Did the goal line technology work or fail

[Time]

I am not sure that the 2nd French goal against Honduras was a goal (that the entire ball crossed the line) I don't see a goal in the replays. I see may be 80% to 90% of the ball across the line.

Who wants to call it before someone publishes a photo from one of the cameras?

[Islandman]

I believe the technology, it is there for these decisions which are not visually obvious.

[Karl]

One frame shown of the results of the goal-line technology showed all of the ball over the line.

...however, the match camera-angles shown showed "no goal"...i.e. entire ball not across the line.

[Peter R]

It worked! Either you believe or you don't. If you don't, it doesn't make sense to have it. It clearly called a goal with the ball on the ground. It said no goal when it hit the post, which was before it ricocheted to the ground.

I don't understand the confusion... unuh don watch cricket or tennis??

[Peter R]

Karl, If the technology is what is being used, that's what we have to go by. With the TV cameras, it's impossible to say, IMO.

TV cameras can be used for offside though, or, why not apply the same goal-line technology?? TO BE USED when a goal results i.e.

[Peter R]

Do you agree it was an OG? I don't.

[Islandman]

https://vine.co/v/MI1JWwmvUhF

Goal!

[Tilla]

It worked. You could not make the correct call from the TVcamera angles. The TV cameras were not directly in line with the goal line and would cause parallax error resulting in you (or the TV viewer) not seeing the entire ball over the line.

[Islandman]

It was an own goal. The clip below shows that.

Simply put, anybody who is still against goal line technology for any reason other than the cost of implementation being prohibitive cannot have the games best interest at heart. T

[Tilla]

OG yes. It was the GK who put the ball over the line.

[Peter R]

Unuh people don't waste time boy!

That replay is not conclusive though as his hand on top the ball obscures our vision as to whether it crossed or not. Have to go with the G.L. Technology!

BTW, You think it should be an OG?

[Peter R]

Saw your answer above. thanks.

[Tilla]

Unfortunately, that video clip is not showing the point when the ball cleared the line. It showed when Benzema's shot hit the post and bounced back into play. At the point it was showing, there was no goal. Goal occurred when the GK scrambled with the ball on the ground, it went over the line. That is when GLT registered a goal.

It works!

[Islandman]

I think it is convincing enough. You can tell with reasonable certainty by the shape of the ball that the part his hand obscured was over the line.

The only thing that would convince me otherwise would be, well , if the goal line technology said it wasn't! Give me sensors over eyesight any day.

[Islandman]

Tilla, the ball in that clip is over the line while still in the air before the GK pulls it back. Unless I am mistaken that is enough for it to be a goal.