Is it used in the FA Cup? MOTD showed the goal was given on the goal line technology and I've heard/read reference to the ref getting notification that it was a goal from the technology. We have it installed because we have to have it in the Premier League but what would have happened if this game was played at Lincoln? Do they have to have it installed just for the FA Cup games?

For non league football grounds there as amendment to law 9.1 which states the ball must hit the inside of the goal netting to class as a goal so had the match been played at Lincoln it would not have been a goal

Devils_Advocate wrote:For non league football grounds there as amendment to law 9.1 which states the ball must hit the inside of the goal netting to class as a goal so had the match been played at Lincoln it would not have been a goal

Which would have been a poor do, as Lincoln deserved the goal and deserved the win.

FactualFrank wrote:Which would have been a poor do, as Lincoln deserved the goal and deserved the win.

They certainly did.. It's history now.. Roll on Hull away

Devils_Advocate wrote:For non league football grounds there as amendment to law 9.1 which states the ball must hit the inside of the goal netting to class as a goal so had the match been played at Lincoln it would not have been a goal

Sorry DA, I'm calling bullshit on that one

FactualFrank wrote:Which would have been a poor do, as Lincoln deserved the goal and deserved the win.

You can't use 'deserved' twice in the same sentence. Your opinion is invalid as such..

Saxoman wrote:You can't use 'deserved' twice in the same sentence. Your opinion is invalid as such..

Of course you can. In this case it is repeated to add emphasis.

Formerbfcmanager wrote:Of course you can. In this case it is repeated to add emphasis.

Then definine how that differs from a double negative? Educate me..

If it had been played at Lincoln, the linesman would have given it. He wouldn't signal because knew Hawkeye was switched on, but if there hadn't been Hawkeye, I'm sure it would have been far enough over for him to see it.

Double negatives generally are grammatically incorrect, whereas double use of a word is a style issue.

Personally I don't tend to get my knickers in a twist about that sort of thing. If it's good enough for Pink Floyd and The Rolling Stones, who am I to argue

Formerbfcmanager wrote:Double negatives generally are grammatically incorrect, whereas double use of a word is a style issue.

Personally I don't tend to get my knickers in a twist about that sort of thing. If it's good enough for Pink Floyd and The Rolling Stones, who am I to argue

I'm not fussed either really..

Saxoman wrote:Then definine how that differs from a double negative? Educate me..

Define

bf2k wrote:Is it used in the FA Cup? MOTD showed the goal was given on the goal line technology and I've heard/read reference to the ref getting notification that it was a goal from the technology. We have it installed because we have to have it in the Premier League but what would have happened if this game was played at Lincoln? Do they have to have it installed just for the FA Cup games?

Referee clearly indicated the goal had been given by the technology - had the game been at Lincoln and that happened it would have ended 0-0. Only used in the FA Cup ties where available.

Just a shame that Scott missed the handball which would have given us a free kick rather than them a corner.

The ref gave it straight away after looking at his watch. Plus I don't think linesmen flag anymore when they can communicate over the their mics.

But you would hope they could see that with the naked eye.

The only reason I thought in realtime it might not of crossed is it didn't beat Heaton and you don't expect him to be two yards behind the line.