4 NEW TYPES OF GOAL LINE TECHNOLOGY COMING

Here on Footy-Boots.com, we’ve always held the Goal Line Technology in high regard.

So, when Sep Blatter revealed today that, FIFA were considering not just one – but four new types of Goal Line Technology we were immediately interested.

Blatter, who is in Singapore to open the men’s and women’s soccer tournaments for the Youth Olympic Games, has said that – as long as the technology is reliable – that he would be all for the use of goal line technology.

At this meeting (in October), we will bring the point of goalline technology,” Blatter told reporters. “It is now on the this agenda.

My personal opinion on goal technology has never changed, I have said if we have an accurate and simple system then we will implement but so far we have not had a simple, nor an accurate system.

The 74-year-old said that a number of groups would be able to present their solutions at the meeting.

The Cairos-Adidas system said they will have something more simple and the Italian group presented by the Italian FA said they now have a system which is absolutely accurate.

“We have the Hawk-Eye again and then a Swiss watch company Longines, they said we have something that will beat everything so in this meeting all of these people can come and present their different items.”

We know about the Cairos-Adidas Initiavite to use electronic sensors in the goal mouth and the ball, and Hawk-Eye is familiar to those who watch Tennis.

However, the Italian FA and Longines are completely new names to enter the fray, and we’re really excited to see what they bring to the table.

What would you like to see from these new systems? Motion Trackers in the goalposts & cross bar? An Appeal system?

Or are you not bothered as long as it doesn’t effect the flow of the game?

Let us know!


16 Comments

  • It’s really interesting that the Italian FA has been working on something.

    I mean, here in the UK the FA has been investing lots of money into Grassroots football, and that’s obviously a good thing.

    But Italy have put time and money into something that the whole World of football could benefit from – that’s a pretty noble move from the Italians. Forza Italia!

  • i love the way the Italians come and save the world but being as its Italian it will probably break but i still praise them for it and as long as this whole situation gets sorted out i don’t care what they use im just sick of stupid blind refs not seeing a clear goal.

  • Although technology and how it’s used is already established in other sports, let’s take lessons from them but come up with our own rules. I think the video ref should have the power to stop play, be a two way communication not just one way.

    In football we just need the ref to have more information to make a decision. How quickly the ref can have the information is the main talking point as the ref does decision on gut reaction. You never see a ref deliberating a decision, even a shocking one. It’s the pressure to make decisions quickly. The best games is where you don’t notice the ref.

    Let’s start off with the easy. Did the goal cross the line? Was there contact? Was it hand to ball? Did he/she get the ball first? Was is stopping a goal scoring opportunity? Answer these q’s quickly and accurately and the majority of game changing points are almost always correct. Pushing/shoving in corner’s. Let’s leave it as there too much whistle blowing on good hard tackles during the game anyway.

  • I don’t see why if the referees are already wearing headsets, that the solution is not just communication with a person whose job is solely to determine goals. Set up a camera or two that provide views of the goal and that can make it easily distinguishable whether or not the ball went in. Make it known to the players that with the new system it will take at most, 30 seconds to a minute for the right call and to just play on through any questionable goals. From there, play should still be uninterrupted (something FIFA want to keep in tact) and the match official can be notified by the “5th referee” watching the specific cameras whether it was a goal or not. If it is a goal he can just stop play where it is and award it, and if it is not, he can treat the situation like a substitution and at the next stoppage of play, take the time to inform both captains. Play won’t be interfered with unless a goal should be awarded, in which case no one should have any gripes because it is the right call, and by players being told that they can just play on without having to make claims for a goal, the continuation of play could result in a rebound being scored.

  • Misterbroom12, the biggest problem with that is, which actually happened in the masters cup final, not sure which, is when a questionable goal is scored, players stop to argue, the other team goes and scores, and the ref went over to see footage of the disallowed goal, and gave it. Does this mean we also chalk off the other goal aswell?
    Give rises to new problems.

  • we don’t need new goal line tech per say, I suggest that we use the camera that are placed around the goal and post them at different angles to see the ball. Plus referees should be able to review the plays.

  • i reckon if the manager thinks that the referee has made a poor decision then he can appeal up to three times, to change the decision using regular tv cameras like the state of the art quality of andy grays cameras

  • If Longines is going to present something, we can be sure it is going to work very well. They are part of the Swatch Group, that also owns Omega, the official time keeper of all Olympic Games (Summer & Winter) and creators of great innovations such as the touch pad for swimming pools and photo finish for races. I look forward to seeing their proporsal….

  • I think there should goal tech but kid of like hockey how they have the light and sound blaring. Except there would only be the lights on the side of the goal post were the sideline and the center ref could see it clearly so it wouldn’t comepletly stop the flow of the game

  • It’s been a while since I last commented so I’ll try to put some meat into this comment:
    Firstly we cannot judge yet, as we do not know what all of the technlogies are, but I will say that the ones we know about have advantages and disadvantages.
    Cairos-Adidas – Disadvantages- Have they considered the fact that a keeper may plant his foot behind the goal and this may trigger the sensor, it just seems like it will be inaccurate.
    – Advantages- Other than the above I can see no problems.
    – This technology is instant so we would not have to wait to find out if there is a goal.
    Hawk eye – Disadvantages- Either play must be stopped once the decision has been made or before it is made and the players must wait for the decision.
    – What if the ball is in the air?
    – Advantages- Technology has shown it can be successfully used in other sports and is Very accurate.

    ———————-Other Technologies——————————-

    Goal line official – Is instant, but humans aren’t perfect

    Video replay – Whilst it is near perfect, it takes a while, especially if you have to watch it frame by frame for close calls, also who decides with this and hawk eye, whether a replay should be inspected or not, it would be a big call to check if there were 30 seconds to go and the team that may have just conceded a goal was currently down 1-0, they would probably run out of time even if it wasn’t a goal.

    Microchip in ball – This would work well as it would be accurate, fast and could be used to tell if a ball went out of play as well.

    Referals to video replay or other technolgy, like in cricket: This could work if there was a limited number of referals allowed but some players might use it to waste time.

    ————–On FIFA—————————————————–
    FIFA need to decide what they want and get there story straight. First they look to put microchips in the balls, then they say they “don’t want to take the human element out of the game”, now they say that they are, and have been, looking for an option.
    Also I would hate for them to choose the Cairos-Adidas option just because Adidas sponsor FIFA
    ______________________________________________

    @Jose Luis – Yes, it will be interesting to hear what Longines suggest, but I must remind you that despite there track record many think their technology ISN’T foolproof. There has been controversy over whether the swimming touchpads are completely accurate, some saying that swimmers with a better, firmer ‘touch’ make the time stop earlier then those who have a ‘weaker touch’.
    Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see what they bring out.

    @MisterBroom12 – I see where you’re coming from but say within the 30 seconds it takes to find out if a goal has been scored the other team launches a counter attack and scores a goal.

    ___________________Other Technologies___________

    Offside – We’ve all seen it, a players scores a goal when he should be called offside. How about a technolgy to tell if team is offside.

    Post match reveiw – How about a board that sits down after a match and watches replays of incidents (e.g. red cards, yellow card, fouls the referee didn’t see, etc.) and decides how players should be punished. – i.e. No penalty, two game suspension, a fine.

    THE BOTTOM LINE_______________
    Whatever technology is introduced it must be quick (if not instant) and accurate (if not perfect).

  • The Belgian national team simply lacked talent during the past 8 years because of poor youth management in Belgium. Youth management used to be all about fysical qualities and teamplay. This will ring a bell in England. Youth management in Belgium now is all about technique and individual training at clubs like Standard Liège, Germinal Beerschot, Racing Genk, RSC Anderlecht,… Also a lot of the Belgian talents move abroad at young age now, joining clubs like PSV Eindhoven, Ajax Amsterdam, Lille OSC and Racing Lens.

  • the italians have submitted cameras within the goal post. a patent that has been owned by an englishman for the last twelve years. GOALMINDER the english patent was thought of twelve years ago by a fanatical football fan HARRY BARNES when seeing bolton go down because of a disputed goal in a match against everton. the GOALMINDER system shows actual video evidence within seconds to the official on the sidelines. the GOALMINDER system is simple. . Six fibre optic cameras within the crossbar, two within both the goal post. Because of the simplicity of the system the cost are minimal.GOALMINDER will be a fith of the cost of such systems as cairos chip in the ball which does not show actual evidence. its also been tested and failed. hawkeye again not actual evidence has been critisisced by top cricket players and the two top tennis players in the world Nadal and Federer have said it shoud.nt be used in tennis because its inacurate.GOALMINDER because of the cost could also be filltered down to the lower divisions. GOALMINDER has all ready been shown, tested, and approved of by Gordan Taylor, Garth Crooks and a number of other ex proffesional footballers. So let the italians try and copy an english patent that has been out for twelve years. GOALMINDER is simple to introduce, with actual evidence. Its affordable, and its ENGLISH. THANKS GEORGE. ex proffesional footballer.

  • This new CTRUS football looks amazing. The idea of the whole ball being transparent and that the ball lights up a different colour whenever a goal is score, or the ball is kicked out of play, or if there is an offside. And ther idea to make the ball change to team-colours to show that the goal has been scored will prevent confusion as to whether it is a goal or an offside goal. The perfect idea!!

Leave a Reply

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