Board poll: let's pretend that Goal Line Technology is being introduced
It is agreed that there will still be circumstances wherein definite proof can't be achieved (people in the way etc). Would you prefer the FA to give the benefit of the doubt to the attack or the defence?
For me, it'd be the attack, unless The Nodge were the defence, but I can see the argument for the reverse.
Posted By: Sugbad The Bad on April 30th 2011 at 18:43:35
Message Thread
- Board poll: let's pretend that Goal Line Technology is being introduced (Other Football) - Sugbad The Bad, Apr 30, 18:43:35
- Would probably agree with the hawk eye system (Other Football) - pants, Apr 30, 19:24:29
- its not a goal unless you know it 100% crossed the line. therefore still not a goal (Other Football) - Tony Martin, Apr 30, 18:49:58
- hawkeye for tennis works fine (n/m) (Other Football) - 1 5CC, Apr 30, 18:50:39
- Tennis is a lot more stop-start though. (Other Football) - Graham Br15tol, Apr 30, 19:02:45
- The ball is only in play for about 50 minutes of the 90 innit (n/m) (Other Football) - pants, Apr 30, 19:25:12
- Tennis is a lot more stop-start though. (Other Football) - Graham Br15tol, Apr 30, 19:02:45
- hawkeye for tennis works fine (n/m) (Other Football) - 1 5CC, Apr 30, 18:50:39
- the technology would decide if it's over (Other Football) - 1 5CC, Apr 30, 18:46:51
- Would have to be the defence if any doubt. (Other Football) - JD3, Apr 30, 18:46:20
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.