Goal-line technology moves closer

Goal-line technology moves closer

FIFA was carrying out tests with goal-line technology (with HawkEye and GoalRef) in November and December last year, and is satisfied with the performance of both systems.

Further testing will be carried out over the next few months, and if there's no major hiccups, the goal-line technology should be included in the FIFA Laws of the Game for the 2012/2013 season.

http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/organisation/ifab/news/newsid=1593474/index.html

Good to see the reversal of the decision on female players and headscarves there!

In regards to this goal-line technology, I'm not convinced its necessary or a good idea. The actual number of situations where the ball crosses the line but isn't ruled a goal is tiny, especially compared to the number of wrong offside or handball calls which affect games. I'd almost say it would be a better approach to have a video ref who can tell the referee if a ball crossed the line, or a goal was actually a handball, via microphone and not bother with technology. That would still not disrupt the flow of the game as calls would only be made about goals themselves and I suspect it could well be cheaper, as well as hitting two birds with one stone. If such a system had existed in 2010 not only might the England v Germany match have ended differently but Ireland would have been in SA instead of France. Goal-line technology would have only changed one of those blatantly bad calls.

Also, I don't know if any change is really necessary. I like a bit of controversy in sport because it adds to the drama. It sucks when its your team that suffers but that's life

I should have emphasised the 'might' (personally I can't stand the English national team and I just thought that call was hilarious, and that ze Germans would have won anyway. However some Anglophile associates of mine disagree)

In regards to your question, based on the most recent international football match I have watched (AWs v Jamaica) 50% sounds about right

Barry, I like how you are using technology to tell us that you think this proposal goes over the line.

Ahem, no - all Ireland had before the French handball goal was an aggregate tie. One of the things that especially pissed me off about the subsequent Irish whinging was that they were never ahead throughout the both legs of the play-off, and they still complained that they were robbed of a World Cup place.

Ah I should have done my research, I was going solely on the recollection of Irish outrage. I guess its still one of those "might have been" things like Lampard's ungoal. 

Going back to the topic, I agree with you that these changes aren't really necessary, but I guess FIFA occasionally has to look as if it's listening to its stakeholders, and calls for goal-line technology have been very strong over the past couple of years.

My personal preference is just to employ the 5-man officiating crew (like they are doing for Champions League this season) for all games.el grapadura2012-03-06 12:43:33

Yeah that could work. Assuming those extra 2 officials actually do something, unlike the ones in the Champion's League 

If tennis can have 13 officials so two people can smack a ball at each other, surely 5 is not a stretch.

But even still, i agree with the sentiment above, it's not so much the rare occurrance of a ball crossing the line and then coming out, it's more the other calls that shoudl be looked at being improved.

Why not 4 linesman. Same as now, but have a linesman on the currently 'empty' quarters of the pitch as well.

You could try things like:
* For an offside to be called, both linesman must be in agreement.
* During corners and other set pieces, the linesman on the side furthest away from goal can move into the 'behind the goal' position to monitor play close to the goal. Or perhaps the ref can do that, with knowledge that there are extra officials monitoring whats going on behind play.
* A video ref may be a good idea, but only on goalscoring. Allow a team to challenge a decision, but have it cost them a goal if they get it wrong.

I like those ideas but I would use the video ref differently. There would be no challenging or  anything, they would simply watch the game with access to all tv camera angles and if a goal-scoring situation arose where the ref missed something like a handball or the ball crossing the line then they would inform the ref via microphone and he could make the correct call. Calls would hopefully be quick and reviews would be made while play continued so there would be no disruption. Also, the video ref could inform the ref of dives which have been missed and players who did this could then be carded at the next stoppage in play.

If said it before, and it's always been proven correct. These things tend to have a snowball effect. Tegal2012-03-06 14:15:28

I do agree, the amount of referral to video replays seems to be always increasing in Cricket. Goal line technology at the most, I could see in the future that all calls on whether the ball is out, like in Tennis, can be controlled by this technology.

I actually like the 'human' factor in games. The fact that a ref occasionally calls an offside wrong, it adds to the banter post match.

Sometimes, you look at the reply, where the guy was technically offside, and the ref didn't call it, but when you stop and take into account just HOW close it was, you've gotta think they're doing a pretty bloody good job.

I would absolutely HATE for the game to become stop start all the time, while waiting for decisions.

But the snowball comment is correct.. once you have it there.. the temptation to 'improve' everything else may become too terrible.

Keep the human element, just add more people.

I think the euro style ref behind the goal is a waste of time.. can they call infringements in the box as well, or are they only there for goal-line decisions?

I never like that the far side of the fields were un-policed by linesman.. i mean how can someone standing on halfway clearly call a ball in or out, when the rulng i whole of the ball, whole of the line?! (Unless they are a goalkeeper, in which case they see everything correctly and clearly, 100% of the time)

The other problem with technology is the cost to have it. I can imagine internationals being played in some countries who may not be able to afford it.

But then does it become a requirement to have it to host an international?

A couple of extra people on the park however is more attainable, and you would assume affordable.