Heart vs Mariners

[Forum Phoenix]

As long as we don't foul there players in the box we should be ok.
Though they are a much better side with caravella on the park.
But Perth looked well capable of at least a draw I thought. Pity that.

Nice final send off for Harnwell by the shed.
Might have been a few still grumbling about the first pen though

Garlo, glad to hear about your win! verhead:

 

[style_cafe]

The replay from behind the goal indicated that the whole of the ball didn't go over the line.

If it was the sideline there`d be no arguement that it would be given as out of play...

 

[Bex]

It wasn't the sideline???

 

[dibo]

If it was the sideline there`d be no arguement that it would be given as out of play...

Why? It wasn't over the line. All of the ball, all of the line.

 

[bikinigirl]

Why? It wasn't over the line. All of the ball, all of the line.

. one of the early replays seemed to show bolton taking the ball over with his momentum ... but then they only continued to show replays from a different angle wish only clearly showed his efforts to push the ball back under him

. at the time it looked like a goal and i don't think it is an overly yellow perspective. truth is it is one of those ones that is too close to call ... and that was probably the AR's take on it too

 

[style_cafe]

Why? It wasn't over the line. All of the ball, all of the line.

The point i`m making(albeit sarcastically)is that all to often as soon as the ball goes onto the sideline the liney signals it as out.
Whereas in this instant,the benefit of the doubt went to the defending team.

So therein lies the next question "Why wasn`t Ryan given the benefit of the doubt"?
Without the replay surely there was some doubt as to whether the Heart goal actually crossed the line.

 

[scottmac]

The point i`m making(albeit sarcastically)is that all to often as soon as the ball goes onto the sideline the liney signals it as out.
Whereas in this instant,the benefit of the doubt went to the defending team.

So therein lies the next question "Why wasn`t Ryan given the benefit of the doubt"?
Without the replay surely there was some doubt as to whether the Heart goal actually crossed the line.

There was massive doubt as to wether Bolton took it over. You couldn't even see the ball underneath Bolton and TV replays are inconclusive.

There was no doubt that Ryan took the ball behind the line which is why the touchy called goal. When the ball is clearly over the line, its a goal.

 

[style_cafe]

There was massive doubt as to wether Bolton took it over. You couldn't even see the ball underneath Bolton and TV replays are inconclusive.

There was no doubt that Ryan took the ball behind the line which is why the touchy called goal. When the ball is clearly over the line, its a goal.

I`ve just watched the Fox replay about 30 times. Only one angle clearly shows the Heart goal the other angles are inconclusive as the ball is in the air.
I have no doubt that,with the benefit of replays, both decisions were proven to be correct.

However, the referees & assistants do not have that luxury during the game.

It just seems to me that one team was given the benefit of the doubt & the goal was not awarded, whilst the other team (my f......g team!)was not given the same benefit of the doubt & a goal was awarded.

 

[scottmac]

I`ve just watched the Fox replay about 30 times. Only one angle clearly shows the Heart goal the other angles are inconclusive as the ball is in the air.
I have no doubt that,with the benefit of replays, both decisions were proven to be correct.

However, the referees & assistants do not have that luxury during the game.

It just seems to me that one team was given the benefit of the doubt & the goal was not awarded, whilst the other team (my f......g team!)was not given the same benefit of the doubt & a goal was awarded.

The touchy also viewed it from an angle that you have not seen and maybe it was the best angle?

Your wrong in assuming that 1 team wasn't given the benifit of the doubt. As soon as the ball went over it was called a goal in Ryans case. That says there was no doubt in the touchys mind for awarding a goal. If there is no doubt how can there be benifit of the doubt?

Refs got both calls exactly right and it should be applauded.

 

[MagpieMariner]

My immediate impression with the Heart goal was "Oh bother (or something like that ) it's gone in." I'm sure our defenders would have spat the dummy big time if they thought it hadn't. I don't think there really was any doubt.

 

[style_cafe]

The touchy also viewed it from an angle that you have not seen and maybe it was the best angle?

Your wrong in assuming that 1 team wasn't given the benifit of the doubt. As soon as the ball went over it was called a goal in Ryans case. That says there was no doubt in the touchys mind for awarding a goal. If there is no doubt how can there be benifit of the doubt?

Refs got both calls exactly right and it should be applauded.

I take on board that in Ryan`s case the liney may have had a better angle, as in the replays he is not on camera.

However, I`m definitely NOT wrong in assuming that one team was given the benefit of the doubt & that team was Sydney.

In Ryan`s case the liney was level with the 2nd last defender(Wilko)near the edge of the box when the kick was taken.
For the liney to have been able to adjudicate "without doubt" he would have had to be static, on the goal line (which he definitely was not.) & not moving at speed towards the corner post. The fact that the ball was in the air also adds to the doubt.

In Bolton`s case the liney was in a similar position ie. moving towards the corner post.
The referee was also some metres back & Bolton`s body was over the ball, so it could not have been seen. Hence, the referee would have had "some doubt" as to whether it went in or not.

As I said previously, with the use of the TV replays the referee made the right call, BUT he did give Bolton the "benefit of the doubt" & didn`t give Ryan the same latitude.

 

[pjennings]

Simply put I thought there was no question about the Thompson goal. On first viewing I thought young Ryan was way out of position.

However, after viewing it again a number of times I think he got a bad bounce. It was a wet night and Thompson hit the ball with back-spin - that meant it should have had a tendency to shoot through rather than bounce higher as if hit with top-spin. The other thing is from side on it seems to bounce slightly to his left - again with the only obvious spin being backspin.

I would love to see the shot from directly behind - but they cut away to the side shot all the time.

 

[scottmac]

I take on board that in Ryan`s case the liney may have had a better angle, as in the replays he is not on camera.

However, I`m definitely NOT wrong in assuming that one team was given the benefit of the doubt & that team was Sydney.

In Ryan`s case the liney was level with the 2nd last defender(Wilko)near the edge of the box when the kick was taken.
For the liney to have been able to adjudicate "without doubt" he would have had to be static, on the goal line (which he definitely was not.) & not moving at speed towards the corner post. The fact that the ball was in the air also adds to the doubt.

In Bolton`s case the liney was in a similar position ie. moving towards the corner post.
The referee was also some metres back & Bolton`s body was over the ball, so it could not have been seen. Hence, the referee would have had "some doubt" as to whether it went in or not.

As I said previously, with the use of the TV replays the referee made the right call, BUT he did give Bolton the "benefit of the doubt" & didn`t give Ryan the same latitude.

The liney does not need to be static on the line to see a goal without doubt. The ball was so far over that he more than likely saw the whole ball from where he was.

You keep harping on about doubt and Ryan deserving the same latitude as Bolton. This is wrong because there was no doubt that the ball was over the line therefore no reason to give Ryan any benifit of the doubt. Bolton case was not clearcut. Ryans was. End of.

 

[style_cafe]

The liney does not need to be static on the line to see a goal without doubt. The ball was so far over that he more than likely saw the whole ball from where he was.

You keep harping on about doubt and Ryan deserving the same latitude as Bolton. This is wrong because there was no doubt that the ball was over the line therefore no reason to give Ryan any benifit of the doubt. Bolton case was not clearcut. Ryans was. End of.

"Bolton case was not clearcut".

So,Bolton got the "benefit of the doubt"

I think to the naked eye (no TV replays)there was some doubt with Ryan`s.
How many people had to look at the replay from different angles before they conceded that it was a goal.
Cmon,put your hands up!

Now isn`t that doubt?

Let`s agree to disagree.

 

[MagpieMariner]

You only get "benefit of the doubt" when there's doubt.

 

[scottmac]

I think to the naked eye (no TV replays)there was some doubt with Ryan`s.
How many people had to look at the replay from different angles before they conceded that it was a goal.
Cmon,put your hands up!

Now isn`t that doubt?

Let`s agree to disagree.

You just don't get it.

It's got nothing to do with how you saw it or how the commentators saw it or how anyone on this site saw it. It was flagged immediately as being a goal. That means no doubt was in the touchys mind. The only guy who's opinion matters in this circumstance. That means no doubt. You can carry on all you like about how YOU have doubt but it means absolutely jack. You were not making the decision and neither was anyone else here. In fact your the only one carrying on about benifit of the doubt in what was an obvious goal.

Are you saying that because Boltons goal line scramble was not clearcut that Ryans obvious goal should be called play on? If so then thats just weird logic and your beyond help.