So with the inclusion of goal-line technology looking increasingly likely (providing they pass Phase 2), who will use it? And could this pave the way for more innovations?
Michel Platini (President of UEFA) has stood firm in his views and denied the need for technology, suggesting additional officials are sufficient. He argues that given goalmouth disputes are relatively few and far between, goal-line technology does not represent a sound investment.
This could lead to goal-line technology being implemented during the World Cup and in the Premier League, but not during the Champions or Europa League.
There are also issues on the domestic front. Whilst all 20 Premier league teams could easily afford and implement the technology, would it be fair to allow these teams the technology during the F.A. Cup? Would relegated teams be allowed to utilise it further down the Football League? Would the Championship even have it?
All of this is up for debate. However we can find some solace in the world of Tennis.
Of the four Grand-Slam tournaments, only Wimbledon, The US Open and The Australian Open use Hawk-Eye. The clay courts of Roland Garros are not blessed with the technology and remain against its inclusion.
This makes the French Open unique. There are no breaks in play for challenges, fewer mind games in fact, and the umpire’s has the final word. Human error leads to contentious decisions and controversy – something that many argue is integral to football. The F.A. Cup could retain its sparkle.
Sure, England fans could and should have celebrated Lampard’s goal in South Africa, but you can’t deny the primal feeling you get screaming at the top of your voice, hoping for some divine intervention to no avail. Look at it from the reverse perspective. Imagine if a German boot was on the wrong end of that decision. Absolute ecstasy.
Could there be more innovations?
Whilst Blatter’s change of heart confirms that indeed, anything is possible in sport, it seems highly unlikely, at least for now. Video replays are commonplace in rugby and despite the high-numbers of cameras already present at Premier League grounds, no footballing body can see a use for them beyond their broadcasting purposes, due in part to the long breaks in play while a decision is reached.
However, Everton boss David Moyes suggested this footage could be used to retrospectively punish players for simulation (diving). The F.A. already demonstrates its use, handing out lengthier bans if a tackle is deemed particularly reckless or if the referee does not include an incident in his post-match report. Extending its use to diving could help minimise play-acting.
“If it was me, the best way to make our referees’ job easier would be to have retrospective punishment on diving because the players are so good at it, but if you check afterwards to see if they have done it and you find they did then you ban them.” This makes perfect sense.
It looks as if Premiership managers will finally get what they’ve been demanding for years. The fans will applaud its value. Pundits will revel in the glorified 3D imaging. FIFA will no doubt herald it as a “fresh start.” Whether it will be Hawk-Eye or GoalRef remains to be seen. My money’s on GoalRef.
Introducing the neat little app that’ll pay you to view content tailored to your interests:
ThisisFutbol.com are seeking new writers to join the team! If you’re passionate about football, drop us a line at “thisisfutbol.com@snack-media.com” to learn more.