|
Post by ohbottom on Mar 15, 2014 21:07:30 GMT
To be fair the rule used to be if the center of the ball was over it was a goal,throw in etc............................ You must be a lot older than me then, because as far back as I can remember it's always been the whole of the ball over the line, unless you're playing Germany in the world cup, in which case it needs to be more than two ball widths over the line for at least two seconds.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Mar 15, 2014 21:46:05 GMT
To be fair the rule used to be if the center of the ball was over it was a goal,throw in etc............................ You must be a lot older than me then, because as far back as I can remember it's always been the whole of the ball over the line, unless you're playing Germany in the world cup, in which case it needs to be more than two ball widths over the line for at least two seconds. Unless it's the final!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2014 21:55:23 GMT
Here we go folks, an early contender for thread of the year!
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Mar 15, 2014 23:21:48 GMT
Geoff Hursts 2nd goal in th world cup final was at least a foot over the line.
|
|
|
Post by alster on Mar 16, 2014 0:01:10 GMT
This is the controversial bit for me.......if the edge of the white line forms a true tangent to the circumference of the ball is that counted as over the line? Or does there have to be green visible between the circumference of the ball and the edge of the white line? This for me is where the rule becomes a bit grey instead of black and white. I think the latter is much easier to interpret. If there's grass visible between the edge of the ball and the line when viewed from above then it's 100% over- otherwise it isn't. Even a doofus like me can understand that, so no need to complicate things any further. Ah but how much grass can you see, from what angle and from what elevation. Don't forget the ball is wider at the equator or middle than it is at its base where it touches the turf, consequently from a certain view you could see a smidgin of grass and the entire ball may still not be over.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2014 0:13:35 GMT
Never mind that. They were bloody lucky. Definite penalty near the end for Newcastle. I think the ref just wanted to blow the whistle for full time. Blatant, blatant penalty. Three points that they should never have got!
|
|
|
Post by santy on Mar 16, 2014 0:28:52 GMT
From a top-down angle its not all over, but what if you saw it from say a 45 degree angle, looking at that I'd argue that you'd probably be able to see a bit of green between the base of the ball and the line.
|
|
MooG
Youth Player
Only the wisest and stupidest of men never change.
Posts: 493
|
Post by MooG on Mar 16, 2014 0:54:08 GMT
Surely all we have to do is award the same fraction of a goal as the proportion of the ball that crossed the line. So Fulham won this game 1.98 - 0.
It's also obvious that we should reward skill by assigning each 'goal' a degree of differently; so an overhead kick while wearing a hood and whistling the national anthem is worth more than a goal the opposing keeper whacks against your arse while you're facing the wrong way.
What could be simpler?
|
|
|
Post by broadwayroundabout on Mar 16, 2014 7:12:47 GMT
To the OP, I think you are getting confused with the appeal / review panel policy that if the club or a minimum of 150 fans appeal against the "no goal" the panel have to review the information from the sensors in the pitch where the ball lands and then give a decision, but there is a cost involved and the club pay if it's still found to be a no goal, hence why most clubs don't use it.
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Mar 16, 2014 7:13:40 GMT
If you looked at the 'line' through a microscope, it wouldn't actually be solid since it is painted on grass. It would be jagged. So I bet parts of the ball were all the way over the line whilst other parts weren't. Ooh, it gets more confusing.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Mar 16, 2014 7:36:02 GMT
Ok. Think of the ball, not as a sphere but as a hypothetical disc with no thickness and diameter equal to the diameter of the ball at its widest ie on its equator. Now deciding if it has crossed the line will not be affected by the angle or distance you are viewing it. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
Post by kettle2013 on Mar 16, 2014 9:17:46 GMT
Have you ever watched football before? Or are you just smashed out of your tiny mind? Yes & no. If the whole ball has to cross the line, then I disagree with the rule Seriously!! I despair with some footy fans! It's the rule, it's always been the rule, it is always going to be the rule.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_Shawjosh on Mar 16, 2014 9:26:02 GMT
In fairness, it is a goal if more than 50% of the ball is over the line...
As long as the other 50% of the ball is over the line
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2014 10:18:03 GMT
They still did not, and I repeat not deserve three points! This could help them stay in the prem. It was a penalty to Newcastle and would have ended the match in a draw. I hope these points don,t help to save them at the end of the season. They deserve to go down!
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 16, 2014 10:28:22 GMT
What the pic on the original post actually shows is how good the Goal Decision System is. The law states that the ball has to be 100% over the line and the GDS system is good enough to rule "no goal" when only 98% of the ball is over the line. Hooray for technology that actually works.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Mar 16, 2014 10:42:52 GMT
To be fair the rule used to be if the center of the ball was over it was a goal,throw in etc............................ You must be a lot older than me then, because as far back as I can remember it's always been the whole of the ball over the line, unless you're playing Germany in the world cup, in which case it needs to be more than two ball widths over the line for at least two seconds. Think Squeekster may be right. The rule was changed to make it easier to decide if the ball is completely over the line than trying to judge more than 50%. Seem to remember the rule change bringing further controversy regarding the positioning of the ball in relation to the quadrant when taking a corner. Bet not many know that under the original rules of the game the goalie was allowed to bounce the ball with his hand right up to the half way line where he could throw it to an attacking player. This rule did not change until 1912. Stoke had a keeper called Leigh Roose who used this to great effect until other clubs started to complain to the FA that it was ruining the spectacle of the game. Sounds familiar. Just found this on Wiki. An extraordinary story of a real character by the sounds of him. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Richmond_Roose
|
|