July 08, 2007

Hawk-Eye for EPL?: Technology for seeing if balls are in or out in tennis will be tested for goal-line decisions by the EPL. The technology is to be used by "the referees, not TV."

posted by worldcup2002 to soccer at 11:49 AM - 11 comments

About time too.

posted by squealy at 02:21 PM on July 08, 2007

We don't get many EPL matches on the basic Cablevision package here in NY so I have no frame of reference, but are there many goal line discrepancies that this needs to be implimented. In my humble opinon soccer goals are pretty difinitive. I did witness the Hawk-eye in a action at Wimbledom in the new challenge system that was implemented this year and it seems pretty accurate (according to McEnroe and Co. it is accurate to within 5 millimeters, thats pretty much a dick hair's amount of space) In fact after Nadal challenged (succesfully) a called made by the ref and Federer, quite audibly asked the ref to turn it off.

posted by HATER 187 at 09:42 PM on July 08, 2007

The technology's a bit expensive for my local league. A couple of years ago, our goalkeeper had a fgoal disallowed through telling the ref that the opposition's header had actually gone through a gaping hole in the side netting (it hadn't). The linesman wasn't watching, so the ref believed our 'keeper. Heh heh.

posted by owlhouse at 10:22 PM on July 08, 2007

Football would be a lot more interesting if they added Clinger rather than Hawkeye... Love those dresses!

posted by Drood at 01:38 AM on July 09, 2007

I prefer the human error and the drama it creates. How much of a story would Roy Carrols big blunder from Pedro Mendes' mid field shot have been if they had ruled it a goal from a technological review?

posted by Ricardo at 10:47 AM on July 09, 2007

There's still plenty of opportunity for the refs to make mistakes and change the game, but this is a good change in my book.

posted by billsaysthis at 02:13 PM on July 09, 2007

I just don't see where there is enough of this kind of controversy to justify its' use. These types of incident are pretty rare. They would do better putting this kind of effort into ruling on offsides. How many of those calls do we see called incorrectly every match?

posted by Ricardo at 02:30 PM on July 09, 2007

One would imagine the technology is far better suited to deciding whether a ball has crossed a fixed line between two fixed points, rather than something as fluid as an offside line.

posted by squealy at 06:31 AM on July 10, 2007

I agree squealy. What I mean is instead of wasting time, effort and funds on a technology that will only marginally improve the game (mostly because of the amount of these disputes), put those resources toward developing the technology to monitor something fluid like the offsides line.

posted by Ricardo at 08:12 AM on July 10, 2007

Wouldn't the money better spent if they made sure all the linesmen had their eyes checked regularly and trained more on what an actual offsides is and not to watch the foward but when the ball is played to the foward....LOL

posted by koolhandvuk at 12:54 PM on July 10, 2007

As long as this does not introduce any delays in the game, fine, why not. What with the radio earpieces the refs wear now, the person monitoring this technology only has to whisper in the ear of the ref to let him know if he is making a mistake. But please, no long delays waiting for the video review like you have for instance in gridiron or rugby.

posted by dave2007 at 08:04 PM on July 12, 2007

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.