|
Post by PotteringThrough on Dec 27, 2017 9:47:36 GMT
Another analogy you could use - If you get 5 numbers plus 1 lucky star on the Euromillions you should win the jackpot (less numbers required if you're using the 51% rule)
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Dec 27, 2017 10:02:30 GMT
Ok then a bit more theory for you. If I presented you with a picture of a football, and asked you in a second, without measuring, to draw two vertical lines on it - one on the outer left edge, and one right down the very middle - I guarantee you that the one on the edge would be more accurate, as the edge of the ball is very visibly defined already. Effectively you're asking officials to firstly define in their heads where the dead centre of the ball is, and then if it's crossed the line for throw ins, corners etc. whilst it's moving. You're making their job harder and increasing the likelihood of a wrong decision. They can already SEE the edge of the ball, but would have to ESTIMATE where the centre is. Present 3 different referees with 10 pictures of a football some which have completely crossed the line amd others where the ball is still un by a hair's width and see if they all cone to the same conclusions !!!Of course for the goal line this will be determined by the technology as we all agree that the goal line is the most important, surely !! Line is I agree entirely, they make mistakes with the current method as it relies on human judgement... are you suggesting thst your half-ball rule would be LESS error prone?? If so, how? If not, why change it?
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Dec 27, 2017 10:09:07 GMT
Better analogy is the pregnant or not pregnant one, cannot be half pregnant.
The ball is either over the line or it isn't, half over, 99% over isn't over. The line is part of the playing area.
It is the only way that the rule is absolutely clear.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 10:13:36 GMT
It’s the same rule for everyone and let’s be honest, it’s a rule that will probably work more for us than against !
Some want 51% over the line, 75%, 100%... who cares. We are fortunate if we get 51% of the ball into our opponents goal area 😁
|
|
|
Post by malteser68 on Dec 27, 2017 10:20:08 GMT
It’s the same rule for everyone and let’s be honest, it’s a rule that will probably work more for us than against ! Some want 51% over the line, 75%, 100%... who cares. We are fortunate if we get 51% of the ball into our opponents goal area 😁 On the latter part of your comment I fully agree 😄😤
|
|
|
Post by spitthedog on Dec 27, 2017 10:21:14 GMT
The goal line doesn't have a cliff edge. The ball could be 99% over the line and stay there . Technology can easily determine if 50%+ of the ball has gone over the line or not If it has, its a goal If it hasnt, its not That's fair and equitable If the whole ball bar a hair's width is over the line but its ruled not to be a goal because of that hair's width, does it feel fair or not ? Definitely not, in my opinion Surely this is not such a difficult concept to fathom is it ? why 50+%, why not 100%.....so what about throw-ins 50% or 100% and will we think its unfair when someone puts the ball only 90% over our goal line????
|
|
|
Post by SydenhamStokie on Dec 27, 2017 10:21:27 GMT
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Dec 27, 2017 10:25:09 GMT
It's unfair because it didn't go our way. That's the logic of this thread. Wonder if we'd be saying this had it been down the other end.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 27, 2017 10:25:38 GMT
How about determining if something is a corner then? You can't have one rule for the goalline and another for the sidelines etc. Need to have consistency. Same principle applies The goal line marks one outer edge of four edges that define the area where the ball needs to cross into ENTIRELY in order for a goal to be scored. The other three sides are demarcated by the cross bar and the two goal posts. You're surely not suggesting that if over 50% of the ball hits either of the posts or the cross bar but doesn't cross entirely into the scoring area then in those instances too, a goal should be awarded? No? Thought not. So you want to have one rule for one edge but not the other three?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Dec 27, 2017 10:28:58 GMT
The goal line marks one outer edge of four edges that define the area where the ball needs to cross into ENTIRELY in order for a goal to be scored. The other three sides are demarcated by the cross bar and the two goal posts. You're surely not suggesting that if over 50% of the ball hits either of the posts or the cross bar but doesn't cross entirely into the scoring area then in those instances too, a goal should be awarded? No? Thought not. So you want to have one rule for one edge but not the other three? Nailed it! Case closed!
|
|
|
Post by kidcrewbob on Dec 27, 2017 10:35:44 GMT
The rule is fine and it's great that a magic eye has taken the subjectivity and contention out of any goaline decision BUT it annoys the hell out of me as to the lack of consistancy when it comes to the sidelines - by-lines are subject to a bit more scrutiny but I am certain the 100% over the line rule does not seem to apply - and they never / rarely show replays - seems it only has to be 50-75% over to gain the throw in - I think more often than not the liner cannot see and is driven by noise / reaction.....look forward to a fully automated system for this and offside which surely could be developed....
|
|
|
Post by alster on Dec 27, 2017 11:08:46 GMT
The only thing that really amazes me about the whole ball thing is how many football fans seem not to understand it. We sit pretty much right above one corner flag and it never ceases to amaze me how huge numbers in the crowd bey because the ball isn't in the quadrant for a corner huge numbers of fans seemingly unaware that only a hairs width of the ball needs to overhang the line not touch it.
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Dec 27, 2017 11:11:38 GMT
The law is simple, universally understood and has been around for aeons. Why change it?
|
|
|
Post by Cast no shadow on Dec 27, 2017 11:15:27 GMT
So we win 1.5 goals to 1
|
|
|
Post by samba :) on Dec 27, 2017 11:43:06 GMT
I had very high hopes for 3 points from yesterday's match so I decided to go and watch it at Rabokk, my friend's bar and restaurant in Nadur, Gozo as we usually win when I go there. We were a grand total of 3 Stokies watching the match on one of the 2 big screens whereas a more sizeable group of Manure followers were watching their match on the other big screen. Peter, Rabokk's owner, a diehard Stokie, explained in graphic and very simple terms the sheer stupidity of this rule as all 3 of us felt we had unjustly been denied a goal. He got a bottle if coke, put it at the edge of the bar and said that as soon as it is sufficiently far out to topple over, then that should be a goal. And i am completely in agreement - if half the ballor more crosses the line, then it should be a goal In yesterday's case 90% of the bottle had crossed the line Applying Peter's analogy, the bottle would certainly have toppled and hence it should have been a goal Yes but say if i want to leave north korea and go to South korea When im ninety eight percent in south korea im still a bit in north korea Like when the ball is ninety eight percent off the pitch its still 2 per cent on the pitch
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Dec 27, 2017 11:45:20 GMT
The goal line marks one outer edge of four edges that define the area where the ball needs to cross into ENTIRELY in order for a goal to be scored. The other three sides are demarcated by the cross bar and the two goal posts. You're surely not suggesting that if over 50% of the ball hits either of the posts or the cross bar but doesn't cross entirely into the scoring area then in those instances too, a goal should be awarded? No? Thought not. So you want to have one rule for one edge but not the other three? Very succinctly put Paul.
|
|
|
Post by superheroantonius on Dec 27, 2017 11:51:29 GMT
You may be missing the main point
Which is diouf had his legs kicked from underneath him, in the middle of the huddersfield penalty area
|
|
|
Post by datguy on Dec 27, 2017 12:12:11 GMT
Bizarre thread.
|
|
|
Post by FbrgVaStkFan on Dec 27, 2017 12:43:55 GMT
Why not just move the goal line back the radius of the ball and then go with the OP's rule? Then everyone would be happy.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Dec 27, 2017 12:47:05 GMT
Can't make up rules just to suit us, if it was Huddersfield's ball 90% over the line we'd have a different idea!
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Dec 27, 2017 12:48:28 GMT
Why not just move the goal line back the radius of the ball and then go with the OP's rule? Then everyone would be happy.
|
|
|
Post by leicspotter on Dec 27, 2017 19:36:19 GMT
Did anyone else notice that the goal line at the far end was about 5mm wider that the one at our end?
|
|
|
Post by malteser68 on Dec 27, 2017 20:09:35 GMT
Another analogy you could use - If you get 5 numbers plus 1 lucky star on the Euromillions you should win the jackpot (less numbers required if you're using the 51% rule) So how about this analogy wisehead - If you only do 99% of your job well, you shouldny get a salary
|
|
|
Post by interestedobserver on Dec 27, 2017 20:14:18 GMT
I thought only us Yanks get to propose absurd rule changes.
Move the advertising boards up flush to the touch lines so the ball never goes out.
|
|
|
Post by interestedobserver on Dec 27, 2017 20:16:58 GMT
The goal line marks one outer edge of four edges that define the area where the ball needs to cross into ENTIRELY in order for a goal to be scored. The other three sides are demarcated by the cross bar and the two goal posts. You're surely not suggesting that if over 50% of the ball hits either of the posts or the cross bar but doesn't cross entirely into the scoring area then in those instances too, a goal should be awarded? No? Thought not. So you want to have one rule for one edge but not the other three? Paul Spencer, I believe you are the smartest person to post on these here boards. Another brilliant one.
|
|
|
Post by djduncanjames on Dec 27, 2017 20:18:45 GMT
I had very high hopes for 3 points from yesterday's match so I decided to go and watch it at Rabokk, my friend's bar and restaurant in Nadur, Gozo as we usually win when I go there. We were a grand total of 3 Stokies watching the match on one of the 2 big screens whereas a more sizeable group of Manure followers were watching their match on the other big screen. Peter, Rabokk's owner, a diehard Stokie, explained in graphic and very simple terms the sheer stupidity of this rule as all 3 of us felt we had unjustly been denied a goal. He got a bottle if coke, put it at the edge of the bar and said that as soon as it is sufficiently far out to topple over, then that should be a goal. And i am completely in agreement - if half the ballor more crosses the line, then it should be a goal In yesterday's case 90% of the bottle had crossed the line Applying Peter's analogy, the bottle would certainly have toppled and hence it should have been a goal The goal line doesn't have a cliff edge. The ball could be 99% over the line and stay there . I want an inquest! -- Clearly there is an incline in that goal!
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Dec 27, 2017 22:03:06 GMT
Another analogy you could use - If you get 5 numbers plus 1 lucky star on the Euromillions you should win the jackpot (less numbers required if you're using the 51% rule) So how about this analogy wisehead - If you only do 99% of your job well, you shouldny get a salary Wisehead, haha, love it. Define "well" in this scenario? Are you using specific KPIs to measure against or is just one person, your manager, deciding what "well" is? Say for instance if your job was to push a ball all the way over a line but each time you did it it only went 51% over the line would that be sufficiently "well" in your eyes? In fact you only had to push one ball over 1 line once. You do it but only 51% of the ball goes over the line. Better yet, you're the manager, and your employee has to do it - are you paying them or not?
|
|
|
Post by toppercorner on Dec 27, 2017 22:05:59 GMT
at least it wasn't as controversial as this one
|
|
|
Post by wembley1972 on Dec 27, 2017 22:16:24 GMT
I had very high hopes for 3 points from yesterday's match so I decided to go and watch it at Rabokk, my friend's bar and restaurant in Nadur, Gozo as we usually win when I go there. We were a grand total of 3 Stokies watching the match on one of the 2 big screens whereas a more sizeable group of Manure followers were watching their match on the other big screen. Peter, Rabokk's owner, a diehard Stokie, explained in graphic and very simple terms the sheer stupidity of this rule as all 3 of us felt we had unjustly been denied a goal. He got a bottle if coke, put it at the edge of the bar and said that as soon as it is sufficiently far out to topple over, then that should be a goal. And i am completely in agreement - if half the ballor more crosses the line, then it should be a goal In yesterday's case 90% of the bottle had crossed the line Applying Peter's analogy, the bottle would certainly have toppled and hence it should have been a goal Peter's passion for Stoke is admirable and knowing how animated he gets I imagine it was fun to watch. Can't agree with him though, and we had enough chances to make sure it was over the line. I will be at Rabokk in August watching the first couple of matches with the Stoke faithful, I hope to hear the bell ringing for goals scored by the mighty Stoke. Just hope to God we are still in the Prem.
|
|
|
Post by onionman on Dec 27, 2017 22:41:27 GMT
If a football crosses 51 percent of the goal line, and then falls off a cliff as if it were a bottle of coke on the edge of a bar, and there's nobody there to see it, does it make a sound?
|
|