England vs Ukraine goal disallowed: Goal line technology a must [VIDEO]
Roar Rookie By rsingi, 20 Jun 2012 rsingi is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- England Football, euro 2012, football, John Terry
3,522 reads![England vs Ukraine goal disallowed: Goal line technology a must [VIDEO]](http://cdn0.theroar.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/England-Ukraine-goal-297x194.jpg)
John Terry pulls the ball back in the controversial England Ukraine disallowed goal farce (AFP)
Related coverage
Earth to Sepp Blatter, Earth to Sepp Blatter: Enough is enough. When John Terry cleared the ball from well over the goal line last night and Ukraine were denied a goal, the debate over goal line technology surely ended. It must be brought in immediately.
From the Frank Lampard goal which was disallowed against Germany, to the penalty given against Lucas Neil against Italy, years of hard work and dreams have been ended by incorrect decisions which can easily be avoided.
How FIFA can justify its non-use is a continuing mystery to many, and no doubt the Ukrainians will be in up-roar today.
Teams are being wrongly eliminated from tournaments when a 10 second review, or (instant) goal-line technology can ensure the correct decisions are made.
Tennis, Baseball, Basketball, Cricket, Rugby, AFL and even field hockey now use technology in various forms to ensure correct decisions are made.
The players, fans and referees all want to make sure the decisions are correct and results are not altered by blunders. Clearly a goal line official has not solved the problem in football.
The questions arises as to how it would be used. Could each team have two appeals like in cricket or would the referee go upstairs to check on goals and penalties? I believe a combination of both would be the best outcome.
Mr Blatter please do something quicky as you are bringing your wonderful game into disrepute and needlessy ruining the dreams of many. Sepp Blatter: Stand-up or step aside.
- Explore:
- England Football, euro 2012, football, John Terry
June 20th 2012 @ 11:50am
Mat Coch said | June 20th 2012 @ 11:50am | Report comment
While I can see the arguement for the technology, personally I am against it.
Ultimately all these things balance out in time, and while it’s never ideal it’s the way the sport has operated – successfully – without it.
I’d hate to see the sport transformed from the flowing game we have today in to something like NFL where it stops to have the referee review the play.
Personally, I think the sport has more to lose than gain by bringing the system in. A few broken hearts and talking points are better than fundamentally changing the way the game flows, which I think goal line technology would do.
But then maybe it’s the goal keeper in me coming out…
June 20th 2012 @ 12:17pm
Lucan said | June 20th 2012 @ 12:17pm | Report comment
Agree wholeheartedly.
And suprisingly cogent for a goalkeeper.
June 20th 2012 @ 8:20pm
nic said | June 20th 2012 @ 8:20pm | Report comment
The game WOULDN’T stop and start. incidents such as this happen EXTREMELY rarely – LESS than once every 10 games or so! As long as we ensure the technology is used SOLELY for did-the-ball-cross-the-line situations (as opposed to any foul/handball, etc, which, I agree, would be too much) then it would surely help, as situations like this have major repercussions – note this game, as well as Eng-Ger in 2010, where two teams were eliminated from the two most important competitions in the world!
June 20th 2012 @ 8:28pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | June 20th 2012 @ 8:28pm | Report comment
nic
It doesn’t matter how rarely such stoppages will occur.
The GLT Specifications that have been set mean IFAB will not even consider any technology that stops the Game.
The Principles clearly state:
(iii) The indication of whether a goal has been scored must be immediate and automatically confirmed within one second.
So, no review, no challenge, no clownish drawing of an imaginary TV screen in the air … the technology either tells the ref “GOAL” or it will fail the IFAB test.
June 20th 2012 @ 9:59pm
nic said | June 20th 2012 @ 9:59pm | Report comment
That’s cool – i dont think anyone minds what the technology is – as long as it is used to get rid of major injustices
June 20th 2012 @ 7:20pm
SteveG said | June 20th 2012 @ 7:20pm | Report comment
Maybe it is the goal keeper in you.
How much time is lost by teams protesting that it was a goal? Surely that’s stopping the flow of the play right? Like currently in tennis a 4th official could of looked at a replay to determine whether a ball has passed the line or not. (Clearly the 4th official in last nights game was as effective as a chocolate fire guard).
How many times does this kind of thing happen ? not very often which is why it wouldn’t effect the flow of the game in every match and even if it did would take seconds to replay a video.
I don’t believe you were not up in arms when Lampards goal was disallowed against Germany 2 years ago?
I don’t think its a fair talking point about a teams disallowed goal because an incompetent referee.
June 21st 2012 @ 12:26am
Mat Coch said | June 21st 2012 @ 12:26am | Report comment
Given it doesn’t happen often there’s surely a strong argument against it – is such an investment worth it for that 1/100 dubious decision? It means the referees are getting it right 99-odd-% of the time. That’s actually pretty damned impressive.
My concern would be when the ball is cleared from the goal line, at what point does the game get pulled up for it to be examined? What happens if the opposing team goes up the other end and bangs in a quick counter attach?
Given its rarity I see no reason to change the system, but then I am a goal keeper so I am m…maa….maaa…..m….mad.
June 20th 2012 @ 11:52am
Seriously, Who says Oi? said | June 20th 2012 @ 11:52am | Report comment
I feel bad for the Ukrainian players and their fans. FIFA is hurting the integrity of the game by not implementing video challenges for goal scoring situations.
June 20th 2012 @ 12:03pm
nordster said | June 20th 2012 @ 12:03pm | Report comment
Fifa cant do it for all levels of the game, this seems to be a stumbling block. Even still they have trialled it although for the cost it rarely gets used. It’ll happen once every couple of big tournaments like this. So is it a good return …i dont know but as mentioned these sorts of things tend to balance themselves out across the vagaries of officiating in general.
It does get beaten up a little by the ‘fifa and sepp are destroying the game’ crowd have to say! Oh wont someone please think of the integrity!!! LOL
June 20th 2012 @ 3:58pm
Ben of Phnom Penh said | June 20th 2012 @ 3:58pm | Report comment
I am not sure why it is a stumbling block. Such technologies are only ever used at the pointy end of any given sport due to the cost.
June 20th 2012 @ 5:35pm
nordster said | June 20th 2012 @ 5:35pm | Report comment
Its like a purity argument i guess, maybe more for wider technology than the goal line option. I guess it would be for tournaments and not qualifiers as well
June 20th 2012 @ 12:14pm
Matt F said | June 20th 2012 @ 12:14pm | Report comment
I don’t agree with using video technology for penalties etc. As we saw with the A-League GF, the initial replays can be deceiving. Goal line technology is a must however and, because the camera needs only has to be in the one position to see the incident (ie on the goal line) it’s easy to implement and there’s no real issue for bad camera angles etc like the AFL are currently experiencing.
June 20th 2012 @ 12:24pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | June 20th 2012 @ 12:24pm | Report comment
Two alternative systems of Goal-Line Technology (GLT) are being put through the final stage of FIFA’s rigourous testing right now. I’m pretty sure the IFAB is due to make its final decision on 5 July 2012.
But, unlike other sports, which allow “challenges” to interrupt the flow of the game, FIFA’s has very strict criteria that will not allow the GLT to affect the purity of the Game.
So, the GLTt:
* must be accurate: give consistently correct responses with no false goals & no missed goals) , &
* must indicate to match officials automatically & instantaneously (e.g. vibration or visual signal within 1 second of the technology deciding “goal”).
So, unlike other sports, football will not allow the Game to be compromised to appease disgruntled fans, who do not have the capacity to think of the long-term consequences of decisions that impact a Game played by billions of people around the world.
Two years ago, if you asked English fans “do you want GLT”, I’m sure they’d have shouted: “YES”. But, last night in Donetsk if you asked the same question, I wonder if the answer would have been the same?
In football, as in life, good decisions & bad decisions can have an impact. If you think adding technology will eliminate all the injustices in life – or in football – you’re going to be angry & disappointed every day.
As far as I’m concerned, no real football fan would ever be turned away from the Game by last night’s injustice. Rather, such injustice should help build the character of football fans & make us accept the bad decisions that impact our team negatively, with the same enthusiasm as we accept the bad decisions that impact our team positively.
PS: The penalty given against Lucas Neil at WC2006, would NEVER be solved by video technology b/c what is in dispute is the interpretation of the law; not the validity of the facts.
June 20th 2012 @ 2:24pm
Lucan said | June 20th 2012 @ 2:24pm | Report comment
Well said.
I was heartbroken by the WC2006 result, but I could see live and can still see now where a referee would award a penalty there and can’t imagine an available replay changing his mind.
England are involved in numerous controversies, and are evidence of the swings and roundabouts nature of our very human game.
1966 WC Final, Geoff Hurst’s matchwinner that may not have crossed the goaline (FOR)
WC 1986 Hand of God (AGAINST)
WC2010 Lampard’s disallowed rocket (AGAINST)
Euro2012 Terry clearance from inside his own net (FOR)
June 20th 2012 @ 5:03pm
Philip said | June 20th 2012 @ 5:03pm | Report comment
We all know that two wrongs dont make a right, so four wrongs definitely don’t make a right!
June 21st 2012 @ 12:29am
Mat Coch said | June 21st 2012 @ 12:29am | Report comment
Go to ground in the box and don’t win the ball, expect a telling off from both the referee and your goal keeper
June 21st 2012 @ 1:03am
Ed Barson said | June 21st 2012 @ 1:03am | Report comment
Could not have said it better.
June 20th 2012 @ 2:15pm
RIR said | June 20th 2012 @ 2:15pm | Report comment
As a referee i knew this would happen. Having some poor fool sitting behind the goal was going to achieve nothing, he spends 90 minutes doing nothing and gets to make one decision which is wrong. This is making soccer a joke. Fix it now.
June 20th 2012 @ 3:31pm
Fussball ist unser leben said | June 20th 2012 @ 3:31pm | Report comment
“Having some poor fool sitting behind the goal was going to achieve nothing”. Don’t rugby, league, cricket, tennis, AFL all have “some poor fool” adjudicating on whether the ball/player crosses various lines on the field?
“Soccer is a joke” well, as long as billions around the world keep playing our Game, I reckon the joke is on every other sport – champagne comedy!
June 20th 2012 @ 2:23pm
me, I like football said | June 20th 2012 @ 2:23pm | Report comment
It would of been nice for the [VIDEO] to have shown the disallowed goal
June 20th 2012 @ 6:17pm
Siege of Perth said | June 20th 2012 @ 6:17pm | Report comment
They were offside anyway, I think offside is where they need the tech more, theres far more incorrect offside calls made every game than ghost goals and no goals once every 4 or 5 games. That said, pro goal line tech
June 20th 2012 @ 6:17pm
To Lucan said | June 20th 2012 @ 6:17pm | Report comment
Please add to the list two dissallowed goals from Greece in current championship.
June 21st 2012 @ 9:48am
Lucan said | June 21st 2012 @ 9:48am | Report comment
The list sure is lengthy, but it is part of the game we all love.
June 20th 2012 @ 7:10pm
Ben Carter said | June 20th 2012 @ 7:10pm | Report comment
Hi rsingi – I’m in the pro-tech camp. As Fuss points out, though, it MUST be a instant thing (I’d suggest either lasers on the posts or a chip in the ball or somesuch and a quick ‘beep’ in the ref’s earpiece) and kept solely for the clarification of the old adage ‘whole of ball must cross whole of line’. As he also said, it’s about verifying a simple fact – did it cross or not – rather than interpreting a law.
So, goal-line technology, when proven, within one second to the ref’s ear, and at as many major tournaments/finals as can be afforded by the host association in conjunction with local confederation support.
I am one of those people who has not always been one of those life-long die-hard born-into-football kind of people, and for me, incidents like the ENG-UKR one DO rankle me and other fans. And no, it’s not good enough for the likes of Sepp Blatter to simply shrug them off as ‘but they’re an interesting talking point of the game’ when such howlers are seen live by billions.