Match 4: BRA-ECU - BASCUNAN (CHI)

First big controversy. 66th minute, Ecuador crossed the ball on the endline and it managed to sneak into the goal, but was disallowed for having gone out of bounds. Even on replays, it looked really close. I'm not convinced it was 100% out of bounds.

 

Nor am I. Replays aren't conclusive due to the angle, and the AR flagging the ball as having passed over the goal line was really late getting there, popping the flag long after the ball left Martinez's foot, which from my view is the closest the ball could have been to being over the goal line (and the AR had the goalposts shielding him from getting a good look at the play).

 

true unless the presence of video replay causes refs to lean towards no calls if they know they'll get a second look if a goal is scored.

 

Couldn't this be instant, just like goal line tech? Simply extend the line they're measuring to include the entire goal line?

 

Also. That same AR called offside with about 4 minutes left on an Ecuador player. He was in an offside position, but Alves cleared the ball for a corner and it did not look like the attacker had any influence on the play

 

How about WC 2014 as well?
The player's foot was over the line, but the ball was clearly right on the line.
But any decision there is a guess since the AR was not exactly at the line. If he had been, the goal post
would enable him to see if the ball had was completely over the line.
This is another case of an official wanting to be safe not sorry but sadly for him, the the keeper,
unexpectedly at this level, fumbled the ball and it squirmed into the net.
Without this there would have been a routine goal kick and no-one would have cared about the initial error.

PH

 

This is the call you're talking about and while they are the same type of call the similarities end just there. Two completely different calls in terms of difficulty. That call in the Korea vs. Spain game is one of the worst AR decisions I've ever seen at an international tournament. I have no idea how he possibly thought that ball was out. He was right there and had the perfect view.

That call along with a couple of other poor offside decisions against Italy in that tournament led to FIFA implementing trios and crews for future tournaments. No more ARs from Uganda or Trinidad which is where the two ARs in that match were.

Back to the call in the Brazil game. An inch or two more and the ball does go out, but he keeps the flag down then he is screwed as well. Imagine awarding a dodgy goal against Brazil?

It's a miss and an error, but the AR is in an impossible position. For me, the lesson isn't so much don't guess as is you just need to be right. It's easy for us to say keep the flag down in our matches with no cameras, but here he was screwed either way unless he got it right.

 

So you're suggesting that if he got eh call wrong the other way he would be screwed. Well, um, yeah? Not sure what the revelation is here.

 

Yes but getting a one off tournament to pay for that is unlikely. The cost of installing all of those systems in stadiums that rarely host soccer games for one tournament is a huge waste of $.

 

I would highly recommend this video to see some of the implementation and requirements for GLT


In this video, you can see them check to make sure the ball outside of the goal but over the goal line doesn't create a reaction so this would most likely need a lot more implementation and technology to be able to do both.

 

Indeed but aren't there still two different technologies? The camera based system similar to tennis I would think should be very easy to adapt to all goal line decisions. I too have wondered why they haven't been doing that. All the hardware is already in place and a few software tweaks to the watch and whatever computer communicates with the watch and voila.

I think the magnetic based one uses sensors in the ball and posts/crossbar so that doesn't seem possible. Even if that's true I don't think that system is widely used if at all anymore. Most leagues have gone with the camera based system.

 

My guess is that, among other possible objections, you'd need a lot more cameras to cover the whole goal line and not just 8 yards of it, and the potential benefits don't justify the cost.

 

In the case of the ball over the line between the posts, the decision is goal or no goal, the most important and critical decision in a soccer game.
In the case of over the goal line outside the posts, the decision is goal kick/corner kick or play on. In some cases, very few usually, this may lead to a goal being scored or disallowed. So it is not as critical and therefore not worth the extra expense.
Also there are many GKs/CKs in a match; the referees would get annoyed with the signal going off so much for obvious incidents.

PH

 

The thing is I doubt there is any added expense other than some software tweaks. The amount of cameras they have can probably already do this.

 

Not this crew in this tournament.