Final score saying Holtby effort went over the line

[fulhamben]

Ben, not sure I understand about the crossbar issue...

And care to explain further Riether Lightning?

if you put a laser line from one end of the cross bar to the other, it would not be dead straight. there would be a slight bow in it. easily 4 mm which would add to the inaccuracy of the hawkeye even further. add to this that its also relying on a white line which is hand painted (viva a machine) across an un even surfice which is covered in grass. nothing in the known universe is flat

[Fulham1959]

In real life, and going by the graphic, the ball (being spherical and not a flat disc) would be over the line.  In a throw-in situation, a throw would be awarded.

However, I prefer the technology to the human eye.

[fulhamben]

In real life, and going by the graphic, the ball (being spherical and not a flat disc) would be over the line.  In a throw-in situation, a throw would be awarded.

However, I prefer the technology to the human eye.

and this is it. its just like the cricket. was bought in to stop huge blunders but is now underscrutiny  over the smallest of margins that 99.9% of the world could not see anyway. if it had stopped villa equalising we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[Neil D]

From a spectator's point of view, I think they should indicate what percentage of the ball is not over the line.  In this case, it could not have been more than 2%, maybe.  It wouldn't alter the decision but it is readily understandable.

[Andy S]

The fact is it should be the same for everyone. We will obviously hear a lot more debate about this technology over the coming years. I'm delighted we can reflect on it where the result doesn't matter.

[epsomraver]

The fact is it should be the same for everyone. We will obviously hear a lot more debate about this technology over the coming years. I'm delighted we can reflect on it where the result doesn't matter.

Wait till it happens to one of the big four or Liverpool :dft011: then stand back for the flak about how unreliable it is!

[cmg]

Personally, I am not keen on a reliance on technology. I think back to my playing days and consider how utterly p***ed off I would be to be hanging around in the rain and cold while somebody pored over a replay (and sometimes coming up with the wrong decision anyway).

TV loves this technology business. Not only does it provide drama for the viewer, but it also puts TV into the driving seat. They provide the technology and it creates the idea that whatever is seen on tv must be right. I am not convinced that tv always provides a definitive account of reality as angles and distances can be distorted. For instance, slow-motion replays of tackles always look like bad fouls.

These goal-line pictures, of course, are not reality at all. They are cartoons based on a guess. Superb quality cartoons and fantastically accurate, computer calculated guesses - but cartoons and guesses just the same. The similar technology used in LBW cricket decisions is acknowledged as being of being potentially sufficiently inaccurate that a ball calculated ('guessed') hitting less than half a stump width with less than half the width of the ball is adjudged 'not out'. Is this level of inaccuracy allowed for in the Goal-line technology?

So far it hasn't rattled many cages - it's 'only' Fulham - but ER is quite right. Wait till it happens to Mourinho or Wenger, then we'll see the 'tilt' light come on.

What would I do? Leave it to the ref as 'sole arbiter of fact'. Pay them a shed load. Educate them. Make them accountable (I've no problem with using the technology to show them where they may have gone wrong). Sack 'em if they're not up to standard. Enforce the law regarding player behaviour towards refs. (Rugby provides the answer to this.)

[Neil D]

The fact is it should be the same for everyone. We will obviously hear a lot more debate about this technology over the coming years. I'm delighted we can reflect on it where the result doesn't matter.

Wait till it happens to one of the big four or Liverpool :dft011: then stand back for the flak about how unreliable it is!

As long as Liverpool are on the receiving end of some rough justice.  

[ChrisBairdOhh]

if you put a laser line from one end of the cross bar to the other, it would not be dead straight. there would be a slight bow in it. easily 4 mm which would add to the inaccuracy of the hawkeye even further. add to this that its also relying on a white line which is hand painted (viva a machine) across an un even surfice which is covered in grass. nothing in the known universe is flat

Yes, but it would bow vertically.  The cameras aren't mounted on the crossbar so it shouldn't affect it

[fulhamben]

if you put a laser line from one end of the cross bar to the other, it would not be dead straight. there would be a slight bow in it. easily 4 mm which would add to the inaccuracy of the hawkeye even further. add to this that its also relying on a white line which is hand painted (viva a machine) across an un even surfice which is covered in grass. nothing in the known universe is flat

Yes, but it would bow vertically.  The cameras aren't mounted on the crossbar so it shouldn't affect it

not just a verticle bow though. it would also go with the imperfections of the metal used. plus you have to take elasticity and all other scientific equations that I have no clue about into effect aswell. if its bowed at errection to the left or right then even with gravity it will still be bowed to that direction. anyhow it is what it is. the same for everyone and that's why no one ever brings it up.

[sunburywhite]

if you put a laser line from one end of the cross bar to the other, it would not be dead straight. there would be a slight bow in it. easily 4 mm which would add to the inaccuracy of the hawkeye even further. add to this that its also relying on a white line which is hand painted (viva a machine) across an un even surfice which is covered in grass. nothing in the known universe is flat

Yes, but it would bow vertically.  The cameras aren't mounted on the crossbar so it shouldn't affect it

not just a verticle bow though. it would also go with the imperfections of the metal used. plus you have to take elasticity and all other scientific equations that I have no clue about into effect aswell. if its bowed at errection to the left or right then even with gravity it will still be bowed to that direction. anyhow it is what it is. the same for everyone and that's why no one ever brings it up.

What if a players leg or body is in between the laser and the ball. The laser wont see anything

[fulhamben]

if you put a laser line from one end of the cross bar to the other, it would not be dead straight. there would be a slight bow in it. easily 4 mm which would add to the inaccuracy of the hawkeye even further. add to this that its also relying on a white line which is hand painted (viva a machine) across an un even surfice which is covered in grass. nothing in the known universe is flat

Yes, but it would bow vertically.  The cameras aren't mounted on the crossbar so it shouldn't affect it

not just a verticle bow though. it would also go with the imperfections of the metal used. plus you have to take elasticity and all other scientific equations that I have no clue about into effect aswell. if its bowed at errection to the left or right then even with gravity it will still be bowed to that direction. anyhow it is what it is. the same for everyone and that's why no one ever brings it up.

What if a players leg or body is in between the laser and the ball. The laser wont see anything

? the laser was just to prove that the cross bar is not dead straight. nothing to do with goal line technology, apart from to prove it does not have a sound datum to work against in the first place.

[Texas White]

The problem is the ball changes shape dependent on contact. For the system to be accurate without dispute it needs to use a template of perfect sphere.

[Nero]

The real question is if the ref and his assistant didn't have the technology yesterday would they have given it as a goal, if they say no they weren't sure there is no argument but if they say yes we would have given it if it was for the tech then there's a argument

[zschwartz]

The fact is it should be the same for everyone. We will obviously hear a lot more debate about this technology over the coming years. I'm delighted we can reflect on it where the result doesn't matter.

Wait till it happens to one of the big four or Liverpool :dft011: then stand back for the flak about how unreliable it is!

As long as Liverpool are on the receiving end of some rough justice. 

they'd be gifted 7 penalties to make up for it. but carroll's slap to mignolet is a start.

[Fulham Tup North]

Ben, not sure I understand about the crossbar issue...

And care to explain further Riether Lightning?p

[/quote, nothing in the known universe is flat

My front tyre was last week! I know, I had to blow it up again by foot-pump!

[gerrys]

Does the curvature of the ball play a part?
It not a flat disc after all; if no leather is touching the line then surely the ball has rolled beyond the line and is therefore a goal.

That was my point.....no way that any of the ball could actually be touching the line.....

[Texas White]

Does the curvature of the ball play a part?
It not a flat disc after all; if no leather is touching the line then surely the ball has rolled beyond the line and is therefore a goal.

And if the ball was still round it would be clear of the line.
That was my point.....no way that any of the ball could actually be touching the line.....

[RaySmith]

I always thought the diameter of the ball has to be over the line - and the photo shows it was - and that it was definitely a goal. The ball couldn't possibly have been touching the line from that photo.

Just a good job that Hugo scored.