FIFA stages shoot-out between British and German goal line tech
Electric eyes will watch the World Cup, with Hawk_Eye to face off against German foes
Football’s ruling body FIFA has agreed to use goal-line technology (GLT) at next year’s World Cup in Brazil after successful trials in Japan in December.
The decision marks a turnaround in thinking for FIFA after big match errors of judgement by referees in major tournament games which have benefitted and penalised England*.
A brief statement from the governing body said that GLT – which will be installed in all stadia for the Confederations Cup in Brazil this year – would be used to “support the match officials”, pending pre-match referee tests.
Two technologies were used at the Club World Cup in Japan – the English Hawk-Eye system and German-designed GoalRef – however neither are guaranteed to be used in Brazil.
“With different technologies on the market, FIFA has launched a tender today, setting out the technical requirements for the two forthcoming competitions in Brazil,” said FIFA.
“The two GLT providers already licensed under FIFA’s Quality Programme for GLT [Hawk-Eye and GoalRef], and other GLT providers currently in the licensing process (that must have passed all relevant tests as of today) are invited to submit tenders.”
FIFA told Reuters that two other unnamed German-built GLT systems could also be included in the final shoot-out between rival tenders.
Hawk-Eye has by far the stronger track record in international sport, having been used extensively at international cricket and tennis matches.
It works by triangulating visual images generated by numerous high speed cameras around the goal and can be set up to alert the ref if a goal is scored by sending a message to his watch.
GoalRef, part-developed by the Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits, requires a low frequency magnetic field be generated around the goal and the football to be fitted with a passive electronic circuit.
The system then monitors the interaction between the two thanks to antenna inside the goalpost and crossbar and again alerts the referee’s watch if a goal has been scored.
* Frank Lampard's goal was famously ruled not to have crossed the line in the World Cup 2010 quarter final with Germany which England went on to lose. England were more fortunate when a Ukraine goal against them in Euro 2012 was ruled out despite TV camera evidence that proved otherwise. ®
The German system will obviously be more efficient, but the English system will be more sportsman like.
I wish they would stop mentioning the Ukraine incident. Yes, the ball went over the line, but they were offside. It was "rightly" ruled out for the "wrong" reason.
I think Hawkeye will get used personally. But long-term a sensor-type system may be the better bet. May even lead to offside tech too?
England were very lucky to win in 1966. Brazil would almost certainly have won if they hadn't been beaten to a pulp. And the final was a dodgy game with dodgy goals to say the least.
Along with Brazil in 1994 it has to be won of the least graceful finals in the history of the (Post-WW2) World Cup.
And I say this as an Englishman, who used to be a diehard football fanatic, but have since lost all interest in the game.
Anonymous to prevent national backlash and reprisals.
Re: re : It was "rightly" ruled out for the "wrong" reason.
The one thing about GLT that bothers me is that the proposed systems only consider if the ball crossed the line, which is great and all, but these incidents happen so rarely and so infrequently, as to almost not be worth bothering about.
I hear the argument that 'because football is a low-scoring game, even a single goal is extremely important thus...' blah blah blah and that's right and true and correct.
This argument goes both ways, of course.
So what about the dodgy goals scored that shouldn't have been given because of offside? Or a foul in the build-up? Or, to cite an example from the Bayern Munich thrashing of Arsenal last night, when the goal comes directly from a corner that is clearly incorrectly awarded in the first place? Or a free-kick that should/shouldn't have been awarded? Or a penalty?
These are all much more common occurrences, and none of these systems do a damned thing about any of them. We all (those of us that watch football on telly and live) know from experience that most of the time the telly-bods have stuck a replay up showing fairly clearly what has happened inside of about 15 seconds of it occurring - often the only reason these things aren't shown immediately is so that any follow-on action isn't missed. Where is the help in sorting these out?
This redundant, ridiculous requirement from FIFA that decisions shouldn't interrupt the flow of the game, and should be made in an arbitrary timescale of X hundredths of a second or whatever are plainly nonsense, as anyone who has watched football knows that for the majority of calls that are seen as controversial, or requiring a booking / penalty / sending off generally take much longer than that to administer anyway due to the number of players arguing and complaining with the ref that the decision should / shouldn't stand... plenty of time to review on the magic telly-box.
Even at the most basic level - where's the official timer that stops the clock when the ball goes out of play and starts when it reenters? At the minute stoppage time is broadly a fictional number anyway. The simplest of measures (as has been used extensively and repeatedly in rugby) removes any 'Fergie-time' arguments. And the 'Hackney Marshes' rule doesn't apply, as clocks capable and suitable for this approach cost about £30 - well within the reaches of everyone playing at a level above that of having a kickabout in the park with your mates.
FIFA and UEFA are both jokes.
In '66 Brazil, especially Pele, were hacked to bits by Portugal. England got lucky... but then again some luck is required to win any trophy so no need to begrudge poor old England their solitary win.
Subsequent World and European cupy have shown England's true level - not so great as the red-top hacks make out in the weeks before the tournament, not so bad as the red-top hacks make out after the inevitable quarter-final exit.