Anyone still opposed to using TV to help ref's make decisions?

[Hibbyradge]

https://youtu.be/ZeaF7DXByU4

[Sammy7nil]

https://youtu.be/ZeaF7DXByU4

Yeah the SFA and Hearts :aok:

[Bishop Hibee]

Not if the referee is incapable of seeing the obvious in front of him.

[neil7908]

Not if the referee is incapable of seeing the obvious in front of him.

It wasn't obvious though. No way a ref or a linesman could confidently call that in real time.

Technology is the only way forward.

[Sammy7nil]

It wasn't obvious though. No way a ref or a linesman could confidently call that in real time.

Technology is the only way forward.

I estimate 90 % on first viewing thought it was in :greengrin I also thought the attacking team got the benefit of the doubt ?

[BS44]

It wasn't obvious though. No way a ref or a linesman could confidently call that in real time.

Technology is the only way forward.

Extra official on the bye line may have spotted it. Also much cheaper than goal line technology

I agree re ref and linesman

[neil7908]

I estimate 90 % on first viewing thought it was in :greengrin I also thought the attacking team got the benefit of the doubt ?

Don't get me wrong, clearly a goal but I thought the officials were very good today except that decision and I honestly don't think it was possible to call that goal confidently.

[Onceinawhile]

Don't get me wrong, clearly a goal but I thought the officials were very good today except that decision and I honestly don't think it was possible to call that goal confidently.

From the officials' positions it wasn't, perhaps however if the assistant referee had been at the by line where he should have been, he might have noticed.

[Michael]

Why would anyone be opposed? Hawkeye works great in England. Costs a few quid, but that's the price of progress.

[Haymaker]

I'm for technology so long as it's instant. Wasn't impressed with the video ref thing at the confederation cup.

[green day]

It wasn't obvious though. No way a ref or a linesman could confidently call that in real time.

Technology is the only way forward.

Tech might be the future, but......



I thought it was a goal from the back of the Roseburn. Ref and lino were 80 yards closer than me, FFS !

No excuse, they blew it.

[Speedy]

From the officials' positions it wasn't, perhaps however if the assistant referee had been at the by line where he should have been, he might have noticed.

Easy to say that but he'd have to have kept up with Boyle to achieve that. And even then there might still have been a player in the way.

Clearly should've been a goal on the replay. My gut instinct was no goal. I'd have been wrong (as the linesman was) but it was close. An inch over the line maybe?

[Billy Whizz]

Easy to say that but he'd have to have kept up with Boyle to achieve that. And even then there might still have been a player in the way.

Clearly should've been a goal on the replay. My gut instinct was no goal. I'd have been wrong (as the linesman was) but it was close. An inch over the line maybe?

It was a goal for me, and I was 100 yards away

[Northernhibee]

Sorry, that didn't need goal line technology. That needed eyes and a competant official.

[Onceinawhile]

Easy to say that but he'd have to have kept up with Boyle to achieve that. And even then there might still have been a player in the way.

Clearly should've been a goal on the replay. My gut instinct was no goal. I'd have been wrong (as the linesman was) but it was close. An inch over the line maybe?

No, but he had time to catch up after.

You're right though, it was over, but not by much. As annoyed as I am, it's at those not allowing goal line technology as opposed to the officials.

[lyonhibs]

That was obviously a goal. I'd had 3 pints and was watching over someone's head on a wee screen in The Cask and Barrel and I called it as a blatant goal right away. No replays, technology or snazzy angles required, just fitter and more competent officials.

[Speedy]

No, but he had time to catch up after.

You're right though, it was over, but not by much. As annoyed as I am, it's at those not allowing goal line technology as opposed to the officials.

What really pisses me off is the commentators going on about not giving it unless you're 100% sure.

Absolute nonsense and I hope that's just commentator rubbish rather than real guidelines. Go with your instincts and you'll get more right than wrong.

[neil7908]

That was obviously a goal. I'd had 3 pints and was watching over someone's head on a wee screen in The Cask and Barrel and I called it as a blatant goal right away. No replays, technology or snazzy angles required, just fitter and more competent officials.

Disagree. I thought it was in but then of course I would! The speed that shot was hit it and the fact it was marginally over the line makes it very hard to blame the officials.

[John_R_Corbett]

https://youtu.be/ZeaF7DXByU4aye, the ****s employ the ****s that keep getting it wrong?

[Nakedmanoncrack]

I was low down at the other end of the stadium, and I was celebrating without any doubt that it hadnt crossed the line, couldn't believe it when they played on. Can accept that the linesman on that side may have had his view blocked but, it's incredible that the ref wasn't willing to make a judgement on his own, when it must have been clear to him that it was over.

[Northernhibee]

I don't accept that it was a close decision. It was blatant, from the angle the ball dropped at, to the clear daylight between the line and the ball and also the reaction of both sets of players.

It was absolutely blatant.

Cheats.

[Lancs Harp]

Watching it at home I was on the third lap of the front room, arms aloft screaming like a mad demon before I realised the idiot hadn't given it.

[Aim Here]

I don't accept that it was a close decision. It was blatant, from the angle the ball dropped at, to the clear daylight between the line and the ball and also the reaction of both sets of players.

It was absolutely blatant.

Cheats.

I dunno about actual cheating. If you were where the linesman was - with a defender and the near goalpost in the way, it was probably hard to call. Unfortunately, all the TV cameras caught it as a goal. All the more reason for goal line technology, though. We were robbed.

[BS44]

Lady luck is also taking the pee out of us as well. Twice now that the ball has bounced out the way rather than bouncing back into the net.

[Jack Hackett]

The thing about this is that the ref never saw it, the lino never saw it, but the camera did see it... The camera always sees it. The camera can stop and rewind itself if it isn't sure, instead of relying on a lino who was miles behind the play. In the long run, the technology will be cheaper and more accurate than the incompetent buffoons we pay somewhere in the region of a couple of grand between them a match, to ruin in spectacular fashion... and they never get any comeback.

Scottish referees are sh*** to a man. The sooner we take away their responsibility for major decisions the better.

[kaimendhibs]

The point of football is to score goals. We scored a goal and because of sheer incompetence we didnt get it. The officials are there to do a job and didnt do it. Cant believe some are defending them.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[hibby6270]

Most big sports use video technology for important decisions. Tennis, cricket, rugby (union & league), American football, etc. It has now been accepted as “part of the game” and will be used more extensively in football eventually.

I must admit though that as far as football is concerned it is a must for it to be used in “is it a goal or not a goal” situations. That’s the most important aspect of a game. Fouls, penalties, throw ins, corners, bye kick decisions are to a lesser extent as crucial and sometimes not as clear cut in every case. Yes, they can have an influence on a game but nowhere near as much as deciding whether the ball crosses the goal line or not.

Sooner it’s brought in across the board for goal decisions, the better imo.

[MWHIBBIES]

Watching it at home I was on the third lap of the front room, arms aloft screaming like a mad demon before I realised the idiot hadn't given it.

Was clearly in on first viewing but I held back,never trust the ****ers in the black.

[Hermit Crab]

Lady luck is also taking the pee out of us as well. Twice now that the ball has bounced out the way rather than bouncing back into the net.


My take on it is yes it was a goal and it should have been given, however the view of the linesman and ref was blocked by hearts players at the crucial moment! Your comment about luck. We got a Paul Hanlon goal given when it was nowhere near going over the line v Dunfermline in a game that relegated them.

[Scouse Hibee]

Tech might be the future, but......



I thought it was a goal from the back of the Roseburn. Ref and lino were 80 yards closer than me, FFS !

No excuse, they blew it.

That's the difference, you thought it was a goal whereby they had to be 100% certain it had crossed the line and they weren't, hence the decision could only go one way.

[Andy Bee]

That's the difference, you thought it was a goal whereby they had to be 100% certain it had crossed the line and they weren't, hence the decision could only go one way.

Nope, the difference is they were a 100% certain it didn't cross the line, hence the decision was complete bull****.

[hibbysam]

My take on it is yes it was a goal and it should have been given, however the view of the linesman and ref was blocked by hearts players at the crucial moment! Your comment about luck. We got a Paul Hanlon goal given when it was nowhere near going over the line v Dunfermline in a game that relegated them.

At 3-0 up and late on in the game. Made no difference to that outcome. The BBC guys on the radio, Stewart and Stubbs were souring goal straight away, from the half way line. If they knew it was a goal then McLean had to have a good sight of it himself.

[cad]

To have the answer to the problem and not use it would imply our education system isnt all its cracked up to be
I hope that this logic isnt taken into our medical profession a 100% cure for X,Y,and Z has been discovered nah just leave it . ?? :doh:

[Scouse Hibee]

Nope, the difference is they were a 100% certain it didn't cross the line, hence the decision was complete bull****.

Nah that was the linesmans cover story ;-)

[TheGreenMan]

When fans in the stand KNOW without any doubt it's a goal a couple of minutes after its happened using the most basic of technology on their phones. There is absolutely NO excuse for that goal not to have been given. It's a fact, there's no debate or judgement needed. It's a ****ing goal and everyone knows it yet 1 minute after the incident but we play on at 0-0!?

Total shambles and any league or sport worth its salt already uses technology in some form and it'll only increase. Dinosaurs who long for days of the past with muddy pitches and leg breaking tackles being allowed will complain its just not like the old days but it's called moving with the times and progress. No excuse at all for that not to be given. Still raging!

[lucky]

If a similar incident happens in an Old Firm game then the SFA/SPFL will introduce goal line technology for premiership games until then we will continue to lag behind other leagues and get distorted results

[Speedy]

That's the difference, you thought it was a goal whereby they had to be 100% certain it had crossed the line and they weren't, hence the decision could only go one way.

See this is what I don't buy, it makes no sense.

[theonlywayisup]

I agree with the comments about "why does the linesman or ref have to be 100% certain" it crossed the line. Football is all about making calls. You get 50/50 challenges when you've got to decide who got to the ball first. You have offside decisions when you've got to decide whether the attacking player was slightly further forward when the ball was played forward.

It was clear to everyone in the ground apart from the unsighted linesman that the ball was over. The ref should have been able to make the call.

I recall a game against St Johnstone when John O'Neill (before he joined Hibs) hit a shot that the Hibs goalie stopped from going over the line - he grabbed the ball but made no motion to pull the ball back to him, the ball was fully on the line - yet the ref gives the goal from twenty yards.

Anyway, back to the OP question - in England they use the goaline technology that doesn't even require a video ref. That's what we need to have in Scotland.

[Libby Hibby]

In this day in age, no sporting result should be influenced by human error. Goal line technology or Video replays for the 4th official is the minimum for any live TV game.

I literally seen photo of the ball over the line 45 seconds after it happened when in the stadium last night. It would take the refs an even shorter duration to decide.

Our football needs dragged out of the dark ages.

[flash]

Everyone stops if you watch it again because they know its a goal. The referee knew as well but chose to use the fact that the linesman was unsighted to bottle out of giving it.

[Thecat23]

It wasn't obvious though. No way a ref or a linesman could confidently call that in real time.

Technology is the only way forward.

If the linesman keeps up with play he clearly sees the yellow ball behind the White post in real time.

The SFA must bring it into our game though it’s a joke we don’t have it.

[Holmesdale Hibs]

We should have goal line technology in Scotland, thats a no-brainer but video technology is different. I’d be in favour of trialing it but it’s less obvious. I worry we’d need some equally bad decisions in an old firm for either to happen quickly.

The decision itself was a difficult one. The ball was 100% over but not by more than a few inches. The linesman did have his view obstructed and the ref may have done as well. Both were running at speed and had a split second to make the decision. The decision from the Griffiths free kick was MUCH worse as the ball was a good foot over and it was a set piece. The hand ball decision vs the Huns was worse as well.

I thought it was a goal at the time as well and it certainly looked like one on tv. However I’ve been at games and described tackles by opposition players as blatant penalties or red cards only to change my mind when seeing a replay.

[Famous Fiver]

Hermit

Your point is.........?

Jordan Forster had a perfectly good goal for us disallowed at Tynecastle for offside which relegated us.

What does that have to do with last night's indefensible refusal of a legitimate goal?

We were cheated (again) pure and simple so keep your whataboutery to yourself.

[SuperAllyMcleod]

I dunno about actual cheating. If you were where the linesman was - with a defender and the near goalpost in the way, it was probably hard to call. Unfortunately, all the TV cameras caught it as a goal. All the more reason for goal line technology, though. We were robbed.

What was ‘unfortunate’ about it? It’s a matter of fact that it was a goal and not given by the linesman?

I agree we were robbed though. [emoji4]

[Pretty Boy]

Technology has to be the say forward. Within about 10 seconds of the incident people in the ground were passing round screenshots on their phone that it was clearly in do 'delaying the game' isn't an excuse.

Another argument against it is it will make the professional and amateur games different. So what? Most amateur games don't even have linesmen so they are already officiated differently.

[heretoday]

Inter had a goal chalked off in the Milan Derby last night by the video assistant. Offside ruling. Milan went on to win the game.
It's a no-brainer for bringing it in for goallines.

[Onion]

Last night the officials didnt need expensive technology, they simply needed the 4th offcial to have a look at Sky footage to call it right. Fans can accept most decisions when they are open to interpretation and subjective, that’s part of the game. But there is no debate about Hibs goal and to carry on as if it wasn’t simply debases the game.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Of course it’s the way forward - see how easily this is sorted in England.

The only reason I’d be a bit worried is we should be expecting all these decisions to even themselves out and I wouldn’t want a tv camera to stop us collecting.

[MartinfaePorty]

Just spoke to a work colleague who is a Grade 1 Assistant Referee. He thinks the assistant from last night won't get sanctioned, as it was too difficult for him to be 100% sure in real time :rolleyes: He's all for having technology introduced though, as he cited a training drill at the Oriam where they had to decide whether or not the ball had crossed the line and as often as not the wrong call was made. It was hammered into them that if they were not sure, do not give the goal.

[Firestarter]

They have it in Italy and it actually added to the excitement a few weeks ago. Roma got a penalty from it, missed then scored a 95 min winner that was borderline offside - ref decided to take a look at it, everyone was ****ing themselves including me who had a bet deciding on it, Gail got given place went ballistic.

[Allant1981]

It wasn't obvious though. No way a ref or a linesman could confidently call that in real time.

Technology is the only way forward.

if he had been up with play the linesman would have easily seen it was over the line

[emerald green]

As Neil Lennon said after the game, the linesman managed to call every offside decision against Hibs. But when it came to seeing the ball crossing the goal line he is suddenly struck blind, as is the referee... It just stinks to high heaven.

How many more times are Hibs going to be cheated/robbed in this manner (call it what you like) in games against Hearts? This isn't the first time, and it wont be the last until the chance of making / not making these vital calls is taken away from the officials.

Some sort of goal line technology has to be introduced now, otherwise we'll be getting threads like this for ever.

Who was the linesman?

[Sammy7nil]

Watching it at home I was on the third lap of the front room, arms aloft screaming like a mad demon before I realised the idiot hadn't given it.


As Neil Lennon said after the game, the linesman managed to call every offside decision against Hibs. But when it came to seeing the ball crossing the goal line he is suddenly struck blind, as is the referee... It just stinks to high heaven.

How many more times are Hibs going to be cheated/robbed in this manner (call it what you like) in games against Hearts? This isn't the first time, and it wont be the last until the chance of making / not making these vital calls is taken away from the officials.

Some sort of goal line technology has to be introduced now, otherwise we'll be getting threads like this for ever.

Who was the linesman?

Anne Budge

[Hi Heid Yin]

When fans in the stand KNOW without any doubt it's a goal a couple of minutes after its happened using the most basic of technology on their phones. There is absolutely NO excuse for that goal not to have been given. It's a fact, there's no debate or judgement needed. It's a ****ing goal and everyone knows it yet 1 minute after the incident but we play on at 0-0!?

Total shambles and any league or sport worth its salt already uses technology in some form and it'll only increase. Dinosaurs who long for days of the past with muddy pitches and leg breaking tackles being allowed will complain its just not like the old days but it's called moving with the times and progress. No excuse at all for that not to be given. Still raging!

:agree::agree::agree:

[Northernhibee]

Common sense dictates it's a goal. The bounce of the ball off the crossbar wasn't straight up and down, it bounced at a diagonal into the goal and spun back.

I totally disagree with those who say it's close or difficult to call. It's blatant. And it's not the first time.

[Bristolhibby]

How about, and it won’t solve all of the problems, but if the game is televised, they use the feed with a ref in the production box to replay major incidents.

It happens in the NFL. The referee can go to a wee screen and review the pictures.

It won’t help if the game isn’t televised, but will do if it is.

J

[Speedy]

Common sense dictates it's a goal. The bounce of the ball off the crossbar wasn't straight up and down, it bounced at a diagonal into the goal and spun back.

I totally disagree with those who say it's close or difficult to call. It's blatant. And it's not the first time.

It definitely was close, quite possibly within the margin for error for FIFA goal line technology.

An inch in it maybe?

[linlithgowhibbie]

Hermit

Your point is.........?

Jordan Forster had a perfectly good goal for us disallowed at Tynecastle for offside which relegated us.

What does that have to do with last night's indefensible refusal of a legitimate goal?

We were cheated (again) pure and simple so keep your whataboutery to yourself.


Don't see any "whatabootery" in HCs response. He pointed out a decision that went in our favour a few seasons ago. Simplles:nlgwa