Official Hawkeye reason given

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

pommpey

A: WE ARE DESSO!
Joined
Dec 9, 2015
Messages
4,527
Reaction score
7,641
Location
South Coast
Deadbat's letter ....
Spot on. Let's be blunt. This club has suffered enough at the hands of shit executives (not just McCabe) questionable imprisonment of our top striker, the incredibly clear flouting of regulations regarding player ownership and countless other smaller dogturds on our lawn. It's about time summat went right for us. Had Villa scored, that is three points they'd have gained and they would have been out of the relegation zone. Had we scored (as we did, legally) we'd be better positioned to challenge for European qualification.

We need to not let this drop.

pommpey
 

Moosie

New Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
84
Reaction score
94
Location
S80
If the cameras in their words were occluded by the players and the goalposts, then how was the system able to give the correct decision when the Crystal Palace keeper did almost the same as what happened against Villa?

Thats before he dropped it over the line, but it’s almost the same scenario to what happened, yet this was given.

D85DA5A9-18DC-4DC5-9482-92070BEB5208.jpeg
 

Deadbat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
4,012
Reaction score
16,216
If the cameras in their words were occluded by the players and the goalposts, then how was the system able to give the correct decision when the Crystal Palace keeper did almost the same as what happened against Villa?

Thats before he dropped it over the line, but it’s almost the same scenario to what happened, yet this was given.

View attachment 83362
Spot on...I should have cited loads of examples probably such as this really. They need to release the 7 images from the 7 camera angles ( film follow up to 7 brides to 7 brothers!) at the time.

Only then will the statement have any credibility.
 

Niceguyeddie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
3,396
Reaction score
5,289
Hawkeye need to be brought to task their explanation isn't good enough and an apology unacceptable
United should demand to see evidence why the set up wasn't working and if not satisfied should pursue legal recourse

If the guy at stockley park knew it was a goal and didnt say anything that should be the end of var in this country as it's actually doing the opposite of what it was brought in for now its not spotting clear and obvious errors instead its spending five minutes redefining the offside rule and trying to disallow every goal scored

its no coincidence that we are bottom with -5 and man utd are top with +8 on the var league table and that doesn't account for the ridiculous man city goal and the ghost goal the other day

man utd would have got that goal because they would have harassed the referee until he looked at it ,every player would have been.in.his face stopping the game restarting until he looked at it and instead of the players being lambasted for breaking the new protocols they would have all been lauded for sporting integrity and great refereeing and use of var

so in short ,if you want the right decision break the rules
 
Last edited:

Revolution

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
9,339
Reaction score
11,668
If the cameras in their words were occluded by the players and the goalposts, then how was the system able to give the correct decision when the Crystal Palace keeper did almost the same as what happened against Villa?

Thats before he dropped it over the line, but it’s almost the same scenario to what happened, yet this was given.

View attachment 83362
One thing to say about the Palace goal was it was obvious from the camera with the view looking down from above that the ball was over the line.

I do not see how that view could have been blocked at Villa Park. And Sky, for some reason, did not show that overhead view immediately after the incident. They normally do.
 

Cerberus Blade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
12,665
Reaction score
19,229
Agree. And reiterate that that is also what the linesman is there for.
The ref/linesman/VAR official have 100% faith that GLT is infallible. Why would they check? Even if it looked "wrong", they have been clearly told to stay out of any yes/no goal decisions. To them, how could it ever be a goal, the watch didn't buzz. So there wasn't anything to check.

They have some slight fault in this, but they were following the guidelines. If they'd gone to a VAR check and it wasn't a goal then their boss and the league would have gone nuts at them for putting doubt into their perfect GLT system. The fault lies with Hawkeye and whoever forgot to turn whatever part of the system on that didn't work
That's a strange take on it imo. :rolleyes: If you believe that the officials shouldn't be questioning the technology, then we may as well do away with the officials altogether.

I see Keith Hackett came out and said this yesterday...

“I have expressed this in the past and I will continue to express it and that is that the referee must the sole arbiter and as a result must have the ability to view the pitch-side monitor.

I agree totally with this.

I also agree with the view expressed yesterday by Steve Bruce, that the referee HAS to be the one in charge and making the decisions and should have stopped the game and consulted VAR.
 

Ainsley Harriott

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Messages
7,855
Reaction score
15,600
Cameras were "occluded" (I learnt a new word this week. They could have said "obstructed" but that's too simple). They weren't obstructed by the goalkeeper as he was behind the post. Indeed, at the time the ball is over the line, Tyrone Mings is stood halfway over the line. Number 39 is also halfway over (picture below). Now if these cameras are placed at shin, waist and chest height then I'll accept the obstructed excuse. I'm guessing they aren't... So the excuse is bollocks. As we all know.

Screenshot_20200619_072549_com.android.chrome.jpg
 

Carlton Blade

Chairman of the Oli Norwood appreciation society
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
7,121
Reaction score
10,225
That's a strange take on it imo. :rolleyes: If you believe that the officials shouldn't be questioning the technology, then we may as well do away with the officials altogether.

I see Keith Hackett came out and said this yesterday...

“I have expressed this in the past and I will continue to express it and that is that the referee must the sole arbiter and as a result must have the ability to view the pitch-side monitor.

I agree totally with this.

I also agree with the view expressed yesterday by Steve Bruce, that the referee HAS to be the one in charge and making the decisions and should have stopped the game and consulted VAR.
I didn't say they shouldn't check. I said they don't check. They have been told that the GLT is perfect and that it doesn't need to be monitored.

I also agree with the point that the ref should be in charge. I haven't said any different
 

Ainsley Harriott

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Messages
7,855
Reaction score
15,600
One thing to say about the Palace goal was it was obvious from the camera with the view looking down from above that the ball was over the line.

I do not see how that view could have been blocked at Villa Park. And Sky, for some reason, did not show that overhead view immediately after the incident. They normally do.
They didn't show the overhead view as it wasn't working. Despite them saying it was. If its working, prove it. Prove the obstructions.
 

Caveblade

Active Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
1,363
Reaction score
2,663
Location
East Yorkshire
PGMOL have said they are not going to change procedures as a result of this. No surprise there. Riley and his bunch of arrogant idiots have taken this stance all season as there tiresome meddling with the laws has been shown to be inept and wrong.

Officials not flagging offside or just using their feckin eyes when the ball has gone in the net because they are scared to prove their own tech is fallible .

I am a complete cynic. I love being in the Prem just to see Wilder and the boys showing the art of the possible.

I hate the Prem itself because it is and always will be skewed to 6 teams. VAR has not changed this. We still have the same little men with big egos making decisions in favour of the big boys. They are just sat in a portakabin no where near the ground doing it.

When you hear the likes of Gallagher and Riley talk you know the lunatics have taken over the asylum. The best ref is the one you don't notice. What have we talked about all season? Referees! It's worse than before tech, which suggests it ain't working.

Meanwhile their beloved Man Ure will scrape into Europe and we will win platitudes. Utter utter Bollocks.
 

Cerberus Blade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
12,665
Reaction score
19,229
I didn't say they shouldn't check. I said they don't check. They have been told that the GLT is perfect and that it doesn't need to be monitored.

I also agree with the point that the ref should be in charge. I haven't said any different
Well maybe it's the way you've said it mate, but I read that as you saying the referee shouldn't check (you put: "Why would they check? - There was nothing to check") I think there was something to check personally. And you said they are only "slightly" at fault and are following the guidelines. I see it very different to that, and this is nothing personal but quite honestly I think football fans everywhere should not be accepting the excuses made. And they were excuses - in fact, it is pure bullshit that they've given. Let's not swallow it or make further excuses for them. We need to stand together as football fans on things like this.

There was sufficient evidence that the ball had gone over the line - never mind bloody Hawk-eye not buzzing. What about the reaction of the players and the position of the goalkeeper and the bulging of the net? If Oliver didn't see any of that then he should take a trip to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight. Not only that, but he could, at the very, very least, gone over to the the linesman and asked..."did tha see owt?" and then he could have stopped the game and asked VAR for their view on it - and reviewed that before re-starting play.

He didn't do any of that.

He's at fault.

End of.
 

Moosie

New Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
84
Reaction score
94
Location
S80
We’re all demanding the pictures or a proper explanation to what happened.

Imagine if they did say it should have been awarded and say either the tech wasn’t working or pictures clearly showing the ball over the line. There’d be all sorts of challenges to contentious decisions over the years questioning its viability in football. Not to mention what happened in this game if we miss out on a European payday by a point or if Villa stay up on the basis of that point.

It’s like the Shelvey goal earlier this season, if that, or what happened at Villa Park to one of the so called big 6 there’d be outcry from everyone saying Hawkeye doesn’t work and VARs useless, but as it's happened to little old Sheffield United again it’s brushed under the carpet and we’re told to get on with it.
 

Carlton Blade

Chairman of the Oli Norwood appreciation society
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
7,121
Reaction score
10,225
Well maybe it's the way you've said it mate, but I read that as you saying the referee shouldn't check (you put: "Why would they check? - There was nothing to check") I think there was something to check personally. And you said they are only "slightly" at fault and are following the guidelines. I see it very different to that, and this is nothing personal but quite honestly I think football fans everywhere should not be accepting the excuses made. And they were excuses - in fact, it is pure bullshit that they've given. Let's not swallow it or make further excuses for them. We need to stand together as football fans on things like this.

There was sufficient evidence that the ball had gone over the line - never mind bloody Hawk-eye not buzzing. What about the reaction of the players and the position of the goalkeeper and the bulging of the net? If Oliver didn't see any of that then he should take a trip to Barnard Castle to test his eyesight. Not only that, but he could, at the very, very least, gone over to the the linesman and asked..."did tha see owt?" and then he could have stopped the game and asked VAR for their view on it - and reviewed that before re-starting play.

He didn't do any of that.

He's at fault.

End of.
But genuinely, why would they check? They have been told under no uncertain circumstances that GLT is infallible.

As I've said in other posts, imagine if Oliver had gone to VAR and it hadn't been a goal? That would have been genuinely harmful to his career because he would be openly checking the veracity of a system that the PGMOL and Premier League have sold as infallible.

We are arguing different points here. Of course it should be the referee's responsibility to make decisions. But that power has been taken away by the PGMOL and PL. To expect individuals to go against that is a lot to ask

I do attache fault to the referee. But he's not at the top of the list, nowhere near
 

west_yorks_blade

In the Tufty Club
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
4,132
Reaction score
10,349
My e mail I have sent to 6 different e mail accounts on the Hawkeye website- if I dont get a response i will send it again and keep sending it - made me feel a bit better sending it anyway....

---

To whom it may concern,


I am emailing you to seek clarity regarding your statement of June 17th, 2020, following the application of your Hawkeye Goal Line technology during the Premier League match between Aston Villa and Sheffield United.


In the 42nd minute of the game a cross from Oliver Norwood was dropped over the line by the Aston Villa goalkeeper, No 25 Nyland as you refer to him. Those in the stadium (players, coaches, media) and watching on TV could clearly see that, in both live speed and immediately afterwards, with several TV replays from different angles (at least 3 shown on Sky Sports) the ball had crossed the line by some distance. The normal signal to the watch that should result from such a clear and obvious situation of the ball being over the line did not happen. The referee motioned that nothing came up on his watch to players enquiring. We assumed at the time that there was an issue with the technology and it was not working properly. Whether it was human error or a glitch/fault with the technology this was the only rational explanation. This may have been in terms of not switching the system on, activating cameras, activating the watch, activating the cameras or ensuring the process was synced.


I was therefore very surprised and somewhat angered by the statement that you put out later in the evening after the conclusion of the game.

Your statement read as follows:


“During the first half of [the] Aston Villa v Sheffield United match at Villa Park, there was a goal line incident where the ball was carried over the line by Aston Villa goalkeeper, No. 25 Nyland.


“The match officials did not receive a signal to the watch nor earpiece as per the Goal Decision System (GDS) protocol. The seven cameras located in the stands around the goal area were significantly occluded by the goalkeeper, defender, and goalpost.

“This level of occlusion has never been seen before in over 9,000 matches that the Hawk-Eye Goal Line Technology system has been in operation.


“The system was tested and proved functional prior to the start of the match in accordance with the IFAB Laws of The Game and confirmed as working by match officials. The system has remained functional throughout. The system has remained functional throughout. HawkEye unreservedly apologises to the Premier League, Sheffield United, and everyone affected by this incident.’’

I would like to discuss some of the points you make and also ask some questions that I believe need to be answered in more detail using your very own detailed ‘How it Works? Guide’ contained on your own website – link shown below for reference.


https://resources.platform.pulselive.com/test/HawkEye/document/2015/08/10/6546e487-0c72-45f9-b4f2-3d45f649ae1f/Hawk-Eye's_GLT_How_it_Works.pdf


You accept that the match officials did not receive a signal to the watch or ear piece and that the seven cameras were occluded by the goalkeeper, defender, and goalpost.


Your own guide states that; ‘Camera Technology Hawk-Eye installs 7 cameras per goal, the most common location is on the roof of the stadium, however there is a great deal of flexibility in the camera positions.’


I would like to ask where the 7 cameras were located in Villa Park; due to the fact that at least 3 cameras used on Sky Television picked up that it had clearly crossed the line? The flexibility you discuss means it would be obvious from above (the most common location that you refer to in the above statement) and either angle of the goal on each side that the ball had crossed the line. You also state that the cameras were significantly occluded by players and the post. The evidence suggests this is incorrect as the ball was behind the post so the post or any player would not have occluded the ball as it was clearly visible. There seems to be no way that one of your 7 cameras would not have picked this up unless they were all located in the same place.


Related to this, you state yourself that ‘the system is able to locate the ball even if it is only found in 2 of the 7 cameras. There has never been a goal line incident where the ball would not have been seen by any of the Hawk-Eye cameras.’ I would suggest that you now need to change this statement as it is incorrect and legally may have ramifications for you; which I will discuss at the conclusion of my questions.


Your guide goes on to say that: ‘The Definitive Replay Hawk-Eye utilises a dedicated high speed camera capable of removing the players from the image, to ensure the ball is fully visible. This provides the definitive replay for broadcast and digital media’


Yet your statement is to the contrary stating that, ‘The seven cameras located in the stands around the goal area were significantly occluded by the goalkeeper, defender, and goalpost.’ So either your statement is wrong or the technology cannot remove players from the image? Which is it? Clarity on this would be useful.


Your statement post game goes onto say that “This level of occlusion has never been seen before in over 9,000 matches that the Hawk-Eye Goal Line Technology system has been in operation.’’ I am sorry but this is in my opinion not only incorrect but insulting to millions of football fans around the world. There have been multiple occasions where goalkeepers have carried it over the line, have been next to the post and other players have been in the line of a camera. This was not an incident where the ball was on the line and several players presided over a ruck and it could not be seen akin to that where a try is scored and ruled upon in rugby? The ball was clearly visible without the need to even remove players or a post.


However, as described above you have the technology to remove these anyway so it would not matter would it not? Your system has been used superbly in various leagues and I have actually praised how accurate, quick and reliable it has been. I have often marvelled at incidents where I was not sure one way or another but the checks and camera footage showed the incident and cleared up any doubt. This needs stating as not only a counter balance to the incident last night but also as reference to how this incident was any different to the countless others that have been picked up so clearly?


You go on to state that the system was working throughout but if it was working why did we not see any release of the 7 camera angles at the time the ball crossed the line? Surely, if these are released and we see the level of occlusion; then we can maybe consider your words against the evidence? Yet, none of these were released – why is that? You state the cameras and the system were working. For your own credibility alone showing the issues that the cameras had in picking up the ball being over the line would be of great interest for everyone and certainly for the clubs involved (of which they are numerous at both ends of the Premier League). It would at least restore some belief in your statement.


Millions of pounds are at stake for both teams in terms of European places and relegation. I believe that your apology and statement needs further explanation to re-establish credibility in your system which now as you admit has a serious flaw within it; if it cannot pick up a clear and obvious incident such as that of last night. I would hope for your sake that clubs do not open litigation at the conclusion of the season but believe clarity to some of the above and further evidence to the statement you posted, would be advantageous for your company moving forward.



I await your response to my queries.



Yours Sincerely,
That’s a great email Deadbat and deserves a proper response.

But you won’t get one.

They will be in crisis mode right now, figuring out the best strategy for avoiding losing a lucrative contract with the PL and wider long term reputational damage.

Their concern will be the company bottom line not addressing concerns and providing honest answers.

I am surprised that they moved quickly to put out a statement that created more questions than it provided answers. I would guess that someone is in deep shit for that decision.
 

Cerberus Blade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
12,665
Reaction score
19,229
But genuinely, why would they check? They have been told under no uncertain circumstances that GLT is infallible.

As I've said in other posts, imagine if Oliver had gone to VAR and it hadn't been a goal? That would have been genuinely harmful to his career because he would be openly checking the veracity of a system that the PGMOL and Premier League have sold as infallible.

We are arguing different points here. Of course it should be the referee's responsibility to make decisions. But that power has been taken away by the PGMOL and PL. To expect individuals to go against that is a lot to ask

I do attache fault to the referee. But he's not at the top of the list, nowhere near
I think you summed it up well - "it would be harmful to his career".

It's the same in business (and football is business whether we like it or not), people are afraid of taking responsibility and doing the right thing if it has the potential to impact upon them negatively. I do understand that, totally. It takes balls to stand up to something that isn't right if it is going to have possible negative effects on someone personally. Some people have the courage to do it - it's called "leadership". It needn't be negative if it's done in the right way.

Where we fundamentally disagree is the role of the referee. You seem to be accepting that the power of the referee has been taken away from him and he shouldn't go against that. I'm of the view that the referee still is the man in charge and that the technology is there to assist him, not to rule him, and he has every right to question it.

As mentioned in the quote from Keith Hackett,

"the referee must the sole arbiter"

If we lose sight of that, then we've lost sight of the game imo.

I haven't seen anything from the PGMOL or PL to suggest that referees should now be slaves to the technology - but I do agree with you that this is the way it seems to be going and referees need to stand up to that - and so do the fans.
 

HammerInPeace

A reyt cockney cunt
Joined
Oct 27, 2019
Messages
540
Reaction score
1,445
IF nothing is done about it & I'm not holding my breath on that, the best we can all hope for is that what happened, come the end of the season, has absolutely no bearing on anything. And then they make changes so that VAR can step in, if necessary in the future. It's not bloody difficult. It's not like VAR isn't there.
As has been mentioned many times, what happens though if Villa stay up by one point that they shouldn't have had or you miss out on qualifying for the Europa or even worse, the CL?
Imo, to just do nothing now & hope that it doesn't affect anything come the end of the season, is wrong & clearly brings the integrity of the game into disrepute.
Who could have imagined that the first goal in the first game back, was going to be missed?
Who was it, Arsene fucking Wenger checking it?
 

Broomhall Blade

Active Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
1,981
Reaction score
2,776
There is a question, which hasn't been answered yet.

In Stockley Park, The VAR officials sat and must have seen the fucking ball cross the line. They therefore KNEW it was a goal. Regardless of whether Oliver got a bleep from the technology, they KNEW a goal had been scored. As Oliver waved play on, they still knew (and hopefully suspected) the tech had failed and that our goal had been wrongly chalked off. Not a minute later, play stopped down by our area for a free kick, so there was plenty of opportunity for those cloth-heads to buzz Oliver and tell him to check his pitchside monitor. They still knew that the whole of the ball had crossed the line.

Where is their fucking conscience in this?

pommpey
The Ref, Linesmen and VAR officials all thought Hawkeye was 100% accurate so had no reason to check.
Like Clattenburg said the officials have all becomes to reliant on Technology being 100% accurate when its not and never can be.
This will now change of course doesn't help United unfortunately but at least we have flagged up that you can not totally rely on the Technology.
 

Carlton Blade

Chairman of the Oli Norwood appreciation society
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
7,121
Reaction score
10,225
I think you summed it up well - "it would be harmful to his career".

It's the same in business (and football is business whether we like it or not), people are afraid of taking responsibility and doing the right thing if it has the potential to impact upon them negatively. I do understand that, totally. It takes balls to stand up to something that isn't right if it is going to have possible negative effects on someone personally. Some people have the courage to do it - it's called "leadership". It needn't be negative if it's done in the right way.

Where we fundamentally disagree is the role of the referee. You seem to be accepting that the power of the referee has been taken away from him and he shouldn't go against that. I'm of the view that the referee still is the man in charge and that the technology is there to assist him, not to rule him, and he has every right to question it.

As mentioned in the quote from Keith Hackett,

"the referee must the sole arbiter"

If we lose sight of that, then we've lost sight of the game imo.

I haven't seen anything from the PGMOL or PL to suggest that referees should now be slaves to the technology - but I do agree with you that this is the way it seems to be going and referees need to stand up to that - and so do the fans.
I said you can see why the ref would be loathe to question GLT, I haven't offered an opinion other than confirming I attribute some fault to Oliver.

I'm taking the view that the Refs have been told to trust GLT implicitly from the fact that the only reference point the referee used for goal/no goal was his watch. It never even crossed his mind to ask the linesman or the VAR official. Oliver is a pretty good referee to be honest - for him to not do either of those things shows that he was following the guidance on how to act in the situation.

I hate VAR. That is not an opinion formed this season when we have suffered from it, it's an opinion I've held since it's inception. It's unnecessary and it makes the end product worse
 

west_yorks_blade

In the Tufty Club
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
4,132
Reaction score
10,349
The Ref, Linesmen and VAR officials all thought Hawkeye was 100% accurate so had no reason to check.
Like Clattenburg said the officials have all becomes to reliant on Technology being 100% accurate when its not and never can be.
This will now change of course doesn't help United unfortunately but at least we have flagged up that you can not totally rely on the Technology.
The VAR officials aren’t sitting around playing monopoly with their backs to the screens unless and until they are asked to check something.

What happened was self evident to them just as much (maybe even more so if they get feeds of all the cameras) as it was to everyone in the world watching the game.

To ignore what they saw and knew to be the case was negligent to say the very least.
 

SouthEssexBlade

...for wit and sage wisdom
Joined
Jul 7, 2006
Messages
18,694
Reaction score
24,831
Location
Stratford, East London!
IF nothing is done about it & I'm not holding my breath on that, the best we can all hope for is that what happened, come the end of the season, has absolutely no bearing on anything. And then they make changes so that VAR can step in, if necessary in the future. It's not bloody difficult. It's not like VAR isn't there.
As has been mentioned many times, what happens though if Villa stay up by one point that they shouldn't have had or you miss out on qualifying for the Europa or even worse, the CL?
Imo, to just do nothing now & hope that it doesn't affect anything come the end of the season, is wrong & clearly brings the integrity of the game into disrepute.
Who could have imagined that the first goal in the first game back, was going to be missed?
Who was it, Arsene fucking Wenger checking it?
Doing something about it is as political in football as anywhere else. Power, money and influence dictate actions and in this case doing something has implications for those at the bottom and more importantly for Arsenal, Spurs and Man Utd at the top. Doing something impacts on the possibility of those 3 missing out on a European place, not doing anything impacts on those at the bottom including The Hammers. In this case, the world cup winners will be deemed expendable, so they will decide to do nothing. Looking a bit bent and possibly corrupt is worth the financial benefits of Newton Heath at al generating millions in European competitions.

Welcome to our world HammerInPeace ☹
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Top Bottom