When It Is unclear If a ball has crossed the goal line or not, Is an Incredibly difficult call for officials to make. More often than not, mistakes are made. With so many advancements in technology these controversies have led many to call for the use of “goal-line technology. ” The use of a replay system, such as Hawk-Eye or Cairo GLUT, could do wonders to avoid errors of the human eye. There have been many controversial goal-line decisions over the years, all of which are now being used as support for the use of goal-line technology In soccer.
Anyone who had watched the World cup match between England and Germany on television during the summer had probably come to the same conclusion. From the comfort of your sofa, you would have clearly seen that when Frank Lanyard shot from a distance, the ball clearly looked like it crossed the line. However, the ball did come out of the net very quickly, so it would be reasonable to give the match officials the benefit of the doubt that they could not see the goal.
This only proves, however, that goal-line technology should be Introduced to lad them towards making the right decision. Nominal Tests In 2005, FIFE under Seep Blaster’s presidency, agreed to tests being conducted at the U-17 world championships. The form of goal line technology used involved microchips in the ball that activate a message being sent to a watch the referee wears, when the ball crosses the line. After the tournament, Bleater stated, “The evidence wasn’t clear so we will carry out trials… T the 2007 World Club Championship,” This Is exactly what they did. Then at the annual BIFF (International Football Associations Board?the body that governs the rules of football) meeting In 2009, they halted any further progress regarding goal-line technology. Bleater explained the decision by saying that the microchips ball had failed in one of the seven World Club Championship matches due to interference to the signal sent to the referee and that it would be difficult to implement the chip technology in the many types of football used around the world.
Bleater then clarified the official position on goal-line technology, saying: “The BIFF believes that football Is a game for human beings and, as such, we should Improve the standard of refereeing?and not turn to technology. ” Hawk EYE The Hawk-Eye system for goal-line technology uses six cameras in the stadium that re used to triangulate the position of the ball in three dimensions, it can also be used to calculate (using physics) the future path of the ball.
Bleater rejected the Hawk-Eye system, stating that: “You cannot ensure It works when there are a bunch of players Inside the goal mouth and you cannot see the ball, or when there Is poor visibility. ” Dry. Paul Hawkins (the founder of Hawk-Eye) clearly disagrees. After the 2009 BIFF meeting, he said: “Bleater said he was concerned about our technology because if a flare went off in a stadium, it might get in the way of one of our cameras. Firstly, that’s ridiculous, and, secondly, that’s the reason we have six cameras.
Have you ever known a televised game where a goal can’t be shown because a flare has blocked a camera angle? ” Another Alternative fear of the introduction of video replays becoming part of the refereeing system. What is the problem with this possibility, anyway? According to BEEF chief executive Lars-Christie Olsson: “Video-refereeing would stop the flow of the game… This would also open up windows for further commercials in the middle of the match, which would damage its image, and secondly this would lead to a referee’s authority being undermined. However, video refereeing has been a success in other professional Sports. Such as in Rugby, it actually helps to empower the referees rather than undermine them. As for creating delays in play, much more time is spent watching overpaid footballers put on amateur dramatic performances when they get the slightest tap than is spent waiting for video replay decisions. The truth about the block on goal-line technology probably comes down to that quote from Bleater: “Football is a game for human beings and, as such, we should improve the standard of refereeing?and not turn to technology. ”