by Bigman » 02 May 2012, 11:13
Not sure I agree with your argument Kernowgull, it's a bit like saying we can feed half the children of Africa, but then the other half will still be hungry, so let's not bother feeding any of them.
And if the ball crossing the line is your goal, so technology would win you the match rather than drawing it, would that make it better?
I think goal line technology is perhaps the only element of the game where a fact can be established, it is black and white whether the ball has crossed the line, so if the ref can categorically be wrong. For fouls and even offsides there is an element of interpretation, so it is often down to an individual's opinion, and while that of everyone else may differ from that of the ref it gives him some protection, which I think is what the FA is trying to provide and return some credibility to refs.
As for who gets it, it could become a requirement for league/Premier league entry, but could then not be used for cup ties to handicap teams playing at grounds without it. The cost would be to the club, which they won't be happy about, but the FA will say that if they're all so desperate for it they have to pay for it.
My worry is that this would be the start of a landslide of technology, in the first instance video reviews, which would slow the game, and only transfer whose opinion was being used to make the decision (albeit with the action slowed down and from different angles). And as many have said, it would give us less to talk (/moan) about.
Not sure I agree with your argument Kernowgull, it's a bit like saying we can feed half the children of Africa, but then the other half will still be hungry, so let's not bother feeding any of them.
And if the ball crossing the line is your goal, so technology would win you the match rather than drawing it, would that make it better?
I think goal line technology is perhaps the only element of the game where a fact can be established, it is black and white whether the ball has crossed the line, so if the ref can categorically be wrong. For fouls and even offsides there is an element of interpretation, so it is often down to an individual's opinion, and while that of everyone else may differ from that of the ref it gives him some protection, which I think is what the FA is trying to provide and return some credibility to refs.
As for who gets it, it could become a requirement for league/Premier league entry, but could then not be used for cup ties to handicap teams playing at grounds without it. The cost would be to the club, which they won't be happy about, but the FA will say that if they're all so desperate for it they have to pay for it.
My worry is that this would be the start of a landslide of technology, in the first instance video reviews, which would slow the game, and only transfer whose opinion was being used to make the decision (albeit with the action slowed down and from different angles). And as many have said, it would give us less to talk (/moan) about.