Goal Line Technology
After this weekends high profile FA cup semi finals at the national stadium & another big game where a controversial decision has been made which has lead to calls for goal-line technology to be trialled.
I have been against the introduction of the technology for years but the whole issue has become rather tiresome now because it’s reached the stage where the answer to the question of what’s correct and above board is obvious to everyone.
However there are those who refuse to accept the need for change do so because they seem to be the buffoons from the authorities that are clearly looking to protect their own interests.
When you look at all the recent incidents mainly in very high profile matches and taking in to consideration that relatively minority sports like Rugby League and cricket should implement the technology to get big decisions right, yet football remains stuck in the Dark Ages, steadfastly refusing to accept that such technology will improve the game. But it’s only once you understand the fear that lies behind the honesty and integrity that
such technology threatens to provide that you begin to understand why football wishes to lag behind in the twentieth century.
Unlike other relatively minor sports that must improve themselves and the quality of order to compete for a greater audience, football is far and away the clear sports leader in this country and the level of resistance to change is bound to be extreme because everybody is working to the same mantra: if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
That’s the crucial theory question that leads us into a whole new debate of while human error lies at the heart of why is football so appealing to the masses. Allow me to elaborate
As Football is the global market leader because of the natural order that exists within the game. Spain are now the team to beat in the international arena, Barcelona are the current super power of European club football, Manchester United have dominated in the Premier League for
years.
Power shifts may occur from generation to generation but these generally take place over a sustained period of time, slow enough for the masses who take only a casual interest in the game to keep up with the storyline.
The main reason why the big clubs get all the major decisions is simple, Human error which will always favour the natural order because the
script, to some extent, is already written in advance. Years of conditioning means that referees, the men in the spotlight at such crucial moments, expect certain outcomes and are most likely to make mistakes in favour of the team they consider most likely to win in any case
Goal-line technology, on the other hand – not to mention the other developments that will inevitably follow once the floodgates have been opened – might throw a small but significant spanner in the works. Who knows how different football superiority might look 50 years from now if underdogs got more of the major decisions right then Imagine 50 years of underdogs winning more football matches, leading to a different team lifting the Premier League title every year.
As dedicated fans and punters, it’s easy to become frustrated when, in the here and now, you don’t care much for the natural order. To the educated, the integrity of the game is being compromised by repeated incidents of this nature. The authorities, by refusing to embrace progress, are treading a
fine line between what’s right and what’s best.
Whether you agree or disagree with the introduction of goal line technology probably depends on your interpretation of ‘what’s best’ for the game in the long run, but you should think about the long-term consequences of disturbing the natural order before you ridicule the authorities for their resistance.
Fifa dropped its long-standing opposition to its introduction in 2010 following Frank Lampard's disallowed goal against Germany when his shot hit
the bar and bounced down clearly over the line. Fifa president Sepp Blatter apologised to the FA after the incident.
So what has happened since?
There has been a first stage of tests for systems. Eight systems were tested by an independent body. The eight companies had to demonstrate their
technology adhered to Fifa benchmarks. These included notification of a goal being sent to the referee's watch within one second of the ball crossing the line, and strict standards on accuracy.
Who was successful?
Two companies will proceed to the second phase of goal-line technology testing following a decision by the Ifab. Goalref and British-based Hawkeye will be tested again in 'multiple scenarios' in late-April and May to test their accuracy in "real world" scenarios - including when there are poor
weather conditions, floodlights being used and players moving or standing close to the goal-posts.
What if one - or both - receives approval?
If that happens in July, it leaves open the possibility that goal-line technology could be introduced next season.
I have been against the introduction of the technology for years but the whole issue has become rather tiresome now because it’s reached the stage where the answer to the question of what’s correct and above board is obvious to everyone.
However there are those who refuse to accept the need for change do so because they seem to be the buffoons from the authorities that are clearly looking to protect their own interests.
When you look at all the recent incidents mainly in very high profile matches and taking in to consideration that relatively minority sports like Rugby League and cricket should implement the technology to get big decisions right, yet football remains stuck in the Dark Ages, steadfastly refusing to accept that such technology will improve the game. But it’s only once you understand the fear that lies behind the honesty and integrity that
such technology threatens to provide that you begin to understand why football wishes to lag behind in the twentieth century.
Unlike other relatively minor sports that must improve themselves and the quality of order to compete for a greater audience, football is far and away the clear sports leader in this country and the level of resistance to change is bound to be extreme because everybody is working to the same mantra: if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
That’s the crucial theory question that leads us into a whole new debate of while human error lies at the heart of why is football so appealing to the masses. Allow me to elaborate
As Football is the global market leader because of the natural order that exists within the game. Spain are now the team to beat in the international arena, Barcelona are the current super power of European club football, Manchester United have dominated in the Premier League for
years.
Power shifts may occur from generation to generation but these generally take place over a sustained period of time, slow enough for the masses who take only a casual interest in the game to keep up with the storyline.
The main reason why the big clubs get all the major decisions is simple, Human error which will always favour the natural order because the
script, to some extent, is already written in advance. Years of conditioning means that referees, the men in the spotlight at such crucial moments, expect certain outcomes and are most likely to make mistakes in favour of the team they consider most likely to win in any case
Goal-line technology, on the other hand – not to mention the other developments that will inevitably follow once the floodgates have been opened – might throw a small but significant spanner in the works. Who knows how different football superiority might look 50 years from now if underdogs got more of the major decisions right then Imagine 50 years of underdogs winning more football matches, leading to a different team lifting the Premier League title every year.
As dedicated fans and punters, it’s easy to become frustrated when, in the here and now, you don’t care much for the natural order. To the educated, the integrity of the game is being compromised by repeated incidents of this nature. The authorities, by refusing to embrace progress, are treading a
fine line between what’s right and what’s best.
Whether you agree or disagree with the introduction of goal line technology probably depends on your interpretation of ‘what’s best’ for the game in the long run, but you should think about the long-term consequences of disturbing the natural order before you ridicule the authorities for their resistance.
Fifa dropped its long-standing opposition to its introduction in 2010 following Frank Lampard's disallowed goal against Germany when his shot hit
the bar and bounced down clearly over the line. Fifa president Sepp Blatter apologised to the FA after the incident.
So what has happened since?
There has been a first stage of tests for systems. Eight systems were tested by an independent body. The eight companies had to demonstrate their
technology adhered to Fifa benchmarks. These included notification of a goal being sent to the referee's watch within one second of the ball crossing the line, and strict standards on accuracy.
Who was successful?
Two companies will proceed to the second phase of goal-line technology testing following a decision by the Ifab. Goalref and British-based Hawkeye will be tested again in 'multiple scenarios' in late-April and May to test their accuracy in "real world" scenarios - including when there are poor
weather conditions, floodlights being used and players moving or standing close to the goal-posts.
What if one - or both - receives approval?
If that happens in July, it leaves open the possibility that goal-line technology could be introduced next season.