Goal Line Technology Persuasive Essay

Use of goal line technology in football is overdue, and can only lead to benefits.

Yes because...

It has been a question that has been rife and top of the agenda doing the rounds on football forums and also top of the agenda throughout the structure of the sport.Should there or should there not be further technology to enhance the Laws of the game? it is a question in which most top league clubs are asking in the wake of many incidents which have gone unnoticed which have cost different clubs points and alot of money.There are other questions which arise when thinking about the effects of these decisions and incidents such as what effect is this having on the reputation of referees and the relationship between player and referee but also the relationship between the wider public and community towards officials.

The reason i say that these decisions being made turns the public on the officials is because the fans have such a strong relation to their clubs their they cannot accept a decision which is deemed preposterous against their clubs, instead they see it as a controversy affecting the bond between fan and their club.The fans wont blame anyone else other than the referee at fault even if that referee had just reason to give a decision considering his position on the field and the parameters in which the decision was taken.This often erupts in foul mouth slurs and talk of cheating and that match officials are against their clubs.Now if you put this into the context of the position of the fan and especially the young fans who hear those foul-mouthed assaults it can create a wider issue in the footballing community at amateur level as young players from youth teams start to disrespect referees and a bore referees and their decisions due to the culture that has been handed to them from their role models and the relationship of their role models with the officials for example if a 11 yr old playing youth football constantly hears the effects of the strained relationship and lack of respect for referees such as insults and talk of controversy from his/her parents their friends,their leaders, and from watching footballers consistently having a lack of discipline for match officials then how can we expect any different behaviour from the 11 yr old on the field of play for his/her team? can we expect any different from a generation who has been plagued by their role models in the sport for so long? I don’t think that can be changed in a hurry but we can do things to slow down that process and help the referees regain a stronger relationship with the players and the wider football fan community in the sport.The way this can and should be done is through technology.

“We don’t want a repeat of last World Cup … I think I can convince the International Football Association Board board that we must go forward with technology.”, Blatter says he does not want to be at “a World Cup and witness another situation [like the Lampard one]. I would die.”

Sepp Blatter speaking (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/mar/02/sepp-blatter-ifab-goalline-technology

Football wouldn’t be the first sport to take away the big decisions from the on field referees in fact they would be among a long line of sports who have successfully adopted a technological approach to officiating with limited or no after effects or damage to the reputation of their respected sports.Tennis have the Net Cord Sensor which uses Vibrations which turn into Electrical energy which is called the Piezoelectrical Device and the Hawk Eye which uses four high-speed cameras to detect the map of the flight path of the ball to determine whether points should be given or not, the same system is used in Cricket and have been hugely successful.The most successful in my opinion is in Rugby.The Hawk eye has been inspirational with ensuring the sport stays honourable to the codification of the sport ensuring balanced and fair competition.

We can do it, the football world wants it and yet it is still being thwarted, that is unacceptable,” said Tijs Tummers, secretary of FIFPro’s technical committee.

( http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8766423.stm)

The one thing these sports have in common is that the officiating sectors command the highest of respect from the sports coaches players and their wider sporting community , it is more accepted that their decision is final and whatever decision that may be must be the correct decision.By taking the hardest of the decisions out of the referees hands and looking at evidence can have an impact on the way people view referees and the way that we as a community share that relationship with officials in a culture in which Countering everything has become common place.If we look at events in football and certain situations for example , Barcelona FC , when they play the game and they start to struggle it is obvious to anyone watching the game that they start to try to sway referees decisions and bully the referee into the decisions he makes, how many times have you seen a referee with 10 Barcelona players shouting around him after somebody blew on one of their players and that player doing his latest drama routine ? they only disrespectfully behave like that because it is one man solely having the responsibility to make that huge and crucial decision and they have learned through cultural experience that putting one person under that pressure can benefit them, So why can’t we take those decisions away ? if it isn’t then down to one person and the “buck” is passed to a team of officiators watching evidence surely that sort of behaviour can be nullified. A referee could then book any player that is deemed to abuse him/her and show that there is consequences for appalling behaviour on the field and maybe just maybe we will start to get back to a level where more respect is shown throughout the hierarchy of football from the young amateur Sunday league players right up to the top of the game. An obvious thought is that of course the amateur game can’t benefit from technology directly as the referee at that level will always be the law-maker but with a changing culture at the top of respect this could see a domino effect throughout the leagues and through the youth of the community and get rid of this Counter Attack philosophy where every official decision can be challenged and maybe just maybe viewed as beyond reproach.

“There is not a single convincing argument against the use of goal-line technology. With offside incidents, it is slightly more complicated, but the Argentinian goal which was allowed to stand shows the failure of the system even better.Referee Roberto Rosetti had a long consultation with the assistant referee, who was in contact with the fourth official via a microphone.He would undoubtedly have heard that Tevez was offside, the whole stadium had already seen it by then via images on the scoreboard.Yet, because the referee was not allowed to rely on video images, he had to award the goal which he knew should have been disallowed.You could see the doubt in his eyes. Technology does not undermine the authority of referees, it only helps them”

FifPro technical committee statement after a decision to allow a goal which was clearly offside in the 2010 World Cup, http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8766423.stm

There should be clear outlines as to how much of the game should be handed to Hawk eye and how much time can be devoted to officials in an evidence viewing room. Not every decision should go to evidence only the major decisions such as Goal Line Technology,This has been an Achilles heel for a long time going back to the England Vs West Germany final of 66, to Roy Carroll’s fumble for Manchester United vs Tottenham in which a goal for Tottenham should have been given and on to modern times such as the 2010 South Africa World Cup where Frank Lampard’s shot which clearly went over the line by a good 2 ft wasn’t given at a time where England could have gone in at half time level at 2-2 and the game mentality changes unfortunately that wasn’t to be.The other main decision should be horror tackles and tackles in which the referee may have to give a red card. The reason for this is because it is of such importance to keep 11 men on a field in a sport that generates so much money every decision could be harmful or beneficial so getting that right decision is crucial as there are questions to be answered on the field at times ones which will need clearing up for example what if a player dives and gets a player sent off at a crucial stage of the game ? should the referee send the player off? what did the referee see? how far away was he ? should he make a panicked decision with 10 players around him shouting at him ? or should he blow his whistle and signal a square with his hands and ask a panel of expert official’s watching the evidence to make the right and fair call?.

One argument against which I have heard is the time which will be taken to do so and that it would add too much time to a game and eventually slow the football match down too much. Why ? why would it slow it down too much if you look at the decisions it should only be brought in for the majority of the time the players are arguing their case to a pressurised referee which delays his decisions as he has to take time to restore order and in rugby its estimated to add an extra 30 seconds per decision made so what would be the difference in the time taken?. If you put that into context of the whole game a fan may be in his seat for an extra 5 minutes a game if that game is a heated occasion needing many major decisions, is that really so long ?.There is also the option of each manager having three chances in a game to challenge a decision for example a player running through on goal and scores but the linesman puts his flag up late disallowing the goal , the manager of that team could then challenge the decision and if the video referees see it to be onside the goal would stand.

“The sub-plot is that referees want players, managers and club officials sanctioned much more toughly ”
Fraser Wishart
SPFA chief executive (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9230434.stm
This decision is one in the making and I believe one day these laws will all be involved in the game as the game looks to withhold its standing and credibility in the world market where decisions have to be accurate and fair.Football has such a responsibility financial wise as businesses that at times they cannot afford to have decisions go against them which shouldn’t have such as the famous “Goal that never was” for Neil Warnocks Crystal Palace, who scored in the corner of the goal only for the ball to canon back off of the inner posts, the referee gave a goal kick to Bristol City.I believe that the days of poor decisions like this are nearing an end and that technology does have a future part to play in Football and we should welcome it and not be threatened by it and hopefully we shall see a rise in respect for referees and officials because remember this, We wouldn’t have the beautiful game if it wasn’t for our loyal referees! and let’s be honest none of us want to see a recurrence of what happened in Scotland in 2010 where referees went on strike

“We have created a space for people to say referees should be treated differently,”said John McKendrick".(http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9230434.stm)
http://coachesunited.wordpress.com/

When tennis balls landed close to the lines at the recently completed Wimbledon tournament, a high-tech monitoring system was ready to review disputed calls.

When England’s Frank Lampard launched a ball that hit the crossbar and clearly bounced over the goal line against Germany in a Round of 16 match in the World Cup, the only sounds were the bleating of the ever-present vuvuzelas and howls of outrage over FIFA’s longstanding opposition to goal-line technology.

Paul Hawkins, the inventor of the Hawk-Eye system used at many tennis tournaments and cricket matches, posted an online open letter to Sepp Blatter, the FIFA president, making a renewed case for using Hawk-Eye in soccer — specifically on goal lines — to certify whether a ball has cleared the line.

“There are no sound technical reasons to say it won’t work,” Hawkins said in a telephone interview from London. Referring to Blatter, he added: “Anyone trying to make a decision about technology shouldn’t try to understand it; he just needs to know that it does work, not how. Leave that to the scientists.”

Hawkins said that his goal-line system had undergone successful testing for several years in England at the Fulham and Reading clubs. But any alteration to soccer’s rules must be approved by the International Football Association Board, which meets once a year and includes representatives from the four nations that comprise the United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales), as well as representatives from FIFA. Last year, the board decreed a cessation to all technology trials, including ones using a so-called smartball, one with a computer chip embedded. Instead, Michel Platini, the leader of UEFA, the sport’s governing body in Europe, approved the use of two additional officials behind the goal lines during last season’s Europa League tournament.

That appeared to be the most recent end to the technology discussion, until Lampard’s shot was judged not to have crossed the line. After days of criticism, Blatter said that he and FIFA would reconsider high-tech answers after a World Cup rife with embarrassing errors by referees.

“They are against technology because they claim it is a more pure sport, officiated by humans,” Hawkins said. “Mistakes are part of the allure of the game.”

He added: “There’s an argument that controversy is good for the game, that mistakes are part of it and that this incident proves the case. People say the 1966 final was good for the game because people are discussing it 40 years later. But no one discusses whether the Lampard incident was a goal or not. It has undermined the credibility of the event.”

According to the Hawk-Eye Innovations Ltd. Web site, the system uses an array of cameras that feed information to a bank of computers, which forward the data to a central computer that determines if the ball has crossed the goal line. Within 0.5 seconds, a signal is transmitted to the referee’s earpiece or wristwatch.

The Hawk-Eye system, which is used in all four Grand Slam tennis tournaments, will again be presented to the I.F.A.B. at its meeting later this month, Hawkins said. It could be tested at the 20 stadiums of the English Premier League, or another league, like Major League Soccer, but could probably not be implemented widely for another two or three years, with I.F.A.B. approval, Hawkins said.

“We’d be happy to do some trial cases, not rules of the game or something like that, but with an additional referee or technology,” Sunil Gulati, the president of the United States Soccer Federation, told reporters in South Africa after the England-Germany game.

0 thoughts on “Goal Line Technology Persuasive Essay

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *