Of what use is goal line technology, in all seriousness?

That was in all likelihood a goal. You can't rely on the camera since the angle isn't perfect and the crossbar is in the way of any overhead view. I think that was a great example of it working, in fact, as the ref is immediately notified and awards the goal without hesitation.

 

What the hell are you talking about. Its was a clear goal and correctly shown. GK puts it in by himself.
http://i.imgur.com/IyokdBS.png

shows it from above.
Goalcontrol is designed by excellent german engineers with years of experience and rigorous testing. Almost an insult to us germans, we WON this contract against hawkeye because we passed all of the tests.
Do you even know the ref has a watch thats shows him its a goal within milliseconds?

You must be a guy that denies mankind landed on the moon....

 

I agreed with the decision, looked like a good goal to me

 

And probably never would have been awarded without the technology. In fact, I think this play justifies the technology in and of itself.

 

I suppose they have created a modus operandi on how to deal with that?

if the ref calls the goal, and the cameras prove it was not, I suppose they will call a "technical foul" where someone will kick the ball with the ref dropping it.

if the ref doesn´t call the goal and it is, the ref maybe can stop play and say it was a goal...

 

I think it would... Sandro Meira Ricci called it a good goal immediately (too fast to have been warned by the tech guys). But WITHOUT goal line technology, there would be one hundred times more people saying the ball had not TOTALLY crossed the line.

 

The ref has a wrist watch which notifies him immediately. They rely on the notification and call the goal based on that. There is no need for review.

 

What are you talking about "wasn't a goal"? This was the perfect use for goal line technology, the ref was alerted immediately that the ball crossed the line and the game continued. If it hadn't been for goal line technology, we'd still be debating whether or not it actually crossed..

 

He awarded it immediately because his watch told him to do it.

 

Great use of technology as Ref would not have had a chance to see where the ball was as the keeper was between him and the ball.

Now we just need instant technology to determine fouls and holding and we can get rid of the refs

 

For real though, there should be technology to determine offsides. The linesman are wrong far too often and it completely changes the course of many important games.

 

Thank GOD for this technology. Eventually should be applied to all out of bounds lines and one day it could be developed further to call offsides in real time. And encroachment into the box on penalty kicks.

Don't be afraid of the future people ...

 

At first I thought it wasn't a goal and the technology was flawed, or erred. But then I saw the virtual pic and it was right on. I'm convinced it wouldn't have been ruled a goal without goal line tech. I wonder how Platini feels about GLT now? How ironic that it helped France and one of their greatest players was against it.

 

I'm glad they have it as there have been issues in past tournaments. At least it is one problem that's fixed. There will always be people upset. The old way or the new way. Glad I read this thread as US coverage is terrible as usual. Not the games but pre and post. Haven't seen anything like good info yet, just fluff and 50% of their half hour show is commercials. I'm sure as things progressed I would have found time to read about it online, oh, just did.

 

How long will it be before someone hacks into this system?
Ahhh imagine the posibilities...

 

The main issue preventing the adoption in the last couple of years has not been accuracy, they passed all the tests, it's been cost. It's not cheap, well into 6 figures, PER STADIUM. When you match the cost against now often it's actually needed, that's the main discussion point. In the last world cup: 1 call (England game), this one so far, 1 call, but in a game that it probably wouldn't have made a difference.

It works, it's cool technology, the issue is cost.

 

Cost? FIFA is one of the worlds richest non-profits. Joke.
Sitting on a billion dollars. Cost is not a factor.
Reluctance for old people to adapt to new ways is.

Having said that I would hate to see instant reply. Hate it in NFL and that game stops. Let the ref's do their job and there will always be controversy. Already enough cameras on the game if they want to address and assess penalties after the game.

 

The thing is that the game already stops after a penalty call or a red card. Just pay attention to the next time it happens in a game. There's usually a minimum of 2 minutes before the ball gets kicked again. Plenty of time for a reviewer to see a replay and send message to the center ref

In the reverse situation where the ref missed a call the game doesn't stop at all. But this is the scenario I'm more worried about because it's disruptive if the game goes on and the reviewer stops the play for something that happened 30 seconds before. Also if the reviewer has this power he will be able to call a penalty on almost every corner kick or set piece by the letter of the law

 

They aren't really using any technology in the NFL. It's just the ref watching the same video replays that we see on television and making a subjective call based on it. And of course, as you said, it delays the game even more than the normal course of an American Football game.

The NHL, however, has used goal line technology effectively for years now. Their system of alerting the fans works better as a light goes off for a goal. The thing FIFA is using to alert the fans in the stadium - the computer generated graphics are overly complicated and confusing. It lead to a lot of confusion on this recent situation as it alerted "no goal" for the initial movement of the ball off the post and apparently that prevented it from alerting the goal itself which happened immediately afterward.

End line technology would be feasible, but expensive. Offside would be nearly impossible without a man in the middle like the NFL does, because of the complex nature of the rule. I doubt either would happen any time soon, and I wouldn't support anything that requires a human reviewer as that will inevitably lead to the NFL situation.

 

Some many years way before they had GLT, before anyone thought they'd come up with GLT, I told my friend they should place officials, or goal judges by the net. In Euro 12 they did that, it helped, but as we all saw, it wasn't perfect and France wouldn't have been awarded a goal with that system in place.

Anyway when I heard how expensive GLT was I thought FIFA should have a replay system like the NHL. But even with that system I don't think France's goal would have counted because the NHL doesn't give you a virtual pic, it's just eyeballs in Toronto looking at a slo-mo replay through a goal line camera which isn't always conclusive, if I'm not mistaken. The GLT in this Cup is 100% conclusive, as well it should be considering how much it cost. But hey FIFA can afford it and the teams and fans benefit.

Can anybody tell me what the difference is between the GLT being used in this Cup and HawkEye GLT which is used in England?

 

Goal line technology is a GENIUS idea; just think how much time could be saved in PL games where players of certain teams *cough Chelsea cough* seem incapable of adhering to instructions and standing in a set place for free kicks.

Amusingly, I heard mutterings from the people around me in the Carlsberg Sports Bar (Leicester Square - London) along the lines of using the invisible spray on Adrian Chiles.......!

Enjoy the World Cup everyone!!!!

 

Need to keep goal line technology and replay different, they are VERY different issues. The GLT in use works, it's expensive. Yes FIFA can afford it, but push it beyond that to MLS, EPL, La Liga etc. Now you have some teams that can afford it in the stadium, others that can't.

didn't realize it was visible via a graphic in the stadium, I'll look for it next week in Rio!

I know the refs watch buzzes INSTANTLY when the ball goes in the net. The TV graphics have been dumb, using it to show a goal when the ball is sitting in the back of the net? Like one announcer said "someone got a new toy"