Goal-line technology – the debate continues

Article by Ed Hewings

past two weeks has seen two very prominent examples of the impact goal line technology hasn’t had.

On Friday 18^th October, Bayer Leverkusen paid a visit to the Rhein-Neckar Arena to play Hoffenheim in the Bundesliga. As I am sure everyone has now seen either on YouTube or via various sports news bulletins, Stefan Kießling scored a phantom goal – as the ball was swung over from a corner in the 70^th minute, he got above his marker and headed the ball towards goal. It went wide and into the side netting, yet ended up in the back of the net via a hole in the corner of the net. To the disbelief of everyone in the stadium, the referee gave a goal to Leverkusen – he has since explained that his view was obstructed and after consulting with his linesman (on the other side of the pitch and the wrong side of the goal) confirmed the score. For some unknown reason he did not think to consider the reactions of both sets of players – Leverkusen were not celebrating, and neither were Hoffenheim in the depths of despair. Even Kießling turned away in disappointment – he had not seen the ball end up in the back of the net having seen his header drift wide. Of course, this raises the questions of German refereeing standards and of course sportsmanship on the part of Kießling, but those are debates for another day.

The score when the phantom goal ‘went in’ was 1-0 to Leverkusen. Of course, there are many ifs and buts, but had the incident been correctly dealt with, then the match may have had a completely different outcome. The ‘goal’ turned out to be the winning one. One feels that had it not been given, Hoffenheim would have gone into the last 20minutes 1-0 down, beginning to pressure as the home side – who knows what effect the decision will have on their season.

There was talk of the game being replayed as a similar incident occurred in the Bayern Munich vs Nuremberg game a few years back – the game finished 2-1 to Bayern thanks to a phantom goal, and the DFL ordered that the game be replayed in the interests of sportsmanship. Bayern won the replay 5-0, but that is beside the point. It set a precedent, and that has almost been completely ignored this time around – it is understood that both clubs wanted the game replayed, yet the DFL panel in charge of such decisions decided it was not the correct thing to do – Hoffenheim are understood to be challenging the decision.

I, for one, found it surprising upon hearing of this incident that the German FA had not taken up the goal line technology options available to them (considering the system planned for use at the World Cup is manufactured by a German company, this is even more bizarre), as has been done so by the English Premier League. Yes, there has been little to no use of the system, but it is there as a safety net to reduce errors and remove any doubt in such previously controversial decisions. It can not be a question of money either, as the Bundesliga is one of the most watched leagues in the world and the television revenues would easily cover the installation of such a system.

In an interview with a Frankfurter newspaper, DFL general manager Andreas Rettig has confirmed that this is down to a lack of quality with the existing systems – it appears that the DFL will wait whilst a more accurate system is developed and is ready for installation. Who knows how many more ‘goals’ will go in and how many calls they will have to resist before making the call to bring the system in?

At the other end of the spectrum, we have a goal scored in the English Championship on Monday which was not given as a goal. In injury time at the end of the first hald, with Watford leading 1-0, Forestieri, the Hornets striker, broke through the Brighton defence and chipped past the onrushing Tomas Kuszczak – Gordon Greer, like any good defender was covering round the back yet slipped after controlling the ball and cleared the ball from behind the line. The goal was not given.

Yes, this instance upon viewing is not quite as clearcut as the Leverkusen one, but it’s completely different. Yet it still raises the same question.

If the goal had been given, as it should have been despite all the ‘in real time’ quotes you hear, Watford go into half time having just scored and being 2-0 up. The second half is completely different and Watford probably come away with a win. However, Brighton, urged on by the sense that they have been granted a gift, storm out into the second half and equalise 9 minutes in. Completely different game.

As Watford boss Gianfranco Zola remarked afterwards, if that results in Watford missing out on a place in the holy land of the Premier League, then that is a potential £100m windfall that the club has lost out on. Big money for such a club. It is likely that a great deal of other goals in other games will decide Watford’s season, but this is something that Zola may come back to in May should they finish 3^rd and have to settle for a place in the lottery of the playoffs.

The ‘money’ argument prevalent in the argument for the Bundesliga having the technology does not really apply here. Yes, the Championship attracts a lot of viewers, but the financial disparity across the league prevents such technology becoming a reality at that level. Think of Nottingham Forest for example, a massive club with Qatari investors, and compare them to newly promoted Yeovil. It is unreasonable to expect clubs such as Yeovil, and many others considering the nature of the Championship being one of ‘anyone can win it and anyone can go down’, to fork out on the expense where they may only be in the division for 10months.

One thing is sure though. This (and other techno solutions) will not go away anytime soon, and so it is time to get systems in place to make sure they are in common use across the footballing globe to ensure continuity in our great game.

© e-Football 2013 All rights reserved no part of this document or this website may be reproduced without consent of e-Football