|
Post by Carter on Jan 5, 2005 10:13:08 GMT 1
To be fair the Rob he did everything right - he was correctly positioned watching for offside and as soon as the shot was released he tore off down the line, however no one on this earth could have run as fast as that ball was kicked.
He was looking but Carroll's body was in the way so there was no way without xray vision he could definately see if the ball had crossed the line! If you can't see it you can't give it - simple as that.....
Imagine the hell to play if he had just 'guessed' - which is what it would have been- and given the goal and it wasn't in....
Funny how no-one is taking about the screw up by Carroll...
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jan 5, 2005 10:28:08 GMT 1
Noone's talking about the screw up by the keeper because its the blunder by the officials which meant United escaped with a point they shouldn't have. Carrolls mistake, funny as it is, is secondary to the real issue
|
|
|
Post by faginy on Jan 5, 2005 10:28:18 GMT 1
just 'cos he's your mate
|
|
|
Post by Mr T on Jan 5, 2005 11:04:02 GMT 1
could maybe see your point if it were an inch or two, but it must be at least a metre over the line. You don't need to be even level with that to see its clearly over the big white line
|
|
|
Post by Carter on Jan 5, 2005 11:10:18 GMT 1
look at the angles - if carroll's body is in the way and you can't see the ball - what exactly could anyone do? I see the FA have just made a statement about how they will now consider video technology - Shrewsbury's Rob Lewis the man who changed the face of football!!! ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2005 12:30:07 GMT 1
Theres no excuse for the officials, and anyway the ball bounced above Carrolls dive as he clawed it out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2005 12:39:00 GMT 1
I'm with carter on this one.
I'll be honest, when I first saw it on MOTD I didn't think it looked that clear.
Bear in mind where the Lino and the ref were positioned, a fair distance from the decision and Carol's body was in between them and the goal.
|
|
|
Post by theriverside on Jan 5, 2005 13:26:42 GMT 1
Everyone is talking about Carrolls body being in the way of the ball. The thing is that his body is completely over the line so it should not have taken much working out....................
|
|
|
Post by DiggerDave on Jan 5, 2005 13:30:31 GMT 1
I hate Rob Lewis anyway ,even before last night
|
|
|
Post by BelleVueShrew on Jan 5, 2005 14:53:46 GMT 1
I agree with Carter as well, and I'm no fan of Rob Lewis.
I don't think anyone can really pass commemt in less they have seen the whole incident in real time. Slow motions and freeze frames are all well and good, but in real time, it happened so damned quick.
Carroll scooped the ball back out as quick as he let it cross the line, he was sliding backwards so his momentum anyway was taking him over the line. His back is to Lewis, thus obscuring his view. Lewis is frantically charging from his correct position on the half way line, from where the ball is hit. Look at the view from the camera positioned on the half way line and say it is definately over the line.
The only thing you can say with this incident is that it proves the need for video replays, if we believe that officials should get all major decisions right all of the time.
Other sports are in the 21st Century, why not football?
|
|
|
Post by timgallon on Jan 5, 2005 23:16:27 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by shrewinjapan on Jan 5, 2005 23:26:34 GMT 1
I can't believe that anyone in the whole ground couldn't have seen that was a goal - Carrol's whole body bar his feet were in the goal. His head was virtually in the net!?! Yeah, an undeserved point to Man Utd., but I think more importantly 2 points lost to Spurs which for them come the end of the season might be the difference between a place in Europe or not. I'm annoyed because I had just had a bet with an Everton fan friend that Spurs would finish above them, but they are now two points further adrift coz Everton won.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 6, 2005 2:29:44 GMT 1
anyone watch sky sports news today ?
they re created the incident and proved that it was a freak and happened so quick that the ref and lino could not be 100% sure that the ball had crossed the line
|
|
|
Post by mattsnapper2 on Jan 6, 2005 4:11:45 GMT 1
Theres no excuse for the officials, and anyway the ball bounced above Carrolls dive as he clawed it out. ...but Rob, the referee was blocked as Carroll dived into the net to claw the ball out thus blocking the view and if you are not happy with Robs running the line then the Premiership need Lindford Christie type athletes to catch up with play. The only official who could have seen it would be a line judge behind the net or get more linesmen who just operate on the opposite side covering only the penalty area Remember the pictures everyone saw was from the TV cameras high up in the roof of Old Trafford looking down. No photographers got a picture, not all the players knew of the severity of the incident as it was on ground level and like I have said, Carroll himself blocked the view has he dived into the net thus blocking the view of the ball and the goal line
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Jan 6, 2005 8:55:40 GMT 1
But Matt, why was Carroll diving into the net? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the ball was in there?
If his initial contact with the ball (above his head) had been on the line and he had toppled back, ending up a yard over the line would not be significant. But his second contact with the ball was on the ground as he scooped it back from over the line.
I don't accept that the officials can only make a judgement about whether a ball is completely over the line only by having an unobstructed view of the ball.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2005 9:00:36 GMT 1
The linesman and ref had an almost full stereoscopic view of the incident making it even harder to judge whether the ball was over the line or not
|
|
|
Post by pawlo on Jan 6, 2005 11:02:53 GMT 1
This is difficult really, and to be fair, i can see both sides of the arguement.
But what i wonder is, and i cant be sure of any facts cos i only saw highlights on tv, both officials must have felt certain about the decision. Why didnt they at least call each other over and exchange views, talk about it. Ask the other linesman, who although even further behind play, would at least have had a different angle on the goal.
Cant say I am particularly in favour of video evidence. If you take the human factor out of the game, i think it will loose some of its magic. I want to be able to scream at the ref when he gets a decision wrong, I want to be able to cus the linesman when he misses an offside. Take this away and you will loose some of the passion and one of the things that unites all football supporters, loathing of the men in black.
|
|
Ty
Midland League Division One
Posts: 336
|
Post by Ty on Jan 6, 2005 12:19:16 GMT 1
Lewis was on the side of the pitch, I don't see how Roy Carrol is obscuring his view? The ball went over Carrol's shoulder and behind him, obscuring the ref's view, but not the linesman. It looked clearly over the line to me when I watched it live in real time.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 6, 2005 12:53:14 GMT 1
lets get real
i'm sure none of us really think that any of the officials actually cheated at the game
which can only mean that none of them were sure the ball was over the line
and as the ball was so far over the line its a good time to do something about it
|
|
|
Post by mattsnapper2 on Jan 6, 2005 19:55:51 GMT 1
But Matt, why was Carroll diving into the net? Could it have anything to do with the fact that the ball was in there? If his initial contact with the ball (above his head) had been on the line and he had toppled back, ending up a yard over the line would not be significant. But his second contact with the ball was on the ground as he scooped it back from over the line. I don't accept that the officials can only make a judgement about whether a ball is completely over the line only by having an unobstructed view of the ball. im not defending Carroll but throughout his goalkeeping life he had been programmed to stop the ball entering into the net just like a striker puts his foot in try and get the ball over the line. It was a split second thing and he dived in vain to try and stop it before it went over the line like any goalkeeper would do. What he did afterwards can be brought into question in a moral issue like Robbie Fowler appealing to the ref that it was not a penalty when Seaman felled him. If the officials cant or dont see an incident then how can they give it...? A ref does not send a play off if he sees an oppenent drop to the ground with blood pouring from him head does he.? He has to see a punch or something first. Officials only give goals when they see the ball going over the line. If they dont or cant see they cant give can they ? It should have been a goal and because Rob Lewis if from Shrewsbury and most on here take the wee wee out of him is unfair. I dont think any linesman would have seen it or given it. I wish Sky would show a low level camera angle so people would gain a better understanding of Robs vision - but they dont.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Jan 7, 2005 1:23:55 GMT 1
They do send a player off if he has blood pouring from HIS head!
|
|