Goal-line technology will stifle pub debate
I’m all for goal-line technology. Just look at the misfortune of players and teams in recent years, from Clint Hill of Queens Park Rangers against Bolton Wanderers last season to Pedro Mendes of Spurs against Manchester United at Old Trafford in 2005. And who can forget the “ghost goal” for Reading against Watford at Vicarage Road three years later?
With goal-line technology, all of these mistakes would have been rectified in a heart-beat. The decision to use five officials in European competitions this year has been a total joke. The things that the extra officials failed to see from only a few yards away was nothing short of diabolical so that, for me, was a failure and should be terminated Asap.
Yes, goal-line technology will be good as long as play isn’t held up for more than a matter of seconds. Simplify it. Alert the referee with a buzzer. Stop the game for a couple of seconds and then carry on. I am, though, very old school with technology in football and believe it should stop there.
When I was younger, my dad would take me to a game. As I got older and had time to go to matches with my mates, controversial issues were always the topic of many a heated discussion or disagreement over a pint. Now, not to be disrespectful, but could you honestly say that would be the case with cricket, rugby or tennis, with all the technology they use? I very much doubt it.
I love the talking points that football creates, specifically in matches, and goal-line technology, to a certain extent, will stop this. Putting it bluntly, it will take away the excitement of preparing yourself to watch “Match Of The Day” to see if you were a better judge than the referee on the day.
I love the simplicity of football, the way human error can cause mistakes. Looking at it from the other side, though, new technology would make sure that teams were not unjustly treated by a goal not being given or, vice versa, a goal given when it shouldn’t have been.
With the money at stake in the game now, maybe it’s time to take the human-error aspect out of it. But, please, not too much or, otherwise, the heated discussions and long-hour debates in pubs up and down the country will become a thing of the past – and that would be a crime considering that we created the beautiful game.
Here’s to common sense prevailing and human decisions not becoming completely extinct. Cheers … I will drink and debate to that.








I am frankly astounded that someone can think that the loss of a potential debating opportunity could be more important than an objective, definitive answer to whether a ball crossed the line.
It sounds like the ‘jumpers for goalposts’ sketch from the Fast Show