FOR any English or German football fan, the words “Russian linesman” need no further qualification. They are shorthand for the day in 1966 that the English got one over on their big rivals to become world champions. Both sets of fans can easily conjure the grainy, black and white scene. First, Geoff Hurst swivels to smash a shot against the underside of the bar. Then the realities momentarily diverge. If you are German, the ball bounces up off the goal line before being cleared. If you are English, and right, it bounces behind the line before spinning back into play. An eternity then follows as the referee consults the “Russian linesman” (whom, despite his moniker, everyone can tell you was actually Azerbaijani), and the goal is awarded. Cue half a century of bickering.
Most teams will have a similar moment of despair. Germany felt vindicated in the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, after a clear Frank Lampard goal was denied during the quarter-finals. Tottenham fans still grumble about Pedro Mendes’s disallowed goal in 2005 that denied them their first win at Manchester United for 16 years. They were robbed again in this year’s FA Cup final against Chelsea, when Juan Mata scored a ghost goal. Crystal Palace have found themselves on the wrong end of myopic officials on more than one occasion. Perhaps Watford fans can consider themselves the most hard done by, after Reading were awarded “the goal that never was”—when the ball had in fact been kicked out for a goal kick.
The list is endless. Virtually every club on every continent has a story to tell. But such controversies look to be a thing of the past after FIFA, the game’s governing body, at last gave the go-ahead for trials of two goal-line technologies. These could be introduced as early as the turn of the year in the English Premier League. The first system is Hawk-Eye, which is owned by Sony and is already familiar to fans of tennis and cricket. It uses cameras to track the path of the ball. The second, GoalRef, a German invention, uses a sensor in the ball and in the goal posts to see if it has crossed.
The introduction is a victory for Sepp Blatter, the head of FIFA, football’s global governing body. At first sceptical, he was won round to the idea after the Frank Lampard debacle. But it is a blow for Michel Platini, the president of UEFA, which administers the European game. Mr Platini, who covets Mr Blatter’s job, has argued that human fallibility should be accepted as part of the game, and has put his faith in having extra officials positioned behind the goals. They were introduced in the recent European Championships. But Mr Platini was made to look foolish when one of them missed it when the ball crossed the line in Ukraine’s crucial match against England.
All of these mistakes, coupled with technology which is now viable, has made the introduction inevitable. But some worry that, now the game has crossed its technological Rubicon, the call for more intrusive hi-tech rulings will become irresistible, such as video replays to decide penalties or offsides. This might make play too stop-start. One of the reasons that football is so popular is that it is so free-flowing. The game would do well not to forget this.
And the irony is, had technology been used in Ukraine’s case, the wrong decision would have been made. Although the ball did cross the line, the assistant referee had already missed an obvious offside. The game is better for having such talking points. Perhaps there is hope yet for the 50-year grudge.