Jump to content

Hawk-eye


Saint woody
 Share

Recommended Posts

sigh...wish they wouldnt bring this into our game.

 

While I agree that controversy is a vital part of he game, it has been obvious that the officials need some help with the speed of the game. Technology can help here because whether the ball crossed the line should be a matter of fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably worth trialling but I wonder how quickly the decision will be made to review. It'll be easy enough if the ball goes out of play but what will happen if the ball smacks against the crossbar, bounces somewhere near the goal-line before being hoofed upfield where it's duly smacked into the net at the other end?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably worth trialling but I wonder how quickly the decision will be made to review. It'll be easy enough if the ball goes out of play but what will happen if the ball smacks against the crossbar, bounces somewhere near the goal-line before being hoofed upfield where it's duly smacked into the net at the other end?

 

How many times has that happened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm! I have no actual examples, m'lud. It is a hypothesis.

 

My question remains though. Does the game get stopped for a review or does the review happen while play continues?

 

The whole point of it is that the decision has to be electronically relayed to the referee within 1 second. So its pretty much instantaneous and won't require stoppages to the game for review. That's the benchmark (as well as 100% accuarcy) that the trials are to judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole point of it is that the decision has to be electronically relayed to the referee within 1 second. So its pretty much instantaneous and won't require stoppages to the game for review. That's the benchmark (as well as 100% accuarcy) that the trials are to judge.
In that case can't see a problem. What about the idea of referring a decision in the style of tennis and cricket?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case can't see a problem. What about the idea of referring a decision in the style of tennis and cricket?

 

Nope. The whole point of it is that there can be no breaks in play; the referee will get an alert within one second if the ball has crossed the line. No other stoppages, referrals etc can form part of the system, it has to be a totally instant alert that there's a goal and nothing else. If the system can meet the benchmarks prescribed then it will be implemented, if not then quite simply it won't. It can only benefit the game, if only in a small way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably worth trialling but I wonder how quickly the decision will be made to review. It'll be easy enough if the ball goes out of play but what will happen if the ball smacks against the crossbar, bounces somewhere near the goal-line before being hoofed upfield where it's duly smacked into the net at the other end?

 

Simple - the first ones the goal. Don't see a problem. Ice Hockey uses the system just fine and its far quicker end to end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@TomCoull: Hawk-Eye are showcasing their goal line technology to the media at St Mary's today. No Frank Lampard to hit shots though. #CrossbarChallenge

 

@JFBLucas: #SaintsFC hosting start of Phase 2 of FIFA's Goal-Line Technology tests. Two companies, Hawk-Eye and GoalRef, in running. Hawk-Eye up today.

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blimey

 

Hope that doesn't come into use next season.

 

I'd be worried about Rickie or Jos tripping over the Tent when they go up for corners.

 

And what about KD hitting his head on those boxes on the goal-line?

 

:-))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably worth trialling but I wonder how quickly the decision will be made to review. It'll be easy enough if the ball goes out of play but what will happen if the ball smacks against the crossbar, bounces somewhere near the goal-line before being hoofed upfield where it's duly smacked into the net at the other end?

It is not a question of review. If the ball crosses the line then Hawkeye should produce an audible signal so even if the ball does get hoofed away the play will be stopped anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that controversy is a vital part of he game, it has been obvious that the officials need some help with the speed of the game. Technology can help here because whether the ball crossed the line should be a matter of fact.

 

yes it's part of the game, but how is it vital? I'd say fair play is vital, but without new technologies the cheats will continue to get away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably worth trialling but I wonder how quickly the decision will be made to review. It'll be easy enough if the ball goes out of play but what will happen if the ball smacks against the crossbar, bounces somewhere near the goal-line before being hoofed upfield where it's duly smacked into the net at the other end?

 

Oh yer it works fine at the moment with 5 minutes of all the players screaming at the ref and then at the lino, all telling him what they saw and the decision was wrong. That doesn't stopp the flow of the game whatsoever.

At least we would have a correct decision at the end of it , and John Terry would just have to shut up and get on with whatever else he does.

Got to be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What apparatus? A pitch and a goal?

 

We're being used because we're the closest appropriate stadium to where the Hawkeye system is being developed.

 

Don't be so negative - this is clearly a sign that developers of motion detection gizmos believe our pitch the goal at the Northam end are the best in the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it going to be just for the goal line or all the lines? Arguments about whether a ball was out for a corner or a throw-in are much more common in games than close decisions on the goal line. For example couple of close decisions in the playoff match last night, neither led directly to goals but could have done, that could well have gone the other way if there was assistance for the officials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't be so negative - this is clearly a sign that developers of motion detection gizmos believe our pitch the goal at the Northam end are the best in the country.

 

We should put it in the 5 year plan to be one of the top 4 clubs in the country to be willing to try out footballing technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it going to be just for the goal line or all the lines? Arguments about whether a ball was out for a corner or a throw-in are much more common in games than close decisions on the goal line. For example couple of close decisions in the playoff match last night, neither led directly to goals but could have done, that could well have gone the other way if there was assistance for the officials.

 

it's only half the job if it's only goal-line.

 

I watched a streamed version of the game at Midd.boro. In the first half, Rickie Lambert chased the ball down the left touchline for 10-15 yards, and the white line could be clearly seen on the (left) crowd side. Ricky went on to score a "goal " in the final move, but the linesman belatedly gave the ball out - because everyone had stopped running (except Rickie) and he'd convinved himself it was out.

 

A video re-run of the incident showed that the ball was never completely over the line, and still in play and the goal should have stood.

Fortunately, we finished the job by beating Coventry, but it would have been quite unjust had it been more of a vital goal.

 

If we have the technology, it should be used to the full. Maybe we have to wait for the next " ba**s -up " in the Euros, when the ref gets it wrong AGAIN, and someone goes out. If it's France who suffer, I wonder what Platini will say then?..........

Edited by david in sweden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's only half the job if it's only goal-line.

 

I watched a streamed version of the game at Midd.boro. In the first half, Rickie Lambert chased the ball down the left touchline for 10-15 yards, and the white line could be clearly seen on the (left) crowd side. Ricky went on to score a "goal " in the final move, but the linesman belatedly gave the ball out - because everyone had stopped running (except Rickie) and he'd convinved himself it was out.

 

A video re-run of the incident showed that the ball was never completely over the line, and still in play and the goal should have stood.

Fortunately, we finished the job by beating Coventry, but it would have been quite unjust had it been more of a vital goal.

 

If we have the technology, it should be used to the full. Maybe we have to wait for the next " ba**s -up " in the Euros, when the ref gets it wrong AGAIN, and someone goes out. If it's France who suffer, I wonder what Platini will say then?..........

 

It's got to be an advantage of the hawkeye system compared to the sensor in the ball one. You can put electronics around the goal for the ball going over the goal line with the sensor version but its another thing to cover all round the edge of the pitch. For the hawkeye system just use the same camera's and beep in the officials ear if the ball goes outside the bounding box that is the playing area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...