• Graycat23@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They gave the one for Newcastle vs Arsenal (dammit) so this one has to be given by that standard.

  • Ryanatix@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s gone out, simple as.

    You don’t even need technology to measure for the lines. The ball is a sphere, it’s a set shape with set measurements. If you measure from the line to the centre base of the ball you can find out if it is overhanging or not.

    More than one way to find out but installing some basic algorithm into VAR would blow their tiny brains

  • Ok_Dinner8889@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why didn’t they just say that it’s in if the bottom doesn’t touch the line. Would’ve been a lot easier.

  • peremadeleine@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why do they not just make it so that some part of the ball has to be touching the field of play (including the lines) in order for the ball to be considered in play? That way if you can see grass, it’s definitely out.

  • JohnnyBobLUFC@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can we please for fucks sake get cameras looking down the bastard line? From above would be better but fuck me we have all the cameras and angles but not one for this? It’s so easy to stop people getting annoyed by this.

  • Kimolainen83@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s impossible to see from this angle as a referee myself I would have to use the VAR , or goal, line technology, and see from above

  • Straightoutthe90s@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fuck all this arc of the ball shit. If the base of the ball that’s touching the ground is out, then the ball is out of play.

    • Superb-Ad-4322@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is not very clearly out of play. Obviously you have been out of touch with other similar decisions made in the men’s game recently.

  • GrumpyOldFart74@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can’t tell with 100% certainty from that angle. It looks out, but from behind the line it might look in

    Dead along the line is going to be fucking close - maybe a millimetre or less.

    As there’s no way to be certain, VAR should stick with the on-field decision.

    (And I don’t see why we don’t have “goal line tech” around the whole pitch, tbh)

    • herkalurk@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      (And I don’t see why we don’t have “goal line tech” around the whole pitch, tbh)

      Because it takes 15 cameras and $250K per match to run the GOAL line tech, increase the cost sigificantly and cameras to have that technology around the whole pitch…

      • Malvania@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Would be a lot cheaper to just put a camera facing down the line and let VAR quickly review whether the ball was out of it’s a goal. Just need cameras in the right places

      • GrumpyOldFart74@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well, that would be a reason right enough!

        That said, we were told the clubs decided against fully automated offside because of the price but it’s used in European matches (I think?) so half the clubs probably have it anyway

      • jod1991@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Whoever the fuck is charging 250k per game needs shooting. As do whoever agreed to pay that.

        Surely there’s more than 1 company doing this stuff in 2023 no?

      • CrossXFir3@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, that’s not how much it costs to do, that’s how much the prem would be charged to do it. Fifa or the FA could absolutely work towards making a FAR more affordable option but that wouldn’t be good business would it?

  • fryboy71967@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Been here before. The ball is a sphere. Yes bottom of the ball is definitely over the line. Not necessarily the left arc of the ball. Been shown on tv directly from above and it’s literally a whole new ball game. Arsenal v Newcastle was the game I believe.

      • GlobeTrottingJ@alien.top
        cake
        B
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It can’t be proved either way, has the be the original decision, same with Hojlands goal against Brighton. Would it be too expensive to put the goal line tech in all over the pitch?

        • ToodleDoodleDo@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Just because you put the descisions in the hands of a computer doesn’t mean they’ll be right. Maybe consistent at least, I’ll give you that.

    • Ikhlas37@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To be honest, could they not just change the rule to “if you can see grass it’s out.”

      You look birds eye, and side on if possible… If either show grass it’s out.