clint van damme
Well-Known Member
I thought I had a decent view at the game and didnt think it was a goal but looking at the stills I'm convinced it was. Ref was a c**t either way.
Goal or no goal (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter robbiekeane
- Start date
I thought I had a decent view at the game and didnt think it was a goal but looking at the stills I'm convinced it was. Ref was a c**t either way.
SeaSeeEffCee
Well-Known Member
It certainly looked in with the naked eye, definitely can’t dispute that, but just have to trust that the goal line tech did its job and got it right. It would be a huge anomaly for it to have gotten it wrong. Liverpool had a goal not given vs Man City in 18/19 because it wasn’t fully over the line by 11mm. These margins can be mega tight and the angles they shoot the match from are never going to give a clear picture. What we really need is the in goal camera perspective, but they haven’t shown it for some bizarre reason.
sw88
Chief Commentator!
Question.
if we had goal linetech and VAR (I presume they still work concurrently indivisions where VAR is?), if VAR could override a glaring error and watch malfunction such as this one, why can't the officials using their common sense and BLOODY EYES!?
Officials had a mare tonight and this tops it off blaming technology again, as Oliver did when it failed in the Premiership the other year too (along with the O'Hare putting the ball out for a Coventry corner
)
if we had goal linetech and VAR (I presume they still work concurrently indivisions where VAR is?), if VAR could override a glaring error and watch malfunction such as this one, why can't the officials using their common sense and BLOODY EYES!?
Officials had a mare tonight and this tops it off blaming technology again, as Oliver did when it failed in the Premiership the other year too (along with the O'Hare putting the ball out for a Coventry corner
)I mean it’s pointless debating it if we have technology that can categorically show if the ball crossed the line - whether or not it worked in the moment.
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Hawkeye will show it as no goal because they need to to keep the confidence in it, somebody will be there making sure it shows what they want.
Terry_dactyl
Well-Known Member
It probably wasn’t a goal but it really looks like one.
skybluesam66
Well-Known Member
changed my mind
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee
Well-Known Member
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Now do an angle from the side and you will see the top of the ball is level with the line. As much as we'd love it to be a goal it's not. There's literally technology for it
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
A valid point if that was the angle and proximity the cameras operate at - but they don’t.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
it's clearly over the line you aldi sausage
There’s literally a line that has been fully crossed.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
that's wrong you half smoked red band
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
special
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
why you are both wrong?
SeaSeeEffCee
Well-Known Member
That from tonight? Mega close but not a goal then.
And that looks like it is after the ball has hit the player and is on its way back towards the line.
Have you just chosen to ignore the camera angle above from quest that proves its not a goal?
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
ffsm
special
The worst one was when he refused to give us a pen and so gave us a corner when Ohare headed it behind unchallenged. Either a pen or goal kick. Can't just decide its a corner
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Exactly what I expected.
This certainty from a dodgy screenshot at an askew angle from miles away because you can see a bit of grass is bizarre.
David O'Day
Well-Known Member
exactly that's not the most it was over the line
