I don't get it

Every goal line decision when this has been in has been able to determine that a ball was/wasn't over in the most marginal measurements. Now they say it was because cameras etc didn't see it.

They just need to say it either wasn't turned on or was not working

Posted By: inutero on June 18th 2020 at 08:53:33

Message Thread

I’ve seen the Hawkeye statement re that VAR goal but have the refs group (NCFC) - Jim, Jun 18, 08:49:32
- It wasn’t miles over the line tho (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jun 18, 08:57:39
  - Come off it it was clearly over the line, certainly in comparison with the (NCFC) - Jim, Jun 18, 10:22:07
    - Couldn’t see any daylight (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jun 18, 11:10:34
      - He's in the side netting with his hand between the ball and the post (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Jun 18, 11:36:49
        
        Yes probably an inch over (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jun 18, 12:09:35
    - They should at least have notified the ref of a potential issue. (NCFC) - The Gaffer, Jun 18, 10:27:48
      - There was a break in play shortly after the incident too (n/m) (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Jun 18, 10:32:12
  - There is no defence (NCFC) - Ben, Jun 18, 09:50:15
  - marginal my arse (NCFC) - ghostof barry butler, Jun 18, 09:07:31
    - Yes that’s the split second it looked over (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jun 18, 09:14:47
      - But now we question if those 9000 decisions were correct? (n/m) (NCFC) - Kar1, Jun 18, 10:48:43
        
        They were correct (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jun 18, 11:11:06
  - Have to say I agree there - it would be a ballsy VAR to go against it (NCFC) - Yellalee, Jun 18, 08:59:35
    - Presumably they need a better error reporting system that goes to the VAR (NCFC) - Yellalee, Jun 18, 09:01:22
      - Yeah we should have seen the virtual replay (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jun 18, 09:04:26
        
        how would they do that if the cameras can't see the ball? (n/m) (NCFC) - Chris Peacock, Jun 18, 10:13:10
        
        Would be the last moment the cameras could see the ball (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Jun 18, 10:18:09
- I don't get it (NCFC) - inutero, Jun 18, 08:53:33
  - They have said it wasn't working - all cameras were obscured in that scenario apparently (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Jun 18, 08:57:07
    - Which is b**locks since there are plenty of camera angles available. (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Jun 18, 10:22:41
      - And, I think it isn’t bollocks.... (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Jun 18, 10:31:38
      - For context though, it’s been wrong once in what, 8 years? (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Jun 18, 10:30:03
        
        Don;t disagree. Not having a go at hawkeye. the problem here was VAR not (NCFC) - Jim, Jun 18, 10:43:29
        
        That's not how you statistically calculate error rate. (n/m) (NCFC) - The Gaffer, Jun 18, 10:43:23
        
        Who said it was? (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Jun 18, 11:02:49
        
        You miss the point but that's fine. We can agree to differ. (n/m) (NCFC) - The Gaffer, Jun 18, 12:00:22
        
        That's not the correct context. (NCFC) - The Gaffer, Jun 18, 10:37:18
        
        It is the correct context.... (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Jun 18, 10:39:32
    - Sorry, read your post again and you do mention that! (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Jun 18, 08:57:53

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.