Goal line technology tested at St. Mary's (From Daily Echo)

I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

Well, hang on, what about the many various players & managers who have come out in favour of it?

There's so much at stake now (money wise, good or bad) that this is inevitable.

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

Well.. I don't produce goal line technology so, annoyingly, I must be a moron as I am very much in favour of it! In a sport where goals are rare events, yet absolutely crucial to the outcome, it makes sense to utilise technology and make sure the correct decision is made.

Nope, I'm right and you're wrong. The point of football is that it can be replicated in the park with four jumpers and a football. The fact refs occasionally get decisions wrong only adds to its drama.

St Retford wrote:
Nope, I'm right and you're wrong. The point of football is that it can be replicated in the park with four jumpers and a football. The fact refs occasionally get decisions wrong only adds to its drama.

And also dodgy decisions (whether fair or not) are what makes football interesting and a talking point. Mutual fans love it when someone like Gerard score a totally legitimate goal that the officials 'didn't see'. We love laughing in their face.
.
Sky sports ruined football a long tiem ago by enabling questionable decisions to be replayed at different angles for discussion. Until then no one knew either way which was fair.

St Retford wrote:
Nope, I'm right and you're wrong. The point of football is that it can be replicated in the park with four jumpers and a football. The fact refs occasionally get decisions wrong only adds to its drama.

What a banal and childish argument. Believe it or not, there is no right answer on this point, opinion is divided, although from what I've heard most people seem in favour, probably only because of that moment in South Africa a couple of years ago though!

Are we also opposed to having actual goal frames and nets? Would it not be more fun to guess whether the ball went inside the imaginary post arising from the jumper on the ground??

will it stop at goal line technology though. Off side rule, penalty decisions, red cards etc etc... it would be the first time technology was used in football match decison making so i can see why there will be plently of people who oppose the idea

Good news in my opinion. That goal denied against Germany in the last world Cup made me sick. I'm fed up with England/Saints/Whate
ver team I've lumped cash on being robbed because of the lack of technology. Yes, it means professional football does not replicate the "jumpers for goalposts" park experience but then a bunch of kids playing lower leagues or just for a knockabout aren't representing a team that thousands or even millions have their hopes pinned on. Also, the referee is influenced more at big stadiums because of the noise the home fans make versus the away fans for certain decisions (the same as in Cricket with a loud call versus a whimper for an LBW decision by the players) so this will make the sport fairer.

I think the more technology the better, the sooner the FA start citing unseen off the ball violent behaviour and diving the better for the game

Oh come on St Retford!

Yes, and we all know how technology has stopped people playing rugby, tennis and cricket as a hobby or down the park with their mates... oh, wait a minute, it hasn't.

St Retford wrote:
Nope, I'm right and you're wrong. The point of football is that it can be replicated in the park with four jumpers and a football. The fact refs occasionally get decisions wrong only adds to its drama.

totally agree. It will be the thin end of the wedge.Next will be managers being able to call time outs for referees to look at tackles , disputed corners etc.
Cricket and Rugby have it , but they are stop start games anyway. Surely part of the football experience is moaning about the ref or lino, or occassionly saying the ref had a good game.

Redrobbo wrote:

St Retford wrote: Nope, I'm right and you're wrong. The point of football is that it can be replicated in the park with four jumpers and a football. The fact refs occasionally get decisions wrong only adds to its drama.

totally agree. It will be the thin end of the wedge.Next will be managers being able to call time outs for referees to look at tackles , disputed corners etc. Cricket and Rugby have it , but they are stop start games anyway. Surely part of the football experience is moaning about the ref or lino, or occassionly saying the ref had a good game.

I agree aswell. Football's great because it flows and doesn't stop. What I'd love to see is a referee come out and do an after-match interview and say that certain players under-performed and that was why they lost, and not because one mistake by the referee, and to also mention that they're paid hundreds of thousands a week yet make mistakes themselves. I'm sure it wouldn't take long before managers begin to hate it, and would start to feel like the refs do currently.

I always think that a team should be good enough to win regardless of the referee. If he makes a mistake then you just continue and try again. In South Africa, if we hadn't gone 2-0 down in the first place then it wouldn't have mattered whether it had crossed the line or not. I felt it was more an excuse to deflect away from a poor team and tournament.

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

Agreed. The wife would like hawk eye in our toilets at home -sounding an alarm if anyone's pee aim hits the seat or floor and not the bowl. I say no -whodunnit disputes are all part of the fun in family life.

Confucious wrote:

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

Agreed. The wife would like hawk eye in our toilets at home -sounding an alarm if anyone's pee aim hits the seat or floor and not the bowl. I say no -whodunnit disputes are all part of the fun in family life.

There was no need for any disputes about anything in our house. It was always me. Bring on the technology.

Confucious wrote:

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

Agreed. The wife would like hawk eye in our toilets at home -sounding an alarm if anyone's pee aim hits the seat or floor and not the bowl. I say no -whodunnit disputes are all part of the fun in family life.

150 years of footbal lthe only technology required is a louder whistle. football is not and cannot be a clinical black/white sport .the cotroversy is part of the game

circa 66 saint wrote:

Confucious wrote:

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

Agreed. The wife would like hawk eye in our toilets at home -sounding an alarm if anyone's pee aim hits the seat or floor and not the bowl. I say no -whodunnit disputes are all part of the fun in family life.

150 years of footbal lthe only technology required is a louder whistle. football is not and cannot be a clinical black/white sport .the cotroversy is part of the game

note to self put teeth in before posting

Honest answer guys, all those against this becoming part of the game. How would you feel if next season SAINTS are relegated on the last day of the season because we did not gain the pont needed for safety because the ref DID NOT give a goal that was clearly a goal as shown latter on T V ???

It seems silly to me with the amount of cash running on each and every game that something is not done about cheating.
Goal line tech is fair enough but I have to disagree with the other posters here, I believe that giving the fourth official use of cameras can be invaluable, at the moment all they do is check that the manager stays in his box, the numbers are right for subs, that players are not wearing jewlery, and that two people are not shouting in the technical area at the same time, guess the time added on. I don't think I have ever seen a fourth official able to do any of those things right.
And for f***s sake it would stop diving, handballs, shirt pulling and goal line decisions for half price of the goal line tech (rumoured at £250,000 min).
There is no need to change much as he already has an earpiece with the ref, it just gives them 8 eyes more, all from perfect viewpoints.

Believe me when the likes of Man Utd and Man City come here or we go there the confused ref WILL NOT recognise that we can play at their level, so many times as a Saints fan have I seen terrible ref decisions go against us purely on the basis of reputations.

I do not blame the ref as with the players showing so little honesty confusion is bound to set in, many professional footballers know the refs blind spots inside out and really base a large part of their game on it.

Fair enough bad decisions do make the game more exciting,
but only in a pantomime sense, I get sick of the soap operas.

Sorry, Saints withdrawal symptoms are setting in, when does the new season start?

hedge end bob wrote:
Honest answer guys, all those against this becoming part of the game. How would you feel if next season SAINTS are relegated on the last day of the season because we did not gain the pont needed for safety because the ref DID NOT give a goal that was clearly a goal as shown latter on T V ???

or if in the f.a.cup final we won with a goal that wasn't.

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

I usually agree with you, Retford (although our musical tastes are probably a little different). However, on this one, I'm clearly a total and utter moron.

Optimist makes the most valid case of all in that the mistakes are not evenly distributed. We can reliably assume that refs do the best they can, but the evidence indicates that the pressure they are put under regularly causes the most human of reactions (yes, even in football refs); they buckle and award a sizable majority of close decisions to the bigger clubs. If this can even things up and 're-adjust the scales' so that bigger clubs stop benefiting from the human fallibility of the refs, then bring it on.

IMO Goal Line Technology is the way ahead ...

Changing Subject to MORE IMPORTANT MATTERS ...

Every Saints Fan should look at the Premier League and find everton.

everton are a club that smashed four past manure at old trafford and are an established Premier League side. They have no money though and are stuck where they are ....

THE MIGHTY SOUTHAMPTON have money and are in the process of developing a Premier League Team that WILL FIGHT FOR EUROPE.

Minimum placing of Top Ten next Season.

WE KNOW NIGEL IS A VERY CAPABLE MANAGER - FACT.

There was a post recently about him being under pressure ...

HE SHOULD HAVE A TEAM TO SOURCE QUALITY PLAYERS FOR HIM.

He does not need to do every bit of Donkey Work Himself.

If Nigel is not getting Support - he must demand it and additional Staff to develop the networks required to get the very best for SOUTHAMPTON FC.

WE ARE PREMIER LEAGUE AND EVERY SAINTS FAN EXPECTS..

WE DEMAND SUCCESS

WE ARE SOUTHAMPTON.

RED ARMY 2012. COYR.
THE PRIDE AND THE PASSION.

Strasbourg Saint wrote:

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

I usually agree with you, Retford (although our musical tastes are probably a little different). However, on this one, I'm clearly a total and utter moron.

Optimist makes the most valid case of all in that the mistakes are not evenly distributed. We can reliably assume that refs do the best they can, but the evidence indicates that the pressure they are put under regularly causes the most human of reactions (yes, even in football refs); they buckle and award a sizable majority of close decisions to the bigger clubs. If this can even things up and 're-adjust the scales' so that bigger clubs stop benefiting from the human fallibility of the refs, then bring it on.

strasbourg saint
i know i am getting on a bit but have we not done all this recently although i can't remember the outcome

circa 66 saint wrote:

Strasbourg Saint wrote:

St Retford wrote:
I can save everyone a bit of time and money here. The only people who think goal line technology will improve football by even 0.1% are either morons or people who produce goal line technology. Cheers.

I usually agree with you, Retford (although our musical tastes are probably a little different). However, on this one, I'm clearly a total and utter moron.

Optimist makes the most valid case of all in that the mistakes are not evenly distributed. We can reliably assume that refs do the best they can, but the evidence indicates that the pressure they are put under regularly causes the most human of reactions (yes, even in football refs); they buckle and award a sizable majority of close decisions to the bigger clubs. If this can even things up and 're-adjust the scales' so that bigger clubs stop benefiting from the human fallibility of the refs, then bring it on.

strasbourg saint
i know i am getting on a bit but have we not done all this recently although i can't remember the outcome

Hi Circa66. Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean. Done all what exactly? We certainly haven't introduced the technology yet. Do you mean a study about favouritism towards 'top teams'? Maybe a study was carried out to see if 'bigger' teams benefit from 50/50s more than smaller teams, I don't know. I'd gladly use a decent Government grant to research it via watching plenty of videos of matches over the years.

What I do know is that plenty of managers and pundits/analysts (no, not the Liverpool crew on MotD) have constantly stressed that key 50/50s go against smaller teams when refs are put under pressure by large crowds, bullyboy managers and a 'top team' leaning media.

I remember one example (one in which I had total sympathy with the officials). It was the famous Mendes goal at Old Trafford for Spurs. It was scored at the death and would have altered the result. It was almost impossible for the officials to see what had happened as they were all exactly where they should have been .... lino in line with last player near the halfway line etc. However, it was suggested at the time that, had the shot gone in at the other end, the ref would have had to have awarded it because the home crowd would all have cheered and he would have felt utterly pressured to award the goal simply because all those cheering fans couldn't have been wrong. I bet that ref wishes he had had help from a cyclops.

There is very little that needs changing in football, but there is no great deal in giving the Referee some help, they are only human and make mistakes, so where it is possible through simple technology to save them the vitriol given to them because they got it wrong cannot be a bad thing. No need to go extremes, that wouldn't be worth it. Look at it as 32,000 Referees in the ground, thousands that can see it on TV, who get it right and one/two Officials get it wrong and foul up the most important decision of the Season, for the sake of a device that can correct their decision, wouldn't it be justified?

Are we getting a new kit next season? I still haven't figured out who our sponsor is . I think Liebherr would look **** good on the shirts and be a bonus for Marcus and his familiy?

redsnapper wrote:
Are we getting a new kit next season? I still haven't figured out who our sponsor is . I think Liebherr would look **** good on the shirts and be a bonus for Marcus and his familiy?

aap3 had a three year deal I thought?

That guy who analysed all the questionable decisions in the Premier league last season (and concluded that Man Utd should have already won) said that only 2 of the 172 dodgy refereeing decisions related to whether the ball was over the line. Seems like a lot of money to resolve a minor problem. Just more stuff for Sky pundits to talk endlessly about. Won't get down to League 1 either. But if it makes some money for a firm in Basingstoke who employ lots of local guys, why not?

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

redsnapper wrote:
Are we getting a new kit next season? I still haven't figured out who our sponsor is . I think Liebherr would look **** good on the shirts and be a bonus for Marcus and his familiy?

aap3 had a three year deal I thought?

I was told at the club shop we will be having a new kit for this season.
Hopefully they will change the sponsers logo to the same thinner one on the away kit.
On my home kit, the logo has started to crack up around the edges. I no its probably due to the amount of washes but think it should last longer than it has!
Winge over, better get back to the housework before she gets in.

These are the early buds of a much bigger issue of technology assisted refereeing.

Goal line technology will make a small difference overall. Some significant decisions will be made, but rarely. There have been outrageous decisions because it's not in place. It will undoubtedly help. But I can still see that if a referee gives a goal (or disallows one) on the basis of technology it wont be long before the technology gets called into question .. and so it will roll on .. but I support it in general. It's the age we live in.

However I am also in favour of a much more comprehensive usage of camera technology.

With the sophisticated kit now available surely there should be off-field referees who could instantly review coverage of an incident and judge an incident. They do this in international rugby and it is not intrusive or cumbersome. For the premiership teams there is no problem putting cameras just about everywhere. All over the pitch. Sky TV should pay for it all.

Goal line incidents will be very rare, but incidents elsewhere, fouls, offsides and other infingements will be better policed if the referee is in doubt. The referee could take a quick moment to consult the off-field panel and the decision would be confirmed.

What won't change is player reaction. They will still scream blue murder that the ball was over/never crossed the line etc etc.

I would also like to see technology concentrate on the appalling practice of diving and rolling around like they have been shot after the slightest of touches. Ultimately this standard of gamesmanship will continue until players know they will be caught every time and not just when a sharp referee spots it. When you see what rugby players go through in a match and get up straight away it makes a complete mockery of the footballers who roll around with hands over their faces. Big girls!!

This whole issue is the beginning of a major new age in football refereeing. This is just the start.