?

That looks a good foot over the line.

If thats the size of your foot Bryan I can see you being huge hit with the ladies.

As for live video evidence, I'm all for it. It would be the first administrative footballing decision to work against the big clubs in my lifetime. 'Homers' would rightly become a thing of the past.

[CAPT KAYOS]

I'm with Tris on this and think people are missing an important factor - to what level would this apply too?

Although the consequential differences are enormous - in prinicpal they are the same.

Yet again though questions are being asked how come not one of the so called officials could see what happened.

Personally I agree with the 4 linesmen idea and and although I am against briniging in too much technology for decisions, except maybe on the communication side for all officials to be able to contact/mike up in an instant.

You get some - you lose some that is all part and parcel of the game - however improvement could be made simply by getting players acceptance of refs decisions and the refs being on the same level in their interpretation of rules that are better defined than what they are now.

[Tris]

Both good arguments , but dont you think the game would be slowed down drastically and all momentum and flow taken out of the game at crucial points??

Good point. Look how infuriated we all were when the ref on Boxing Day v Newcastle went to the sideline twice.

The second time (at what would have been a quickly taken throw) totally interrupted the momentum Rovers had built up.

And the upshot of that incident was that some of these idiots can't even operate a bloody stopwatch. The last thing we want to do is give them VCRs as well !!

[broadsword]

OK, OK, it was a good yard! I couldn't be assed to edit it!

Surely you could have some sort of sensor beaming across the goaline with something meshed into the fabric on the ball, and then you wouldn't even need videos.

[SouthAussieRover]

http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/...Technology.html

[Ozz]

Why all fuss?

It`s only like a ref missing an obvious handball and not giving the penalty?

No to technology, let the humans make their mistakes.

[Eddie]

There also has been many good examples of tecnology in sport. (Rugby league) and I think Union has followed the example of league. Tennis has used back court line buzzers to determine faults on service serve's to helps umpires with the correct call for years now.

The nature of those games means that you have to stop anyway. For example in Rugby it can quickly be seen if the ball was touched down while the two teams set up for either a drop out or the conversion. While in tennis, half the time cyclopse, or whatever name youd like to use, doesnt work and they have to turn it off. I myself have played in tournaments where that is used, its more trouble than its worth.

I think in football the game would be slowed down too much, we all know there are going to be mistakes, and that is tough to take, but really id rather see the game as I know it, warts and all, then some stop-start computer run affair.

[92er]

I have come across the idea that the 4th official knew it had crossed the line but there was no mechanism for him to let the ref know.

[Drakefyre]

The only technology that I can see that would be completely beneficial would some sort of earpiece or headset for the referees to communicate instantly.

[Kiwiwannabe]

I have come across the idea that the 4th official knew it had crossed the line but there was no mechanism for him to let the ref know.

There is a good chance that happened. I think they can bring incidents to the attention of the ref, such as behaviour of managers/coaching staff, but I guess they weren't sure if they could tell him if the ball crossed the line.

Having 4 linesmen has been mentioned, but with this particular incident that would not have helped. It wasn't human error on the part of the linesman either. His job is to keep in line with the last outfield player - which he did. When the ball is passed back to the keeper the linesmen don't run back with the ball. Yesterday was the same situation, the linesman was in the position he was supposed to be.

I wonder if Fulham got a call from Fergie this morning?!

[Ossydave]

FA explains United goal ruling

An FA spokesman after the game absolved the linesman of any responsibility for the apparently mistaken decision not to award a goal to Spurs after a shot from the halfway line crossed the goal line by at least a meter.

"The shot came in from an unusual distance and as such caught the linesman out of position forcing him to race back towards the goal as the play developed", explained the spokesman, "As he ran, the United scarf he was wearing under his shirt came loose and fluttered up into his face obscuring his view and preventing him from making the call. It was just one of those things."

In response to further questions from the Press the spokesman explained "If they don't already have a United tattoo most officials on game day try to wear a scarf or a replica shirt under their regulation kit to show their support for the worlds greatest club. The linesman in this case had chosen to wear a United scarf, a common choice that is in keeping with FA guidelines. The root cause of the problem lies not with the linesman but with the players and management of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club who broke one the most important unwritten rules of the English FA: They placed a shot on target at Old Trafford. Martin Jol is new to this country and perhaps he s not yet familiar with some of our finer traditions. Fortunately if he doesn't yet understand that for the greater good of the game visiting teams, by tradition, are not expected to try to score at Old Trafford then our officials are in a position to help Mr Jol make that cultural adjustment."

Chuckling to himself the FA spokesman added "The goal had to be disallowed to avoid us descending down a slippery slope that would be bad for the national game. It's a fine line the officials have to walk. If they award a goal this week, next week someone might expect a penalty or ask that Van Nistleroy be booked for diving. Can you imagine? That would just never do. No no no. Shocking, just the thought of it."

[Jim J]

No to video replays, yes to the ball over the line sensor. It wont slow down the game, just confirm to the officials that the whole of the ball has crossed the line.

[Kiwiwannabe]

You'd have to sensor the whole of the goal for yesterday's incident though! If we had hawk-eye technology, like they use in the tennis, it wouldn't register because the ball was so far over the line!

[mhead]

Wire up the posts and crossbar,let a World War 2 siren sound and the whole of the goal should flash with colour lights for the team that has scored.

Then Sir Alex at the Theatre of Dreams(self-named) would just about believe it.

[AussieinUk]

There also has been many good examples of tecnology in sport. (Rugby league) and I think Union has followed the example of league. Tennis has used back court line buzzers to determine faults on service serve's to helps umpires with the correct call for years now.

The nature of those games means that you have to stop anyway. For example in Rugby it can quickly be seen if the ball was touched down while the two teams set up for either a drop out or the conversion. While in tennis, half the time cyclopse, or whatever name youd like to use, doesnt work and they have to turn it off. I myself have played in tournaments where that is used, its more trouble than its worth.

I think in football the game would be slowed down too much, we all know there are going to be mistakes, and that is tough to take, but really id rather see the game as I know it, warts and all, then some stop-start computer run affair.

Honestly, as far as mankind (women too!) has come, there are areas within football that can be enhanced to help officals in giving correct judgements without taking the pace out off the game.

More and more as technology at home becomes greater through the Television and Sky, (as an example) the greater the outcry/controversy from those you view it as an injustice in sport. This leads to further "nit-picking" into the Refs Assoc. for better standards. Which we know all comes done to "human error". I'm sure there will be, in the future at some point a growing belief from refs that some form of "assistance" will be required for a more scuitinising public.

Just as set out in the numerous examples given in previous posts, small areas of technology could be used in football, which IMO wouldn't interfere with "time" issues of the 45min halves. I mean how much time is lost in "faked" injuries.

I mean taking the "Human Element" out of the game is not what I am saying, but there are instances in Football that can be improved by basic techological advances in the last 10-15 years

Edited January 5, 2005 by AussieinUk

[Teemu]

Probably the easiest way to solve this thing would be to introduce a goal ref, like they have in ice-hockey, by just sitting in one guy behind both goals to check for goal line and other stuff that go on inside the box(i.e. handballs and dives etc..). They would notice the most blatant stuff that go on and the rest could go as 'human errors'. At least that goal yesterday would have been seen. The videos would be unnecessary and too slow considering the nature of sport.

[seahawkdad]

This image was posted on the BigSoccer boards and fully explains how the AR and center missed the call.

It also show Carroll's speed and creativity.

[American]

Probably the easiest way to solve this thing would be to introduce a goal ref, like they have in ice-hockey, by just sitting in one guy behind both goals to check for goal line and other stuff that go on inside the box(i.e. handballs and dives etc..). They would notice the most blatant stuff that go on and the rest could go as 'human errors'. At least that goal yesterday would have been seen. The videos would be unnecessary and too slow considering the nature of sport.

What they also do in ice hockey is they will go back and check with a video judge at the next stoppage in play if there is a chance a goal might have gone in. Usually doesn't effect the momentumn of the game, as the ref is signaled, and the video review is done while the game continues. If it is a goal they go back to the time of the goal, and all other play is for nowt (in soccer's case, it would be adding that time to stoppage).

As for Fergie, the interview I saw of him was pretty good, actually. He admitted that it was a bad call, but that the only way to fix it would be to have a replay system.

[hangthadj]

I was watching this over in the states. Just a few minutes were left, obviously, and i leave the room to get a beer, and then i hear the anouncers shouting. I walk out and see the replay and could not believe it.

Now I am not a Spurs fan by any means. Not by a long shot, but they truly got robbed. Just awful stuff.

[roversWASmylife]

I've only just seen the incident and can't believe like everyone else why Tottenham weren't given a goal.

Video technology?

Not for this incident, it's a good yard and a half over the line. The officials should have spotted it and in my opinion whether or not they have a hard job or not they should have given it.

The linesman's an embarassment. Robbie Keane confronted him and he didn't look too comfortable.

There are advantages and dis-advantages to having video technology in football.

I'd like to see the idea of video technology given a trial period in use, then at least we can say football has had a go with it. If it slows the game down, then fine, scrap it.

FA considers goal-line technology

[Teemu]

What they also do in ice hockey is they will go back and check with a video judge at the next stoppage in play if there is a chance a goal might have gone in.

Hmm, back here they usually stop the whole game until the decision can be made(?). But anywhich way, I still think that it could be just healthy to leave out the videos and just add the goal refs. In the end it wouldn't hurt too much to leave a little space for chance;)

Btw, I also found Sir Alex's comments to be quite reasonable (for change!).

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

It's a rare occasion to be able to agree with both Tris AND Scotty but this is one of those.

You'll be shocked to know that you're also agreeing with me too, FLB...

I'm concerned that the proposed new technology for goal-line incidents will lead to a dangerous slippery slope; there would be demands for video replays to be introduced for every controversial decision, such as penalties and offsides.

Going down this route would be a big mistake in my view.

The delays to the game in order to refer to video would seriously disrupt the flow of the match - as well as potentially giving an unfair advantage to one of the teams having the 'break'.

A delay may give them time to rest, regroup and receive instructions from the coach in the technical area.

A major part of football's appeal is that it's usually a fast and free-flowing game. At the moment, games which kick off at 3pm on a Saturday usually finish by about 4.55pm.

Do we want the matches to finish half an hour later at 5.25pm because of continuous interruptions?

How many different people in the stands will the referee be able to consult? Will it be decision by jury - a group of men in the stands replaying the incident over again on video and arguing with each other over whether it was a deliberate or accidental handball?

If it's the case that only the clubs in the top divisions could afford the new technology then to have a different set of rules for different clubs would go against all the traditions of football.

The likes of little Yeading, who face Newcastle this weekend, would be playing a different game to the rest.

Arsene Wenger says that there's too much money at stake in football for video replays not to be introduced.

I would argue that to change the nature of football in such a fundamental way would be a dangerous move to make.

[MCMC1875]

And me too!

[BMan]

Ice Hockey? What's that?