Big Question: Should FIFA use Goal-Line Technology at the World Cup?
We saw it during the France-South Korea game. A shot by France appeared to be across the goal line only to not be ruled a goal by the referee. This is not the first time this has happened and it certainly won’t be the last. With camera and sensor technology highly developed these days, FIFA could use them to help determine close goal decisions. The technology isn’t perfect but it does exist.
Do you think that this technology should be used during World Cup matches or do you think it is better to stick with tradition and to have the game determined by humans?
 |
Soccer Forums | International Results |  |
 |  Travel |
Related Posts
Subscribe
|
Print
|
Share        |
Comments
Displaying the most recent 25 comments from a total of 34 comments.
Read the rest of the comments
By FIFAworldcup.com - Passionate Fan on Fifa World Cup 2006 | June 21st, 2006 at 5:07 am 
Is FIFA Sensor Ready?
There is discussion flying around whether FIFA should use technology to determine or help goal decisions. I don’t think the discussion should revolve around whether FIFA is going to use the technology but it’s more of when?
Talks about …
Posted from 
United States
By Ali Siddiqui | June 21st, 2006 at 5:17 am Why FIFA has yet to create such a system is beyond me. I mean this would not only confirm those “iffy” goals but it would certainly make it easier for referees who may or may not be at the right spot to view the goal. That match between France and Germany is an excellent example of why we need this type of system. Cameras from different views made it seem the ball went in and didn’t go in…not very reliable. A system that is in the net that can immediately confirm a goal or no goal with certainty is a God sent gift.
Posted from 
Canada
By so what | June 21st, 2006 at 5:40 am Yeah, I see consistent bickering
and advocating of this issue as
usually because the so called
traditional stronghold in
football receives a bad call
against them. If the same happens
to an underdog or inferior team,
things are quickly swept under
the carpet or dismissed with
other bias excuse.
So, why change the plan now as it
may backfire against your usual
favourite euro or latin ?
Silly!
Posted from 
Australia
By sooz | June 21st, 2006 at 5:43 am so what: BINGO!!!
Posted from Canada
By so what | June 21st, 2006 at 5:52 am I will reiterate what has been
said in another similar thread
on this site. How about the game
btw Togo and Swissy ? There was
a clear and unambiguous foul in
the penalty box against Togo when
Adebayor was brought down by a
“back” swinging leg from the
Swiss defender which took
Adebayor out ? It was even much
clearer in the replay than the
claimed “goal” in SK-France
match.
Why wasn’t a penalty awarded to
Togo ? And honestly do yu think
it needs better video technology
to make a fair call on that one?
Speaking of fairness ? To what
country are you guys talking
about for fairness sake!
Posted from Australia
By Luis | June 21st, 2006 at 5:57 am Yes, absolutely. It’s clear we need a beeping ball.
Posted from United States
By dila | June 21st, 2006 at 6:24 am poor france! they couldn’t have won..
Posted from 
Malaysia
By Link | June 21st, 2006 at 6:53 am A lot of the refrees/and linesmen are a hindrance to the sport.There are so much blatant bad decisions it makes one wonder.Is it fair to a player to wait four years and then be suspended for taking a penalty kick before the whistle?Then FIFA does not overturn the decision !!There must be somemeans of overturning those bad decisions
Posted from United States
By butch | June 21st, 2006 at 7:23 am Technology is tiresome.
The Stanley Cup had this useless moment of endless review, watching people in ties on phones murmuring for nothing.
It was boring and I feel like reminding someone it is only a game.
Takes the fun out of the whole preceding.
Americans love that bullshit.
Special teams for tiddlywinks.
Play on I say.
Nobody is saying it so I will.
No to technology.
Posted from Canada
By sedgerick | June 21st, 2006 at 7:26 am definitely not. thats part of the charm of the sport… the outcome relies not only on player skill, but luck. scoring goals has a large element of luck to it anyway, and keeping it classic adds another layer of drama. football is all about upsets, and its by far the sport thats the most like its original version out of the main big sports.
Posted from United States
By Roland | June 21st, 2006 at 7:38 am I think more technology will prove irresistable to FIFA sooner or later, but regardless of what is put into place, there will always be controversial goals. Machines can be rigged as easily as referees can be bought.
Posted from United States
By sooz | June 21st, 2006 at 7:41 am It’s the world’s game, it has to be fair, and technology will promote this.
Posted from Canada
By Ral | June 21st, 2006 at 8:33 am Tough for me to argue either way as my team (Spain) got screwed by bad refereeing in the last cup.
However, although I honestly wish I could go back in time and reverse the calls made, I think that technology such as this would negatively transform the game. Football is not like american football, where the natural pauses in the game allow for easy use of technology: it is this sense of uncertainty, the inevitable suspense and drama that comes from a human being making the calls on the field that makes football such a beautiful sport.
Indeed, although I don’t want the world cup to turn into the super bowl, I do think that the technology will become irresistable, as Roland said.
Posted from United States
By Toncho | June 21st, 2006 at 10:30 am I am not for technology all over the place but definetly for a simple sensor that would “bip” in case on the ball crossing the line, not breaks needed. Anyway, all of you forgot to mention that france was not given a goal because the referee called a previous fault so there is no room for polemic here.
Posted from 
Luxembourg
By SES | June 21st, 2006 at 1:03 pm I just think there needs to be a few more assistant refs available so it’s not left alone to one guy’s decision. Technology would be helpful as well to discern between the actual goals and the saves. It would probably also give a greater sense of credibility to the game.
Posted from United States
By Euler | June 21st, 2006 at 1:33 pm Would you rather doubt a man or doubt a microchip? Does your computer never had any bugs? Of course Mac and Linux users will say no to this, but what about Microsoft users?
Imagine if the technology says your team didn’t score but the TV replay shows the ball went in… every technology is bound to make mistakes.
I say it would be harder for me to accept a chip mistake than to accept a human mistake. Think about it.
By Se7en | June 21st, 2006 at 1:34 pm absolutely.
we also saw another close call in the argentina – ivory coast match.
this has to be implemented next cup!
Posted from 
Germany
By Stuart | June 21st, 2006 at 2:54 pm As someone that works with technology for a living, I’m inclined to say yes, of course; but as a fan of the game, I think the sport is somehow diminished by removing the human element. Let’s face it, part the fun of being a fan is to agonize questionable calls against us or praise them when their for us. The beauty of the game is in it’s simplicity, so that should be maintained at all costs. If it were to be implemented, how long would it be before instant-replay is considered as a means of ensuring the most accurate refereeing? I say, leave it as it is, and ensure that refs have the best possible training.
By mike | June 21st, 2006 at 3:10 pm I completly agree that FIFA should start to use instant replay. However, they should only beable to use it for discrepancies like in the France match, only to determine if a ball crosses the line or not. If instant replay starts to be used beyond that then it will mess up the flow of the game. Referees mistakes beyond that are just part of the game. There is also no need for technology like a chip in the ball. They just need someone up in a booth who can look at the instant replay.
Posted from United States
By Azeglio Vicini | June 21st, 2006 at 3:21 pm To the new technology being tested at the recent world youth championship, Sepp Blatter remarked (paraphrasing): Checking for a goal is fine, but we should not let the technology invade too much of the sport, as we would want to preserve the drama created by incorrect referee decisions.
WHAT! HOW! I don’t get it. If there is a way to encourage fair play, and to respect the rules of the game he purports to uphold, I would hope that it would be thoroughly explored. Whether he realizes this or not, he is backing a “scandal” of his own, willfully turning his back on erroneous decisions because they create drama????? I thought he was leading a football association not directing a soap opera.
Delays could be avoided by the ref being linked up to a pda device that beeps for offside, goals, and even levels of force absorbed by a player from a tackle to guage if a contrast was a foul or a “Dive.” The “electronic eye” in tennis also had to overcome bugs, but they were temporary. All tech becomes stable over time. (Would you want a ref to remove his glasses before the world cup final… then don’t take away these “glasses” either.) Of course nothing is 100%… but the reality is that it will be better than an unaided human agent an average of 15 meters away from an on field event! Given this, it is FIFA’s RESPONSIBILITY to implement the technology once it is feasible.
The beauty of soccer IS soccer… If players know that their skill will be rewarded with increasing consistency, they will be even more motivated… The more we can preserve the integrity of the game, the longer it will bring enjoyment and opportunity to many! BRING IN THE TECHNOLOGY!!!!!
Posted from United States
By Latif | June 27th, 2006 at 3:03 pm Am currently doing a project on technology in fooball and i would appreciate it if you can take part in my quick questionnaire. jus click on the link below. thanks
http://express.perseus.com/perseus/surveys/1734848031/67b8d6e3.htm
Posted from 
United Kingdom
By Bill | June 28th, 2006 at 5:55 pm The technology is certainly on its way. See our web site – http://www.motram.com and it will happen sooner or later. The speed of the game nowadays is such that the ref needs every help he can get. Our device reports only to him; it does not stop play; only he knows the call. May not be perfect – YET! But it is consistent no variation from ref to ref.
It also keeps track of the substitutes, the clock (no more time wasting) and the number of yellow cards given out (certainly needed at these Finals – if not just for English Ref, Graham Poll).
Its coming.
Posted from United States
By Seba | June 29th, 2006 at 12:58 pm I think techs is needed to assist referees in hard situations on games.
See that we all call “technology” to something as trivial as the way supermarket triggers an alarm when someone try to stole a candy (more precise, but almost the same).
I would go to the camera solution rather than the chip thing.
Well positioned cameras could help to solve those not fair situations where we at home actually see the ball is going goal, but referee doesnt give it to the score.
Cameras is the solution, and a new Replay Referee to answer to any of the field referee, main one, and line ones, by intercom, almost instantly if a doubly play arise…
“Does the ball crossed the line?”
“Did exist the faul as penalty or the player simulated it?”
“Was it Off-Side?”
Well positioned cams, no more than 4 (2 in both goal tubes, and 2 in the oposite side of each lineman).
The off-side cams, would stay 1 at the ball and the other at the last man, the defender or the forewarder.
With some thought to develop this idea, and money of course, which FIFA surely has 
it could be at least tested.
And in tournaments as World Cup, something like this should be implemented.
And going further, they should make more cristal the way they arrange the groups of teams.
I have the feeling there is 2 teams that are ALWAYS suspiciously lucky in that arragement… the LOCAL team… and BRAZIL. :/
Well we all know that this WONT change a thing… but I had the need to express someway.
And remember… If Germany can’t beat Argentina in the field, stay alert to some referee’s help to Germany… like a penalty or something.
About Brazil, well u just have to see its group… and its 1st match of the 2nd round.
Regards!
Posted from 
Spain
By Andy Brune | July 3rd, 2006 at 11:37 pm Change and what´s new is too often something to be feared about. Especially by a large beaurocratic organisation such as FIFA, which moves very slow in fact. It seems they´re afraid to loose some kind of “control” over the whole “system” (I´ll ask Nero to enlighten us further). The arguments they present against technology seems rather …sad and even more childish. Example: they say that even with technology, there is still no certainty the right decission has been made. Very true. So? At least your chances of making the right and fair decision (ever heard of “fair play” by the way?! only applied to players?!) is a heck of a lot better. Perfection does not exist. I´m personally more in favour of video monitoring less so of chips, to me the first makes much more sense in many ways.
Technology induced over-rulings should remain to a minimum but be present in important decissions. I find relief in being certain that sooner rather than later it will be implemented due to the logical public pressure. Organisations and those ruling them can be too proud too. Humbble up and get real. …oh, and did you know they severely sanction clubs that try new technology behind closed doors? Again: sad.
Posted from Spain
By Andy Brune | July 10th, 2006 at 10:13 am “Poor” Zidane. …so I guess video replay has now been implemented after all.
What´s next? Perhaps they´ll start using directional microphones as to give red cards to those players that utter big provocatory words.
Posted from Spain
Comments are closed
