Right on cue

Fifa chief expects goal-line technology approval in July

Warsaw: Fifa president Sepp Blatter revealed that he and Franz Beckenbauer are “on the same page” over goal-line technology after the two met in Zurich on Thursday.

The Swiss reiterated the need for technology to be introduced after Euro 2012 co-hosts Ukraine were denied a goal against England in their decisive Group D fixture on Tuesday, after television replays showed that the ball had crossed the line. ...

See the whole story here, courtesy of zeenews.

Kicking Back Comments: Like I said the other day, not a shocker given the recent events in the Euros. My question is ... will the technology even work?

Also of interest are some of the other matters Sepp & Co. are considering tinkering with. Interesting times as (IMHO) we see a swing away from the referee having the discretion and authority they once did.

5 Referees, and no goal

Just take a look:



Pretty clear to me ... and should have been for the AAR straddling the goal line, 7 yards away from the post, or even the AR streaking down the field.

Has Platini's experiment with (5) referees failed with this?

Does this seal the fate of goal line technology up for a vote in a couple of weeks?

Sepp tweeted to that effect saying that goal line technology was now a "necessity."

A good article from SF Gate, "England's Luck Changes as Euros Officials Miss Ukraine Goal" covers these angles and more.

Maybe it was luck ... maybe it was poor refereeing ... maybe it was mana from heaven where the "Soccer Gods" smiled on England for a change in this regard.

In any event, I think sadly, it made goal line technology a lock for future matches.

This is not news ...

Hat Tip to Madame X for this one.

She found this article, "Navigating injury: Can GPS help reduce player burnout?" from CNN.

I'll be honest, this was not real exciting to me as if footballers are just getting wind of this type of technology now, and ways to use it ... well, its just disappointing.

This type of technology has been around for a long, long, time.

Way back in the early 2000's I even worked at a company that did this type of work, Trakus. It is (now) a Wakefield Massachusetts based company that specializes in tracking for broadcast, near real time positioning of horses.

Back in the day, it did the same thing for hockey players and was used in the 2001 NHL All Star Game. A sample output of the technology is shown below.

Photo courtesy InterSystems

Without getting into the 1's and 0's of it, a player is tracked in real time, and that information is stored digitally and able to be regurgitated to get statistics such as distance, speed, acceleration, playing time, and so on.

Now, GPS and GPS type system (like the Trakus system above) have been around for a while, and recently with the advent of low and lower cost electronics have been made available to the "prosumer" (like me with my cycling stuff), and the consumer (like most of us with a GPS in their car).

The suggestion from the CNN article is a very simple, and very known one which is, if you track your effort, you will know how you should be training, and when you should be resting to avoid burnout, excess fatigue, and therefore injury.

Honestly, anyone who is really, really serious about training knows about periodicity and training, and may even track their efforts through a commercially available device, such as the Garmin 405CX that I have.

Heck for me I am even measuring power outputs on my bike during rides. This is hardly advanced stuff and is absolutely essential to me training. An example if how this looks can be found here.

This information can be really useful for match analysis as well. Take at look at "Stuck on the Diagonal" and "Just a High School Match?" from last October and you'll get a sense of just how powerful a tool it is.

If professional coaches are just getting wind of this type of stuff now, they are way behind the curve.

My sense is they have known about it for a while now as there are some really talented exercise physiologists working with teams. What I believe is that there will be great resistance to this on (2) fronts.

First, because it goes against "tradition" (whatever that is) the use of GPS systems will not be easily accepted.

Second, these devices will not be accepted because it puts data on the page that can significantly effect players salaries and transfer fees. As a result players unions and agents may fight to prevent such collection. Can you see the discussion, it goes something like this:

Team Management: Gee Becks, you want a 3 year deal? Let's take a look at your stats last year. Wow, you played in 25 matches and ran an average of 6.5 miles per match. That's down 13% from the previous year. Also, your average speed was down over 2 MPH as well. How about a 1 year deal?

You think I'm kidding.

Players, coaches, and referees are fired for their performance, and often times that is based on objective data such as how many wins, losses, goals, serious incidents, and so on. Imagine if there were a whole set of digitally collect stats for all of these folks? Can you imagine how these would be used?

Now, as we all know, soccer is much more than that. Even the best team on paper can produce horrible results. Just take a look at my poor Radio Shack Nissan Trek cycling team. On paper, the very best team in the world, hands down. In reality, they could not put a beach ball in the ocean if they were standing in the middle of the Atlantic, right now anyway. I am holding my breath for Le Tour however.

It's a piece of the puzzle, and one that can be really abused by those who choose to manipulate the data for their own devices ... as many do.

Head scarfs and goal line technology look to be in

IFAB approve goal-line technology and hijab

By Mike Collett

BAGSHOT, England (Reuters) – Goal-line technology was approved in principle by the soccer’s lawmakers on Saturday and could be used for the first time at FIFA’s Club World Cup finals in Japan at the end of the year.

The eight-man International Football Association Board said that the technologies of two companies, Hawk-Eye from Britain and GoalRef, a German-Danish company, would be subject to further tests until a final decision was taken at a special IFAB meeting in Kiev on July 2. ...

See the whole story here, from euronews.com.

Kicking Back Comments: I admit to being mixed. I believe the hijab is a "no brainer" and one that should have been done long ago. Goal line technology, not so much.

Assuming these systems work ... and that is a big IF. Hawk-Eye will need another referee probably in a booth somewhere to determine goal/no goal, and Goalref that uses a special ball and magnetism to determine if a ball has crossed the line - shades of the Fox glow puck. How oh how are the LOTG going to be adapted with a "time out" to check if that is the case or not? That part will be interesting.

My last remaining question, if we adopt the technology route is, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? For the first time "the machine" makes a mistake ... and it will eventually ... where does that leave us?

Another case for technology

I don't know folks ... take a peek before reading on.

The ball defiantly crossed the line, and should have been a goal. My issue comes with the JAR in this case. He is in pretty good position. Optimally he should be on the goal line as the 2nd to last defender (the GK in this case) is there. Last defender in this case is standing off the field, but as well all (should) know, a defender can not step off the end line to create an offside situation.

In this case folks ... I think it was just a blown call and completely distinct from the goal from 2010 between GER v. ENG that I described in Bye - Bye Uruguay where the AR had no chance to make the call when the ball crossed the goal line.

Here, the JAR did very clearly have that chance to make the right call, and I am sure without it, continued to stoke the fires of the need for goal line technology.

Casper the friendly goal scorer

Ghost Goals That Haunt Soccer
When Is a Goal Actually a Goal?; The Six Arguments Against Technological Progress

It's one of the great mysteries of soccer: In a sport where the objective is to score goals, why do we put up with needless uncertainty about whether the ball has actually crossed the line? Why doesn't soccer use the technological tools at its disposal to objectively determine whether the very raison d'être of the game has actually taken place?

Soccer has a long history of so-called ghost goals. These are situations in which the ball crosses the line and comes back out, but the officials fail to award the score. Usually this happens when it's cleared by the goalkeeper or a defender on or behind the line. Sometimes, a long-range shot will hit the underside of the bar, bounce straight down behind the line and then, heavy with backspin, carom out like a billiard shot. Occasionally the ball does not cross the line but the officials fail to notice and give the goal. ...

See the whole article here, courtesy of the WSJ.

Kicking Back Comments: An interesting opinion piece that in spots I share the opinion, spots is thoughtful, and spots is just technically incorrect. It is worth a read none the less. At the end of the day though, while I am a technologist, I am not an advocate for technology in this case. One point that I strongly agree with is that such incidents create drama (the author call it debate ... but that is too narrow for me). Drama is why many tolerate a 1 - 0 match, or a 0 - 0 draw. It is in the knowledge that something unexpected can occur, without the intervention of someone sitting in a glass booth somewhere. Let it be determined by those who "feel" the match, referee inclusive.

Let The Game be. Don't try and fix something that is just fine all by itself.

It's Baaaaaaack ...

... or maybe it never left.

Goal line technology has apparently had a busy week being put through its paces. FIFA spent part of last week looking at Hawk-Eye, already used in tennis and cricket. Up this week is Goalminder. Both are UK based companies.

What is interesting about these systems is they are both camera based. It would seem from the intel I have seen, and the direction FIFA seems to be going in, that the "sensor" based technologies are history, as from my sources who have used them, they are too flakey.

In the case of Goalminder you have cameras in both the goalposts and the goal line itself. It ain't cheap though as an install is in excess of $50,000 per goal.

While the systems are being tested in secret, it would sure seem that we are going to have goal line technology at least in a trial in the near future ... I hate to say.

Check out these articles that go into a little more detail about what our FIFA friends have been up to.

Fifa eyes football fans’ goal software from the Financial Times, and

Goal line technology back at top of the football agenda from the Football Trade Directory.

No power still ... and it will be a while ... but while we wait ...

Check out this post from JAFO: After the Batteries Die, because boy howdy, they are dead after 4 days without power =)

That's it !!??!!

So apparently FIFA is "giving in" and is set to adopt goal line technology for the 2012-2013 season as reported here by Guardian.

There were some funny things in this article:

Fifa has recognised the shortcomings of the previous testing environment and, in a tender document circulated on April 20, stated: "The tests will be conducted in two phases at a football stadium selected by the respective technology providers, in consultation with Fifa."

How were these tested previously? Not in a football stadium? The engineer in me is coming out and really wondering what happed here the first time around that somehow the testing would not be accurate?

This next line was hilarious.

To proceed to the second round, technologies must demonstrate a minimum of 90% accuracy in recognising whether both a static or a moving ball is across the line.

90%. That's it !!??!!

Frankly, what a joke. While I don't have a hard number, anecdotally if referees had a 10% margin for error on this stuff they would get in deep, deep trouble.

That is an outrageous and unacceptable number! For all the whining that has been done about referees missing crucial goal line calls, and the solution ...

We will get it right 9 out of every 10 times at least ... please.

Give me a live referee 10 out of 10 times.

After the batteries die

Ah, the good old days. I remember a time when soccer was played with the most minimal equipment. In fact, that is the primary reason for its world-wide success: you can play it anywhere with nothing but a small object that serves as a ball. It did not have to be a ball either, it could be something as simple as a ball of rags or small stone, or a stuffed leather pouch as was commonly used over two millennia ago in Asia when the game was taking shape. In medieval times they used a human head as the ball. No shoes; no shinguards: no problem!

OK, so maybe I do not personally remember using a human head as a ball, but I certainly remember the time before shinguards became mandatory. In my early days, I played goalkeeper without them, and even without gloves. The only item of "protective" gear I wore was a soft knit hat on my head, and that was to keep my ears from freezing in the cold weather. (Later, FIFA outlawed them because players were using them as a helmet of sorts, and playing too aggressively. I have to admit that I did take to wearing the hat on some very warm days too for that reason.)

Now things are different. We need equipment. And for the referees, we need even more equipment than the players! How could that be?! From the flipping coin to the final whistle, we are handling equipment that we can do without. If you truly are a student of the game's history, you may realize that none of this stuff was necessary in the beginning. Red and yellow cards were only developed a scant 50 years ago. Even the indispensible whistle has only been around for a little more than a century. How was it that this game was played for over 2000 years without a whistle!!

We are now entering the era of spray paint and the battery-operated device. Beepers flags and wireless radios are tools of any well-equipped professional referee, and no doubt coming to a field near you. Will goal-line lasers or balls embedded with micro-chips be far behind?

Is this a good thing for our game? Is it no longer possible for an officiating crew to manage a game without electronic tools to communicate with each other? And if this is such a good idea, should the players also wear them so they can also talk to each other and receive real-time instruction from their coaches?

Don't get me wrong - I think some of the new equipment is good for the game. Certainly the use of a standard sized air-filled sphere instead of a human head made for more accurate passing. As for most of the rest of the advancements since then, I am not so sure.

And when it comes to refereeing, I lament the encroachment of technology. It is a simple game, certainly we can manage it as such. Sure, there may be an occasional mistake by the refereeing crew, but isn't that a part of the game? Don't the players make mistakes too? Aren't humans flawed and don't we celebrate that? Isn't that why a game is played in the first place?

Instant replay?

Kicking Back Comments: Take a look at the story below ... it is actually pretty interesting. The first half rails about the FIFA presidential elections and how corrupt they are. Nothing new there folks.

The second part however has some quotes from various EPL coaches and a fan. What astounds me in reading these and doing further research on the topic, is there seems to be an idea that things will be made "right" by the use of replay and other technology.

Now, I have stated that I personally am not a fan of replay or goal line technology. Tools to help referees communicate batter (e.g. radios), you bet, I am a BIG fan of that. Anything beyond that puts us on the slippery slope however. I am failing to see however why the use of technology corrects all THE game's "wrongs" as seen by ... well just about everyone.

One analogy is in the NFL where review is used fairly sparingly. Are we really going to allow Sir Alex and his ilk to openly challenge a referee decision by (as the NFL does) tossing a red flag into the pitch? To what end? He will then argue THAT decision if it does not go his way, as he generally does today. Note further, this is for the "clear" incidents ... but as we know, THE game is generally a world of grey when it comes to Law 12.

Long story short, technology is a wonderful thing that can solve many problems as it has in general society and industry. Comments from the below article continue to solidify the though in me that the use of such technology to "assist" in adjudication of a match will cause more problems, and not solve the one it was intended to solve. A classic case of the law of unintended consequences.

Alan Green: Fifa will keep on stalling over video evidence

Late last week the President of the Asian Football Confederation, Mohammed Bin Hammam, announced that he’d be standing against Sepp Blatter in the Fifa elections on June 1. I wouldn’t get your hopes up.

For a start, he’s so much against the head of world football that he campaigned on Blatter’s behalf in the last two elections and, far from delivering a radical and detailed plan to re-design Fifa — an essential you’d think — and the sport as a whole, Bin Hammam’s announcement was couched only in vague promises. ...

See the complete story here, courtesy of the Belfast Telegraph.

Hold that line!

Law-makers set to continue goal-line testing

Soccer's law-making body is expected to approve more experiments with goal-line technology systems on Saturday, but there is still a long way to go before any hi-tech device helps a referee make a decision.

A year after goal-line technology was rejected by the International Football Association Board (IFAB), the item is back on the agenda following tests carried out at FIFA's headquarters in Zurich under the auspices of the Swiss-based technology research institute EMPA.

Although all 10 systems trialed failed FIFA's stringent tests last month, there has been a notable shift in the board's attitude towards using a hi-tech system. ...

See the whole story here, courtesy of Yahoo Sports.

Kicking Back Comments: *Yawn.* You mean to say that FIFA (IFAB) can't make a clear decision. Shocking. Now I have already gone on record as saying that I don't like the goal like technology idea as THE game is human ... however it would appear that technology is getting in the way of making this work. I say that both from reading the story, and also from a recently retired FIFA AR who saw the tech in action and stated that it just does not work well.

Man and Machine

Any fellow geeks or just pop culture followers have likely been watching the Man v. Machine battle on Jeopardy! with the "Jeopardy! Challenge." This is really fascinating stuff on a bunch of levels for me.

A brief video is below for those interested.



Well that got me thinking ... Not that long ago I ran across the Robo Cup, where technology meets soccer. A video from IEEE (which I am also a member of) is below for those interetsed.



I continue to be blown away by the technology curve we are on, and what is yet to come. Of course rumors that Sepp Blatter is creating a cyber division of FIFA must be false.

Take a peek, its worth the time.

Finally a traditionalist

The title of this great article says it all:

Michel Platini: 'The referee must decide, not a guy in front of a tv'

The Brian Viner Interview: The Uefa president hits out at Sepp Blatter's stance on goal-line technology, justifies the Financial Fair Play idea but says he is undecided over England's 2018 bid

The temperature in Switzerland took a dramatic dive earlier this week, causing almost as much consternation in the sleek, glass-and-steel headquarters of Uefa in Nyon on the shores of Lake Geneva as might a dramatic dive in a European final. On the morning I visit, a blanket of thick cloud hangs low over the lake, for which one Uefa functionary actually apologises. A day earlier, he says, it was positively warm, with vivid views of Mont Blanc. Now, all is grey, chilly, damp, inhospitable. My hope is that the mood of Uefa's illustrious president, Michel Platini, will not match the weather. ...

Fabulous article continues here, courtesy of The Independent.

True to his word

Back a few months ago, Sepp Blatter and IFAB were in discussions about goal line technology in an effort to assist referees with such incidents. I have to be honest, I did not think the effort would get as far as is currently being reported by several news outlets.

At this stage there is apparently an evaluation that will be launched into the 13 companies vying for an opportunity to be the official company to provide goal line technology for FIFA.

This is assuming that it gets that far ...

One aspect that needs consideration is that effect on the referees who have to use the technology. When I was on the way up we would be asked to evaluate new technologies from time to time such as various time keeping devices, uniforms, and communication devices such as the famous "beeper flags."

Interesting too as I saw this from not only the inside out as a referee with US Soccer, but also the outside in as my role as engineer with a company named Trakus, where we worked with the NHL refereeing ranks to test the feasibility of real time tracking of professional hockey games. Of particular concern to the engineering involved was to assure the technology was unobtrusive to the referee doing their job, and seamless in appearance.

I hope these 13 companies recognize this, and give the referees the voice to work with the engineers to better the product to make it both effective and invisible to those viewing. In my estimation, this will be the only way for such technology to succeed in FIFA's eyes.

New Poll @ Kicking Back - Instant Replay?

Vote early, vote often! You have until the final!