To all those in favour of video technology...

[DeKuip]

I've not seen today's incident and have only heard it reported, so it may not have happened exactly like this - but it still raises a big question.

At what point would the match referee have turned to the video referee to decide whether the ball was over the line.
Ball bounces down on/over the line and defending team immediately launch the ball forward where it finds an attacker who runs through to score at the other end. All happened in the time it takes to view the replay.
Should the ref stop play immediately the ball bounces on or over the line, or should he wait until the next time there is a stoppage in play?
If you can see my point here - either one team could be celebrating a goal at one end while the video ref is still looking at replays of an incident at the other end... or that team could have been denied that opportunity if the referee had blown first to stop play and go to the video ref.

And if we'd had the technology in use at today's game - would all the talk afterwards have been that we should also use the video ref to decide on dodgy penalties?

I say leave it alone - it's all part of the game that sometimes decisions go your way and other times they don't.

[BC54 VFC]

Having just got back from the game then I agree with your conclusion. These things even themselves out over time, even though from where I was standing I thought there was a good possibility that the ball did cross the line from Beckford's shot; having said that, I also thought he was offside.

[Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air]

This, from the Everton FC website.

  David Moyes insisted Jermaine Beckford's 'goal' should have stood after Everton's 2-2 draw with Aston Villa.

It cannoned down towards the goalline but ref Mike Jones and his assistant Stephen Child decided it hadn't crossed the line, leaving the Everton manager to raise the issue of goalline technology after the match.

Crucially, Villa then launched the counter attack which saw Darren Bent give them a 2-1lead.

Moyes said: "Yes it was over the line. I thought with the angle the ball had rebounded it had to go over the line.

"It's not an easy call for the linesman and referee and that's why we're looking for goalline technology.

"Today it was a double whammy, the referee gets it wrong and they go up the other end and score ten seconds later. For us that was a real blow but it was our defending which cost us a goal."

   

[stevenavfc]

It is an interesting scenario that became reality today. Hadn't really thought about it before but what happened just goes to show that technology may not have all the answers as far as football is concerned. It is valid in sports where the disputed element causes a break in play but in football that isn't always the case, maybe best left alone as you say.

[VillaZogmariner]

Where do you draw the line though?

Only on shots that come down on/over the line?
Penalties?
Free Kicks?
Offsides?

[Ads]

Maybe the video technology could show that Beckford was two yards offside.

[hawkeye]

Villa fans against technology the day a good goal was not allowed shock.


Remember Filbert Street

[Ads]

Villa fans against technology the day a good goal was not allowed shock.


Remember Filbert Street

I'm not against it, I just think its irrelevant, as Beckford was offside. So Everton can get to fuck with their moaning.

[VillaZogmariner]

Maybe the video technology could show that Beckford was two yards offside.

They'd have to find a way of deleting Luke Young from the frame then, as he was playing Beckford 1 yard onside.

[UK Redsox]

Having just got back from the game then I agree with your conclusion. These things even themselves out over time, even though from where I was standing I thought there was a good possibility that the ball did cross the line from Beckford's shot; having said that, I also thought he was offside.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a cop out and not a valid argument. Each incident should be viewed on its own merits and not dependent on some theoretical notion that another incident will have an opposite outcome. Decisions by Football referees aren't subject to Newton's Third Law.

[BC54 VFC]

Having just got back from the game then I agree with your conclusion. These things even themselves out over time, even though from where I was standing I thought there was a good possibility that the ball did cross the line from Beckford's shot; having said that, I also thought he was offside.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a cop out and not a valid argument. Each incident should be viewed on its own merits and not dependent on some theoretical notion that another incident will have an opposite outcome. Decisions by Football referees aren't subject to Newton's Third Law.

...and I agree 'that each incident should be viewed on its own merits'. However, my comments indicate that from a position two rows from the front of the Villa fans, therefore very close to the pitch, and broadly in line with where Beckford was standing when the ball was passed, I got one decision right (that the ball crossed the line) and one wrong (as others have stated on the match thread Young was playing Beckford onside). As it happens on these two 'incidents' the three officials also got one right and one wrong. In an ideal world the officials would get every decision right but this is never going to happen; they're only human like us. The OP makes the very valid point that if play had been stopped today to view 'technology' which had then proven the ball didn't cross they line, then Villa would have been denied the chance to go 2-1 up within seconds, and the game would have been slowed down whilst the 'technology' was viewed. If such stoppages became commonplace then how long would the game then last? I believe it would lose tempo and excitement as a result of constant stoppages. Let's continue to rely on the officials and give them a break when they do get it wrong. And yes I am old enough to remember Filbert Street, 4th April 1970.

[itbrvilla]

For 2-3 goal line decisions a season? The problem is the other decisions like vidic today, which happen all the time and to me are more of a game changer.

[itbrvilla]

P.s . Goal line technology is a waste of money. Perhaps they should concentrate on getting penalty and red card decisions right

[The Moose]

Irrelevant. Beckford was offside.

[Guy M]

Having not watched the game either, my initial reaction was the same as DeKuip's and pretty much what it has always been: the introduction of technology into football for "goal-line decisions" is a Pandora's Box that isn't worth opening.

Having just watched the highlights on MOTD, my opinion hasn't changed.

Just as the linesman could have given a goal for Beckford, he could and possibly should have given us a foul (didn't catch who it was on or by) as the ball went out for a throw-in just before they got the penalty. I just don't agree with the idea that in one situation technology should be used and in the other it wouldn't.

The officials clearly need help as the game is much faster now than it was and the players way more preoccupied with trying to cheat them / their opponents. For me, the answer has always been extra officials. As an ex-hockey player, my preference was for a referee in each half of the pitch but I think additional officials behind the goals as used in the Europa League also make sense.

What bothers me far more than a human being making an honest mistake are players deliberately cheating the officials & the fans and the powers-that-be who aren't really bothered about doing anything.