We’ve all beat on this goal-line technology thing until we can’t beat any more. Honestly, what more can we all say that hasn’t been said before?
Or how about this one, where we got a little naïve and dreamy and allowed ourselves to wonder about a better time in the future, when this crazy technology thing might actually be implemented. Yeah, that was a good one.
I quote myself, where I wondered in a previous post if we all agree that goal-line technology is the right thing to do:
Being good citizens and rational advocates for legitimate outcomes, it’s a good thing, right? Anything to improve the odds of ensuring a right and proper result constitutes a solid plan, yes?
Fair is fair, after all! A ball that crosses the line, between the posts, is a goal. The referee points to the center and we all get on with it. Even if this magic moment happens not for your beloved club, even if the decisive event in question befalls the side that long ago captured your heart’s heart, in the honorable spirit of competition and fair play, all good men and women recognize that a goal is goal is a goal.
… Oh, we don’t need fancy fiber optics or advanced microchips on patrol between the pipes at every schoolyard, college park, public park complex and soccer center in the land. But it certainly seems prudent and quite obvious that stationing cameras or chips for most important matches in the world would constitute reasonable deployment of modern technology.
I suppose the only thing left to be said is this: No, the extra set of eyes behind each goal isn’t good enough. It never was. Get it now?
The only thing left, then, is this picture. It’s from the big talker today, the Ukrainian “goal” that wasn’t.