Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 15:00:30 GMT
But Peacock, I identify a goal awarded by GLT and you say it wasn't - find me one article that says it wasn't. IT WAS and that is why you are being pigheaded. Would it have been if GLT was not in use? We will never know, but the fact is it was a goal given by GLT.
"Only after the Italians complained was the GLT shown to prove them wrong" Once again you completely appear to misunderstand how the system works.
And is it flawless? I don't know but it has been extensively tested and I am certain it is more accurate than a linesman looking from 60+ yards away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 15:53:59 GMT
But funkster, your arguments are those of a weak person. - surely you know that the gizmo alerts the ref even when the ball hits the back of the net at 61mph? Does he pay attention to it, no because he knows it's a goal. - you cannot identify that a goal was awarded by GLT unless you know that and you don't know that or what the ref was thinking. - why do you think the GLT image is shown on TV? it is only to inform the public, just like a ref showing a card. Neither are necessary it's a courtesy to inform others. - would it have been a goal without GLT? Well it was 8 inches over the line and everyone in the video knew it was so I'll vote Yes! The Italians had a little moan as you do in those situations so they showed it on the big screen so their fans could see it! It' really not rocket science. - flawless? Speed cameras are proven wrong all the time, because they are programmed and calibrated by humans. - that's an illegal pitch if it's 60+ yards from the corner flag to the near post..
Oh, and you forgot to apologise...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 16:06:30 GMT
But funkster, your arguments are those of a weak person. - surely you know that the gizmo alerts the ref even when the ball hits the back of the net at 61mph? Does he pay attention to it, no because he knows it's a goal. - you cannot identify that a goal was awarded by GLT unless you know that and you don't know that or what the ref was thinking. - why do you think the GLT image is shown on TV? it is only to inform the public, just like a ref showing a card. Neither are necessary it's a courtesy to inform others. - would it have been a goal without GLT? Well it was 8 inches over the line and everyone in the video knew it was so I'll vote Yes! The Italians had a little moan as you do in those situations so they showed it on the big screen so their fans could see it! It' really not rocket science. - flawless? Speed cameras are proven wrong all the time, because they are programmed and calibrated by humans. - that's an illegal pitch if it's 60+ yards from the corner flag to the near post.. Oh, and you forgot to apologise... I've already been through most these with you on FB, it took about 39 comments and the match referee to demonstrate you were completely out of your depth and even then you could barely bring yourself to accept it. But for the sake of this - any close decision the ref will rely on the GLT - if he gives a close goal and GLT shows it wasn't he would look a pillock - this was close - show me one article that suggests the goal wasn't awarded by GLT - it clearly was - Ha ha, took you about 30 comments to understand that you were convinced the pics were used to award the goal (see comments on FB you've deleted) - See my comments above - we've seen 'goals' where the ball was much more that 8 inches over - Lampard and not given - this was - Oh and show me one pic where the ball is clearly 8 inches over the line - I didn't say it was flawless - see above - Oh and if the linesman is on an angle (as with Lampard) it would comfortably be 60 yards.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 17:23:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by E7#9 on Jul 7, 2014 18:30:34 GMT
Are you two in love? Get a room.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 20:11:30 GMT
I have no idea of the cost of GLT but with all the money floating about at the top of the game it surely is better to use the technology and incur the cost rather than rely on the referee and linesmen who have to make a split second decision which is easy to get wrong. Supporters who fork the cash out deserve that. At what level you draw the line(ha ha) i'm not sure, certainly for the play off finals down as far as the conference as there is so much at stake. But further a field would be unlikely I think below the Championship.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 21:26:09 GMT
I have no idea of the cost of GLT but with all the money floating about at the top of the game it surely is better to use the technology and incur the cost rather than rely on the referee and linesmen who have to make a split second decision which is easy to get wrong. Supporters who fork the cash out deserve that. At what level you draw the line(ha ha) i'm not sure, certainly for the play off finals down as far as the conference as there is so much at stake. But further a field would be unlikely I think below the Championship. I agree terraceman, I am not in favour of technology going further really, using pictures to decide on penalty/no penalty, handball/not handball would still cause arguments. We saw on FB with the Sharps 'handball' v Southend that even reviewing the pictorial evidence there was a difference of opinion. GLT works has been shown to work, not just at this tournament (twice to award goals) but in the Premier League too. I also think the disappearing spray has been really useful. It is not really an experiment because it has been used in South American leagues for years. It is the first time I have seen it in action and it has worked fine. How many 'walls' have you seen doing the creep forward as soon as the ref turns his back? Now if they could pay some attention to time wasting, have a running clock in the stadium that the referee controls, happy days..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 21:56:01 GMT
Terraceman, It would be difficult to estimate the actual total cost so far, and the on-going annual costs moving forward. It has been in the works since 2010 so I think a billion pounds to this point would not be far off. And who pays for it? The companies bill FIFA who bill the leagues and clubs who factor it into ticket and merchandise sales, so the fans do. www.fifa.com/worldcup/organisation/ticketing/prices-matches/Note: these prices are not ridiculously high solely because of GLT and other technologies but partially, no question. Numbers mentioned in this article apply to the Prem and the Euefa tournament. You would have to consider all top leagues in all countries, all major tournaments around the world, not to mention the payments made to the 9 companies who were asked to develop the technology over 2010-12, and then the payments to the 2 companies whose products were selected in 2012 up to now (right now that is Hawk-eye and GoalRef, the German one). www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2316826/Premier-League-goal-line-technology-Clubs-pay-FIFA-15-000-installation-total-300-000.htmlen.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goal-line_technologyIn early 2014, the vast majority of teams in the two divisions of the German Bundesliga voted against introducing goal-line technology for financial reasons. America’s Major League Soccer has also decided the cost of installing goal-line technology — whether through Hawk-Eye or one of FIFA’s three other licensed providers — is too high. Personally I would rather see that money put into getting rid of racism in football, Respect program's at grassroots level football, development of Academies by clubs and countries. A referee missing a goal in a big game is important. But so is players having bananas thrown at them, abuse of officials and players etc. If a player misses the 5th kick from the spot that sends his team out of the World Cup, or if a player gets banned for biting an opponent, these are just as big as a referees mistake.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2014 22:26:37 GMT
The cost at the World Cup for the GLT is about £5million. Ticket sale revenue (including corporates and marketing) should be about about £800 million. Just over 0.6% of your ticket.
Estimates vary widely though but even with roughly 3million tickets up for sale at say an average of £60 (conservative estimate) = £180m GLT makes up under 3% of that figure.
Edited to reflect different ticket sale estimates
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2014 7:59:13 GMT
The cost is worth it in my opinion at the top levels of the game, if the technology was installed at Wembley it would cover play off finals etc. So I agree with you funky. I also follow what you are saying peacock, I don't really see racism as a problem in English football but it obviously is in certain countries, I agree with you there but as for the *** agenda I draw the line and didn't agree with the captains having to read out those obsurd statements. I am totally against things such as the rainbow laces campaign and was glad to see none of our players wore them this season on the said day. I am totally against a minority pushing their values onto the rest of us. If that's how they are perhaps they should have their own clubs and leagues. I am not politically correct and have the courage and decency to speak out in what I believe is wrong. In addition no one could accuse me of being a racist as my wife is Jamaican. Sorry if I have upset any one but I think I convey the view of the vast majority of football supporters in this country who don't get to voice their opinion on this subject due to small pressure groups with too much power and influence. I'm not expecting much support for my view as people in general are scared to say exactly what they think but plenty of opposition from the other side because that's how it works. So just to recap, i'm for GLT at the top levels, i'm for anti-racism, i'm for money and resources being put into quality coaching and football development at all levels and i'm definitely for BAFC.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2014 8:19:55 GMT
GLT is available at Wembley and was used for the playoff finals.
If Derby had got promoted they would have had to pay £250- £300k to have the system installed. Their turnover would have increased from £17m to £120m (Sam Rush's own figures), I reckon they could have afforded it.
Overall the world cup is generating about £3billion in income (various quotes in excess of $4billion). There is plenty of money in football, I don't think it is the advent of GLT that is stopping the wash of income down to the admiral grassroots programmes Peacock mentions. Most of the money in football goes to players.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2014 9:30:50 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2014 10:06:21 GMT
Interesting list peacock, I think it will be determined by who reaches the final, we have three permutations, an all South American final, a South American v Europe final or an all European final, whichever it is will determine the officials.
|
|
|
Post by E7#9 on Jul 8, 2014 20:30:06 GMT
Come on Germany!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2014 22:31:49 GMT
Got to say football was the winner tonight and Germany taught Brazil a football lesson, I actually enjoyed them being humiliated, non more so than Scholarri whose tactics I despise. Looks like my tip for the tournament have every chance of lifting the trophy. Brazil will have to have a good long at themselves football wise and rebuild, it will take time but with the talent they have available they will come back as strong as ever.
|
|
|
Post by E7#9 on Jul 8, 2014 22:37:44 GMT
I think we should have had GLT for all of the Germany goals! Just to laugh at the South Americans.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2014 22:43:11 GMT
Got to say football was the winner tonight and Germany taught Brazil a football lesson, I actually enjoyed them being humiliated, non more so than Scholarri whose tactics I despise. Looks like my tip for the tournament have every chance of lifting the trophy. Brazil will have to have a good long at themselves football wise and rebuild, it will take time but with the talent they have available they will come back as strong as ever. As someone on commentary said, the Germans took that look at themselves after Munich in 2001. They also had a much better base to build on and had administrators, coaches and managers who knew what they were doing. Great performance but they've won nowt yet. It will be a shame if they don't go on to lift the trophy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2014 6:19:57 GMT
Got to say football was the winner tonight and Germany taught Brazil a football lesson, I actually enjoyed them being humiliated, non more so than Scholarri whose tactics I despise. Looks like my tip for the tournament have every chance of lifting the trophy. Brazil will have to have a good long at themselves football wise and rebuild, it will take time but with the talent they have available they will come back as strong as ever. As someone on commentary said, the Germans took that look at themselves after Munich in 2001. They also had a much better base to build on and had administrators, coaches and managers who knew what they were doing. Great performance but they've won nowt yet. It will be a shame if they don't go on to lift the trophy. All very true funky, what a shame it wasn't the same in this country, we had a look at ourselves, decided to build St Georges Park but then decided to moth ball it when the southern gentleman at the FA decided to revamp Wembley at a ridiculous cost instead of building a new national stadium near to Birmingham. We are still paying for the new Wembley, the Premier league rules the roost football wise in this country and is preventing change and development in most cases of young English talent progressing. Its all about greed not development.(there are odd exceptions) Look at the stadia in Germany and ticket prices compared to here. Personally I think Ben Robinson would have done a much better job than the FA and our chances of ever lifting the cup again would have improved. I don't expect it to ever happen again in my life time with the buffoons who supposedly run our national game in charge. A whole host of changes need to be made from grass roots up, there are some green shoots but I don't expect enough funding will be put into developing new coaches and making those qualifications easier to obtain from a financial aspect. Personally i'm glad I support my home town club who do things properly, we already have 4 youngsters in our first team squad who have progressed through the youth ranks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2014 11:47:31 GMT
Interesting list peacock, I think it will be determined by who reaches the final, we have three permutations, an all South American final, a South American v Europe final or an all European final, whichever it is will determine the officials. In my pool I picked Ger-Arg final with Germany hoisting. That could still happen but I think it will be and would prefer Ger-Hol final now. That would be a cracker, replay of 1974. I was living in Germany at the time, everyone had the afternoon off work and the atmosphere was electric! Maybe this time Vlaar will break Mullers nose? As for the ref team, it won't be the Mexico, or Turkey teams. I doubt very much it will be Uzbekistan, Spain, Italy or Japan. So that leaves the two African teams, USA/Canada, Chile, Brasil, Equador, Sweden, Portugal, England. If it's Ger-Hol I wouldn't be surprised to see a South or North American team do the final. If it's Ger-Arg I think it will be Sweden, Portugal, England or America/Canada.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2014 13:05:08 GMT
what a shame it wasn't the same in this country, we had a look at ourselves, decided to build St Georges Park but then decided to moth ball it, preventing change and development in most cases of young English talent progressing. Look at the stadia in Germany and ticket prices compared to here. A whole host of changes need to be made from grass roots up, there are some green shoots. terraceman, I have edited your post to pick out the bits that I think are a problem. True St. Georges should have been built years ago as well as developing the youth program. It worked for France in '98, Brasil in 2002, Spain in 2010, and Germany (almost in 2010) but certainly this year. And 15 of Germanys current squad (inc Reus who is injured) are 25 or under. Winning the world cup comes from taking the time to build a team. 'One' problem with England is that the team should have been torn down to the youth and built from the ground up. This should have happened in 2008 (or earlier) because England had no chance of winning in 2010 (they had 5 players 25 or under in that squad). It has started now since Roy took over (there are 10 players 25 or under in the current squad, 11 if you include Townsend). The German league doesn't have the high priced footballers like the Premier League thus cheaper ticket prices. Plus Germans are very frugal and don't spend money on fringe parts of the game, like GLT as one example. Smart budgeting means that money can be used maybe for stadia and youth programs. As a side, watching that match last night I thought that the Germans don't really have a world-class striker. They certainly have a plethera of first class attacking midfielders. I wonder if a strategic coaching decision was made at some point to develop midfielders while the rest of the big countries were focusing on developing strikers (except for Brasil of course ). Just a crazy thought while Brasil were falling to pieces.
|
|