St. Mary's Trialling Hawk-Eye

[mikee]

Yet again; what is the point in not bringing it in if the technology is there??

 

The penalties and offside issue is a completely different scenario; they would require a break in play to analyse the video replay and requrie a human decision to be made. Goal line technology would be made in real time and would not require an independent reviewer to make a decision on it.

 

I understand the point you are making and I expect that FIFA will end up bringing this in, but for me it will look a bit like bringing in some technology so they can say they are embracing technology when in reality it will have no bearing on 99% of matches which will still be decided by other more important mistakes that will go un-addressed.

[The Kraken]

I understand the point you are making and I expect that FIFA will end up bringing this in, but for me it will look a bit like bringing in some technology so they can say they are embracing technology when in reality it will have no bearing on 99% of matches which will still be decided by other more important mistakes that will go un-addressed.

 

I don't disagree, it will have very little overall effect on most games.

 

That said, I truly believe that it's the extent of how far technology should encroach on the game. Unlike rugby, tennis and cricket, football is very much a continuous game and does not afford the natural breaks in play required to analyse video evidence to come to a particular conclusion. Were it to be introduced, then yes it would improve the accuracy of decision making in the game. But I also believe it would ruin the game as a spectacle by making it massively fragmented, and therefore it would have a massively negative influence.

[Legod Third Coming]

I don't disagree, it will have very little overall effect on most games.

 

That said, I truly believe that it's the extent of how far technology should encroach on the game. Unlike rugby, tennis and cricket, football is very much a continuous game and does not afford the natural breaks in play required to analyse video evidence to come to a particular conclusion. Were it to be introduced, then yes it would improve the accuracy of decision making in the game. But I also believe it would ruin the game as a spectacle by making it massively fragmented, and therefore it would have a massively negative influence.

 

I know we have exchanged views on this before, but I would say these are the following stoppages that could benefit from video evidence:

 

1. Penalty decisions.

2. Sending's off.

3. Goal line technology.

4. Goals (there have been goals given where the ball went WIDE of the goal or not given where it went IN the goal - I can name two from last season).

5. Fouls where a player is seriously injured.

 

In each of the above cases there is already a stoppage. What difference would video evidence make to the stoppage?

 

Football is not a continous game when a referee is pursued for 30 yards after a controversial decision. All we are doing is ending this unsightly behaviour and replacing it with an accurate (more often than not) decision, surely??

[Saint Without a Halo]

I hope we never get technology in football. Part of what makes the game great is having controversial talking points. England may not have won the world cup in '66 if we had goal line technology. Who knows? We may have gone on to win it if we had it in South Africa last year (admittedly, highly unlikely). But its controversy like that which makes the game interesting, and in the long run those sort of close decisions generally balance themselves out anyway...

 

Swings and roundabouts come to mind, one to us and one to the Germans