Goal Line Technology: Necessity or threat?

Lo and behold, the Three Lions let out a feeble roar once again as they were put to the sword by a far superior outfit, in a tournament that most people at home expected them to fare far better in. It's simultaneously painful and boring to yet again see the British media's attitude go from that of glorifying Fabio Capello and the team, to baying for their blood after 90 minutes of football. A dodgy 1-0 win over a pathetic Slovenia side was widely praised in England, where elsewhere in the world of football, an early exit once again was predicted on the back of the same result.

And so it came to pass. But it irks me that not everyone will remember that game for how well the Germans counterattacked and took their goals; the most blindly passionate of English fans will gloss over John Terry's and Matthew Upson's startling inability to form a cohesive and effective defensive unit. What will be talked about until the cows come home is "the goal that wasn't". That unbelievable error by both the linesman and the referee that disallowed a perfectly good goal by the otherwise ineffective Frank Lampard. It would have been England's second in as many minutes, and, admittedly, may have changed the shape of the game, at least for a considerable period of time. However, I am confident the Germans would still have heavily outclassed their opponents.

Yet this is not the centre of the discussion at hand. Naturally, as the English media does, they hopped on the injustice and are now making very loud noises in the direction of Sepp Blatter and co. at FIFA headquarters to introduce some form of goal line or appeal technology, to avoid a repeat of this situation. And with good reason too.

We know ourselves. The now infamous "Hand Of Gaul" incident fecked us over for all our efforts, and the pain and injustice was, and is, still hard to swallow. And yet the dinosaurs at FIFA insist it would riun the flow of the game. Well, do they have a point?

Firstly, the very basic thing that could be done; a 5th official sitting at a monitor would be able to decide in seconds whether a goal should be allowed or not. If a contentious goal is initially allowed, surely that isn't breaking up the flow of play, when play is stopped anyway and the players and referee are awaiting the decision?

However, matters become complicated with something like the very goal Lampard had disallowed. Play continued down to the England end after the German keeper Neuer fished it out of his goal feigning innocence. What would have happened if, during the time a hypothetical 5th official was scrambling to watch replays, Germany had have scored at the other end? Would both goals have stood, or just the English one?

Then the obvious answer to this is goal line technology; place a microchip in the football and have sensors on the goal line. Simple eh? Well, not particularly. FIFA have a point, I think when they say the same rules should apply across the board. Obviously, I'm not talking in terms of grassroots football, but within professional leagues themselves. I've heard £300k quoted for kitting out a stadium with this technology; easily affordable by the likes of Premier League clubs and even some Championship outfits, but how about the lower leagues? The fact is, in a lot of cases, clubs simply would not be able to afford this. But why should their budgets reflect how fair the playing environment in their league is? Clearly, it would be incumbent on football associations across the globe to at least foot some of the bill for this technology, in the interest of the sport.

And yet more problems persist.

Where does the line get drawn with this technology? I think it needs to stop at contentious goal decisions, including offsides; only if a ball is put in the net and the play is stopped should the offside be looked at. There's no point stopping play for a suspected offside only to discover that play could have continued, which could lead to even more aggrevation towards match officials. But for the likes of free kicks and throw ins, the concept of appealing these decisions is ridiculous. This is what could possibly happen, with even the most minute decisions coming under scrutiny, because managers know they have the power and the means to challenge them. The solution to this is a no-brainer; much like tennis, introduce a system of a set number of appeals. That way, teams and managers get to challenge the really contentious decisions, without disrupting the overall flow of the game.

Of course, this is a very broad argument, and I'm sure this will be debated by more qualified and experience men than me once this World Cup is over. But it'll be interesting to see how Sepp Blatter copes if another refereeing blunder leaves a black mark on the festivities in South Africa.




OH, AND ANOTHER THING.....:
I was over the moon to see Portgual exit the World Cup this evening; not because I dislike them as a team, but simply because of the antics of one Cristiano Ronaldo over the tournament. He is seflishness and egotism incarnate, and if I was one of his Portugeuse teammates tonight, I'd be infuriated with his self serving shots that only troubled people in the upper tiers of the stadium.