Insanity

[Ian]

Video's work in rugby and cricket because they are used when the ball is dead. If a player goes over the line with the ball in rugby it's dead irrespective of whether a try is ultimately awarded or not. Same in cricket with run outs.

 

In this incident the referee did not award a goal so couldn't have stopped the game without interrupting the passage of play. If that was to be allowed what would have happened if from Carroll's clearance a foul is committed worthy of a red card? At the point of the foul the referee stops the game sends the player off but only after checking whether the goal stood or not and if it did the player would stay on the field?

 

If they can produce something that beeps in the ear of the referee when the ball has crossed the line then that's fine (although I accept the argument about creating an eliteist league) but apart from that I think we should leave it as it is.

 

Referee's make mistakes the same as players nd managers do and I like it being part of the game (and I'm normally one of the first to shout at referee's during a game!). I think it was Roger Milford who was once accused by a player of having a crap game when his team was getting heavily beaten. His reply was something like, "take a look at the scoreboard, it's you that's having a crap game, not me!"

[charlie]

the beeps in the ear sound like a good idea

[charlie]

re: cricket camera men, cricket is a) a lot slower so it doesn't interrupt the game as much and so dull that the immaculate camera work and the projected magic eye thing makes the game exciting ( have forgotten what the eye's called, they had it at wimbledon too....)

[Matt]

What's this got to do with football?

 

Just kidding <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Staines-upon-Thames Rebel]

Your right Matt whats this got to do with real Ryman football? - not those overpaid premadonnas in the premiership

[Blue Rebel]

FIFA announced on Monday that they have been experimenting with a system involving a microchip in the ball and sensors in the goal to indicate if the ball has crossed the line. They hope to use this for the first time in a competitive match at the Carling Cup final in Feb.

[Guest]

Yes and the ref and the linesman were the only 2 that did not see it in a crowd of over 50,000

 

Come on this was not even close ! the ball was nearer the back of the net than the goal line !

 

Its was a touch of old trafforditis.......

 

chris s

[PJ-STFC]

When this incident was reported on the (radio) news, it was noted that any resulting change to the rules to would have to be applied at all levels, not just Premiershi*.

 

The microchip option mentioned by Blue Rebel is the only one so far that could be economicallly justified by non-league clubs. Sounds simple and effective. Proabably uses the same technology that is (I believe) used for timing on the London Marathon - each runner is given a microchip which is detected at start and finish lines.

 

PJ <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/chat.gif" alt="" />

[DECORUM]

This subject would not be widely discussed had it happened in a Div 1 or 2 game, or was not repeated continuously on TV. The football/media cartel have been waiting for an incident to push this issue because they and their friends will profit if the clamour for technology becomes unstoppable. Video is the problem not the solution. The media create the problem, magically offer the solution, then sell it to football and the fans will end up paying as usual. How long before clubs are denied promotion because the ground does not have the FA-approved video system installed to make decisions referees have been making for 140 years?. Followers of so-called non-league clubs and lower league clubs should be against this because it is not in their self-interest. Technology for officials will either be an additional expense, or a barrier, or both. This is why it is relevant on this board.

[Nathan]

Only not given beacuese it was against Man U, had it been against another team it would have been given...