The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
OT: MLS won't, but FIFA & EPL will -- Goal Line tech coming to soccer
International soccer authorities approved goal-line technology last July. FIFA announced in February that the GoalControl-4D system will be used at the 2014 World Cup. England's Premier League said April 11 it will install the Hawk-Eye system next season, becoming the first domestic competition to use technology.
MLS said they would install when technology was available, but now don't want to spend the $$.
GoalControl said it is likely to cost about $260,000 per stadium to install, and $3,900 per game to operate. Speaking Thursday to the Associated Press Sports Editors, Garber called the price "very, very, very expensive.
"It had us take a step back and pause and try to figure out is the value of having goal-line technology worth investing millions and millions and millions of dollars for the handful of moments where it's relevant?" Garber said. "And our view has been that we're going to wait and see how it works out. We certainly don't need to be the first league that has it."
...
Garber cited the opposition of Michael Platini, president of European soccer's governing body. Platini said goal-line technology would cost about $66 million over five years to install for UEFA competitions.
Holy cow. There's no way that would pay for itself in an NHL context.
I believe so... was a terrible drain on the league's finances. I think they renegotiated the lease after a while, but for the first several years it was 200K a game. And some of those games probably didn't have more than 6k people in attendance.
someone better not be earning 3900 bucks for 3 hours of work to do that.
That number doesn't even make sense. Are there degradable parts involved? Does it use $3900 of electricity? Do you have to helicopter in the one living scientist who knows how to use it?
What does this system do that a few cheap cameras can't do? really. The war room in Toronto gets nearly every "did it cross the line?" call right. How is this a big problem in soccer of all things?
To put a hockey angle on this, there is no need for a system like this to be in place. The 2 fixes I have for the review system:
1) Replace the top netting with plexiglass like they talked about at one of the experimental camps. AND
2) Start calling plays dead when a review is needed. So tired of 3-4 minutes being played only for them to back and say they need a review. Make is so Toronto can buzz down to an official and stop play once the puck is in the neutral zone.
To put a hockey angle on this, there is no need for a system like this to be in place. The 2 fixes I have for the review system:
1) Replace the top netting with plexiglass like they talked about at one of the experimental camps. AND
2) Start calling plays dead when a review is needed. So tired of 3-4 minutes being played only for them to back and say they need a review. Make is so Toronto can buzz down to an official and stop play once the puck is in the neutral zone.
There are those times when I'd swear that an ice-level series of tiny cameras is needed when the goalie is on top of the puck and something might have happened. I think there's a few multiples more instances of that than for what MLS or any soccer league would need.
Of course, if we're barking about $3,900 a game, I guess there's a message there.
For hockey, the HD cameras are great, but I would think that a few cameras running at 60fps or 120fps (namely, the goal line camera) would make more sense.
How is this a big problem in soccer of all things?
Ideological reasons aka stupidity of those in charge.
FIFA President Blatter: "Please do not insist on the technology, the day that the referee takes 2 captains aside to study monitors and see if something is inside the box or outside is the day the spectators will say no, we are not coming to the game."
UEFA President Platini: "Video is not for football. Human (adjudication) is better. Football became popular thanks to its human values. If that becomes a commercial value, it will lose all its popularity."
For sure, spectators follow the game because they love to see refereeing blunders like the following:
EDIT: The Goal-Contral technology they are going to introduce of course is a video evidence technology, so what I said was a bit misleading. UEFA is still against video technology, but FIFA had to change its position after what happened in the video above.
So what does this system provide what a few cheap cameras can't?
-No breaks for video reviews needed. Worth it? I don't think so. You could simply put one or two video refs in charge who follow the game and give the referee on the pitch a quick info when the ball is over the line or a clear foul is commited etc.
-100% precision (at least in theory) as opposed to what the human eye is able to achieve via normal video evidence. Is it worth it? I don't think so. Controversies over close calls don't hurt football - blatant refereeing mistakes and missed calls are the problem and they could easily be avoided by making use of the normal video footage everyone already has on the TV screen.
Last edited by Theokritos: 04-26-2013 at 05:19 AM.
I don't think so. You could simply put one or two video refs in charge who follow the game and give the referee on the pitch a quick info when the ball is over the line or a clear foul is commited etc.
As a football fan, I would hate to have guys in the stands decide that a "clear" foul has been commited. Goal line technology is one thing but god forbid video refereeing is ever used for anything else.
As a football fan, I would hate to have guys in the stands decide that a "clear" foul has been commited. Goal line technology is one thing but god forbid video refereeing is ever used for anything else.
I agree on fouls, but what about offside? I think reviews on that would be quite beneficial.
I think its fine for MLS to delay it. Obviously, it sounds kind of expensive, and to that point (regarding money), there just isn't enough money (and/or passion) on the line to justify implementing it.
MLS had taken steps in the past that other leagues haven't, so I don't view this as them 'resisting change'. Its just a matter of practicality.
MLS adopted the disappearing free kick spray a few years back, which I love.
And as it seems to be a topic. No video review. The only possible situation (which is eliminated by goal line tech) is 'did it cross the line?'.
