World Cup 2010: FIFA Ready To Discuss Goal Line Technology Once More?

At last, the discussion for goal line technology has re-opened.

After the calamity of the disallowed Lampard goal in the England-Germany game followed by the offside goal by Tevez in the Argentina-Mexico game something had to be done.

Football was in danger of turning into a mockery. How can the world's most famous sport continue with such catastrophic and simple errors?

Now FIFA's general secretary has proclaimed that the rules for refereeing will be different in four years time. Alterations will be seen in the 2014 World Cup in Brazil.

The aspect on everyone's minds is goal line technology. My support would go towards the use of Hawk Eye.

Hawk Eye, for those who don't know, is an initiative that has revolutionised the sport of tennis.

With multiple cameras positioned on a court the technology is used to determine balls that fall within or outside of the white lines.

In Wimbledon's main arenas players are given the opportunity to challenge calls made by the umpire and his staff. Essentially any wrongs are put right. Life-changing and history-making misjudgements can be reversed.

If successful the advantage is given to the tennis player. If not then they lose one of three challenges given per set.

For football it may not work in its current format.

You could imagine players questioning every single decision made throughout games. The amount of time spent actually playing could deteriorate.

Maybe this is why FIFA wanted to dismiss it up until now.

The good outweighs the bad, however. Yes, there may be some extra gaps in play. These can be accommodated with extra time.

This works if the referee enacts a staunch amount of control over close calls. Then it can be used effectively. The man in charge will remain in charge but with a vital aid.

One or two incidents during a match could be all that is needed. It is those rare moments that can cause major issues in the outcome of a match, a tournament or a league season. So they are of vital importance to the game's reputation.

What Hawk Eye would give is an accurate and near perfect perception of the game. It could reward those who portray brilliance on the pitch, and punish those who abuse the system.

Germany's goal keeper would have been shown up as a cheeky cheat in the aftermath of Lampard's blatant goal.

The fans may become more vocal on pitch, with the obligatory and tense anticipation of a hawk eye decision. The roars during the revelation would be exaggerated on a football pitch with the vastly larger number of spectators in a football ground in comparison to a tennis court.

There have been suggestions that two further linesmen could focus mainly on the goal line area. Yet this could still leave a failure to spot offside occurrences.

Another option is the introduction of Cairos Goal-line technology. By inserting a chip inside the football the idea is that the chip will afford us access to the position of the ball goal mouth situations.

Magnets surrounding the goal would allow us to see where the ball has landed.
This technology has already been used in the World Club Championships, but alongside Hawk Eye was rejected.

Now, though, with the embarrassment of Lampard's goal the inclusion of either method is a necessity.

Failure to recognise either system will be a major detriment to football's governing bodies.

Thankfully, the wheels look set in motion to introduce either into the sport. A new era could be upon us.

One that will bring the sport into the modern world.