Goal Line Technology. Why Not?

The ongoing debate surrounding the use of goal line technology in football looks set to finally reach its climax.

After years of debate the International FA Board (IFAB), consisting of FIFA and the four British home associations, have agreed to re-examine the issue.

The conclusions of which will surely define whether technology will ever been introduced into the world’s biggest sport.

The issue has frequently filled column inches in newspapers and websites, none more so than after Frank Lampard’s disallowed goal at this years World Cup during a game that saw England eliminated from the tournament by the Germans.

Previous infamous examples include Pedro Mendes’s long range effort for Tottenham Hotspur against Manchester United in January 2005, which television pictures showed went a couple of yards over the line but was not given by the referee or linesman.

In the Premier League this season, the debate was fuelled further when Stoke City were not awarded a goal against Tottenham Hotspur after Jon Walters’s h

eader appeared to cross the line but again was not seen by either the referee or the linesman.

With hindsight, it was only a matter of time after the World Cup incident that the goal line technology debate would be ignited in the Premier League again.

Indeed in the aftermath of England’s World Cup exit, pundits, players and

managers all over the country called for the introductio

n of goal line technology as soon as possible.

But up to this point FIFA and UEFA, under the presidencies of Sepp Blatter and Michele Platini respectively, have resisted.

Speaking recently to the Scottish FA’s website on a visit to Glasgow, Platini warned against the use of technology claiming that it could lead to what he described as, “Playstat

ion football.”

However, the Frenchman did admit that: “One referee is not enough, not in the modern era where you have 20 cameras. It is unfair.

“The cameras can see everything but the referee only has one pair of eyes. Every time he makes a mistake, those cameras are there to focus on it.”

Platini concluded that: “the current system is bad and I have known this for 40 years.”

Currently, the response from football’s governing bodies has been the introduction of two extra officials, who each stand on the opposing goal lines and therefore are in prime location to judge whether a goal has been scored and indeed any other decision in the penalty box which the referee needs assistance with.

Platini himself is a huge advocate of this system. His reluctance to support the idea of goal line technology is evident to everyone within the game of football, which has led to widespread criticism of the UEFA President.

Platini’s favoured system of two extra officials was first tested in last season’s UEFA Europa League and the authorities saw enough merit in the system to install it in this season’s UEFA Champions League as well.

Indeed a spokesperson for FIFA explained: “At a previous special meeting of the IFAB held in Zurich on 18 May 2010, the board reviewed the experiment with two additional assistant referees that was carried out in the 2009/2010 UEFA Europa League.

“They have decided to continue the experiment until the 126th IFAB annual general meeting in 2012.”

In addition to Platini, FIFA President Sepp Blatter is just as reluctant to admit the need for video technology in football.

Blatter expressed his reservations and concerns earlier this year.

"If the IFAB approved goal-line technology, what would prevent the approval of technology for other aspects of the game?" he said.

"Every decision in every area of the pitch would soon be questioned.

"It is often the case that, even after a slow-motion replay, ten different experts will have ten different opinions on what the decision should have been,” Blatter explained.

Yet one major talking point surrounding the use of two extra officials, rather than introduce goal line technology, is cost.

Indeed many critics of the current system insist that it is far more expensive to be paying two extra officials to help referee a match, compared to simply investing in goal line technology which arguably consists of no more than a couple of cameras linked to a TV screen.

You would think that cost would be a vital aspect of the debate when the footballing authorities come to discuss the issue further in the coming months.

Meanwhile, as a result of the discussion amongst the IFAB, a deadline of the end of next month has now been set for companies to make a first presentation of their technologies to FIFA.

A testing period will then take place to determine the accuracy of each system and this will be reported back to the IFAB annual general meeting on March 5.

Former Premier League referee Graham Poll believes there should only be one outcome from this meeting.

“I am 100 per cent in favour of the introduction of goal line technology.

“It would be massively beneficial to referees as, due to no fault of their own, match officials cannot be in the perfect place to make the judgment of whether the ball has crossed the goal line,” the 47-year-old explained.

Poll argues that the pace of the modern game is such, that referees should be provided with as much assistance as possible.

“Even when officials are in the perfect position to see an incident, the speed of the ball often means they cannot be 100 per cent sure,” he said. “Referees understand the shortcomings of the current system but are powerless to change things.”

One of the biggest sport brands in the world, Adidas, created their own solution to the problem, which they called the Teamgeist II football.

This ‘intelligent football’ uses a magnetic field to provide real-time feedback to a central computer, which tracks the location of the ball on the field and sends the data directly to the referee. By using a magnetic field and more stabilized and robust components within the ball, the new system is more precise and is not influenced by in-game factors, adverse weather or nearby technical systems.

The system was tested in 2008 at the FIFA Club World Cup in Japan, but did not impress the governors of the game enough to be considered as a permanent solution to the issue.

The rejection of Adidas’s innovative idea, as well as the widespread calls to introduce more straightforward forms of goal line technology, simply underlines the reluctance of football’s governing bodies to change the laws of the biggest sport in the world.

In this instance, the phrase don’t fix what isn’t broken appears to explain their thinking.

Debate and differing opinions is a vital part of a game millions of people love. If big talking points and decisions were eliminated from the game then football could potentially lose its heartbeat.

But in the case of simply distinguishing whether the ball has crossed the line, a solution needs to be found as soon as possible. Fans and pundits should not be debating such an issue. But goal line technology is where video technology in football should stop.

The incident in this year’s World Cup with Frank Lampard’s ‘goal’ was embarrassing and FIFA must have recognised that. Video technology should never become a major part component of a football match, but to ignore it completely does not make sense.

The referee is there to make decisions on offsides, fouls, yellow and red cards. Having assistance regarding whether the ball has crossed the line and if a goal should be awarded is something that all referees would appreciate.

The introduction of goal line technology would be a triumph of common sense.

As a result, there must be the feeling in the football world that it is now or never, because if goal line technology is not introduced in the near future then it probably will never be.

This article will also soon be available on AskTheExperts.org.uk