Men's Soccer (Football) Thread [ARCHIVED] Soccer • Page 431

What doesn’t make sense to me is why VAR couldn’t have been used in that situation. There was a clear and obvious mistake in a goal scoring situation and we all knew it immediately.

VAR was supposedly brought it for situations like this yet it was used. Instead they use it to determine if a player is a cm offside.

 

It’s impossible to directly apply cause here though. They still could’ve lost that game even if that goal was goal was given. The game changes if it’s 1-0 at that point. Tactics change, mentality changes. Too many variables for them to win any case imo.

I completely understand them being upset and it should be brought up as a means to change the rules and make the refs and replay system better. But using it as the reason your team was relegated is a stretch.

 

They haven't even suggested that they're going to sue Hawkeye yet, but if they can make an argument that the failure in technology cost them and Hawkeye can't rebut it then I see no problem with seeking compensation. This is not a subjective incident like the ones VAR has made over the season, this was a complete failure of a system. I'm assuming Hawkeye have something stating that they're only 99.9% accurate so this will probably lead to nothing.

Sheffield United sued West Ham years ago for the illegal Tevez transfer, no reason why Bournemouth can't look at their options.

 

I'd show video of Bournemouth getting slapped around in losses as evidence as to why this one moment didn't cost them relegation.

 

You'd be a pretty shit lawyer then.

 

There is absolutely not way at all that Hawkeye can be sued for this. Why on earth would any company get involved with anything to do with officiating in the future if a single freak incident means they get sued for £100 million. Nuts to even suggest it would be successful.

Hawkeye will have a margin of error that was agreed to by all teams prior to any installation. Teams signed up for the good, but must also accept that sometimes technology goes wrong or cannot by 100% accurate.

 

Bournemouth to discuss claim against Hawk-Eye for ghost goal during Aston Villa vs Sheffield United

Sky article includes some information from a lawyer:

Barrister Thomas Horton, who is the founder of the website Football Law, told Sky Sports News: "There is an argument to say that there is a duty of care owed by Hawk-Eye to Bournemouth and other Premier League clubs as well.

"A Premier League club's loss of revenue from not finishing in a higher league position due to losing points because of goal-line technology not working is reasonably foreseeable.

"But, getting on to any claim of negligence is where I would consider Bournemouth to have difficulties.

"This is something that has happened once in over 9,000 matches so the rarity of it is incredible but is something that must be accepted.

"There seems to be an inherent trust and reliance on the goal-line technology which is completely fair when you have technology that meets the standard and has been tested before the match.

"I think anyone in that position would have done the same as Michael Oliver did and likewise the Video Assistant Referee on the day.

"It is unfortunate but completely understandable in the circumstances."


See what happens, nothing will probably come of it but if they get a few million quid from the billions that EPL get then that's fine with me.

 

For some God forsaken reason Everton are being linked with Branislav Ivanovic. I'm praying it's for a coaching role as we're not living in 2009 anymore.

 

VAR isn’t allowed look at it. It wasn’t brought in for goal line tech. That’s what Hawkeye is for.

 

Hawkeye might have a “duty of care” but it’s still impossible for Bournemouth to prove that mistake is the direct reason they were relegated.

 

I mean if that goal counted they would have stayed up.

 

That happened in the first half. There’s absolutely no way you can say the game would’ve ended 1-0 if the goal was given.

 

CAS full ruling is out

 

Villa would’ve likely turned up their attacking tactics had the goal counted. Now that could’ve led them to losing by even more, but it could’ve also resulted in a draw or win for them.

 

But that’s conjecture. The only fact we have is a goal that should have stood wasn’t given. If that goal was given it would have been 1-0 and not 0-0 and Villa would have finished the season with one point less than they did.

 

That’s just opening a slippery slope. There’s a reason we don’t change results retrospectively.

Bournemouth says they would’ve survived if the goal counted because Villa would’ve lost.

Villa will say they would’ve played harder and scored a tying goal and still got a point.

Neither team can be proven right or wrong.

 

The reasoning you give for Villa cannot be proven. The goal can be, that’s my point of view. Yeah you can say they “may” have played better, but as I said that’s conjecture. But you can say for definite that if that goal stood and everything played out as it did post that moment Bournemouth would not have been relegated.

the only definite we have is a goal against Villa should have counted but didn’t and that gave Villa the point they needed to stay up.

 

The only thing you can prove is that it’d be 1-0 in the first half. That is not proof the game would end 1-0.

 

It’s not, but on the other hand there’s no proof it wouldn’t have ended 1-0. So the fact stands.


You can’t prove could haves, or should haves. You can prove the goal didn’t stand.

 

Well we can agree to disagree haha

Regardless, it’s a shitty thing to happen. If I were a Bournemouth fan I’d be mad, sure. But I don’t see them winning any court case and I think it’s silly to blame your entire season on one mistake.

 

If they think they have a chance of making up a little bit of money then they may as well try I guess.

 

congrats @Paulie

i’m annoyed at a stupid sporting tournament that shouldn’t even be happening! sports are back!

 

But that's exactly what you are doing. You're saying that goal in the first half would have absolutely denied Villa a point, which is not known. All you know is that a goal would have been scored. There's no guarantee of what happens after that point.

As for Bournemouth's case, I can't see how they could get anything with a duty of care argument. I don't think there's anything where a 0.01% failure rate wouldn't be considered acceptable. I guess they could maybe go after the Premier League with that argument, on the basis that they had other technology available and set up the rules so that it couldn't be used, but that's all getting pretty tenuous.

I hope they get nothing. We've seen plenty of far more egregious things missed over the years and goal line tech has definitely been a net win. I just hope that they now look into whether Hawkeye can report an issue like this in real time and they can use VAR as a backup, but it doesn't seem like it's going to be needed very often...

 

I’m saying that goal changes the score line from a purely statistical point of view. Which is probably what Bournemouth will say and I would be shocked if the lawyers or whoever don’t see more weight in that than “Villa could have played more attacking” after the goal, which can’t be proven.


FWIW I hope they don’t get anything as it opens up a can of worms but I think “Villa could have played better after the goal” is a stupid argument and wouldn’t hold any weight outside of forums. Whereas I think Hawkeye failing to spot the goal would. You simply can’t prove anything that happened after the goal would happen any differently than it had. Whereas you can prove that lack of goal negatively affected Bournemouth