Members Only |
| |
The
NSCAA |
| |
Educating
Coaches |
| |
Coaching Courses |
| |
Awards, Rankings and Results |
| |
Communities |
| |
Membership |
| |
Contact |
|
 |
|
| Technologically Challenged (November 2005) |
By Jay Martin
A few years ago Paul Gardner wrote an article for Soccer America talking about the growth of soccer in the United States. He stated that the poor officiating in this country was holding back the growth of soccer. Simply put, as the sport grew, officiating was not keeping up. He may have been right.
The game of soccer and everything associated with it – equipment, facilities, medical treatment etc. – is moving forward. The technological advance in equipment alone in the last 10 years is amazing. Look at how the simple shin pad has changed to be more efficient. Shin pads offer better protection and are lighter than shin pads of years past. Why is officiating still behind? Why have soccer officials (and federations) refused to embrace technology?
Most American sports have moved to using technology to assist officials in games. And, the key word here is assist officials in games, not challenge officials. The NFL and NBA are leaders in this technological (video technology) revolution. The outcome of a game may depend upon a video replay and the officials’ interpretation of that video replay. Tennis is using micro chips (embedded technology) to assist linesman in calling balls in or out. Even the rugby and cricket associations are using technology to assist officials. Why not soccer?
Change is hard. And change in soccer has been extremely slow. The game is very similar to the game played in the 1860s. There have been some rules changes and some changes in the field markings, but not many. A crucial (wrong) decision in soccer can cost a federation millions in income. A wrong decision in the World Cup finals can ruin four years of preparation for the athletes and coaches and may cost a coach his job.
The magazine of the FA, Insight (spring/summer 2005) in an article written by Jim Lawler, asked the question “How can we support the referee, using technology, without damaging the fundamentals of the game?” This is a good question and one worth asking all people associated with soccer.
Opponents of the changes have many reasons not to make the change. First and foremost is that for most people, change is hard. Secondly, why change? This is the way we have always done it! If it was good enough for Sir Matt, it is good enough for Sir Alex! Lawler and Insight go on to add that opponents believe that technology will do the following:
• Will remove the human factor
• Tinker with the fundamentals of the game
• It will only exist for the elite clubs and in major competitions
• Will cost a lot
• Might not offer a clear answer
• Will introduce delays and breaks into the game.
These sound very much like the reasons opponents of technology in the NFL used before technology was adopted. But technology works in the NFL and very well. There are two types of technology worth discussing. The first type is video technology, which is used in the NFL and NBA. The second is “embedded” technology, which is used in tennis. To satisfy soccer purists and eventually be accepted, Insight suggests that technology must have the following advantages:
• It must be embedded and unseen by fans, players and coaches
• It must be 100 percent reliable
• It must not change the fundamentals of the game.
Video technology already is widely used in America and abroad. Most professional games have a multitude of cameras at different angles that cover all important areas of the field (i.e. goalmouth, sideline etc.) and, video cameras are used extensively in post game analysis by the team and by television analysts. But video does have a few problems:
• It is expensive
• Will it be available for all teams at all levels to use?
• Is it totally failsafe?
• Who would be the video judge?
Embedded technology may be a better answer, but it is very new and there must be more experimentation. Embedded technology was introduced to the International Football Association Board in Cardiff in February 2005. Embedded technology has many advantages:
• It provides instant feedback
• It is 100 percent error free
• It is not obvious to any participants
• It does not change the game’s fundamentals
• There will be no time delays.
But embedded technology – primarily in soccer ball -- is not without problems. Insight provides a list of potential problems:
• It is costly and still in the developmental stage
• It would be available only to the best teams and leagues
• It would require rigorous testing to gain confidence by all involved
• The feedback to the officials would have to be instantaneous
• It must be used by all ball manufacturers to allow global use.
After the technology has been refined, the question of implementation would have to be addressed. When would it be used? Who would be involved in the request? How would it be addressed? And how many times would it be used in a game? Officials make close to 200 decisions in a 90-minute game. How, why, when and where would technology be used? And when would video technology be used (i.e. offside) as opposed to embedded technology (i.e. the ball crossing the goal line)? Some decisions are very complex and require the official to take many factors into consideration (video?) while some decisions are less complex (embedded?).
So where do we go from here. Lawler suggests that before technology is embraced, a number of factors must be considered:
• The officials must have input into the final product
• All soccer constituents must be convinced of the value and benefit
• There must be an incremental approach to adding any technology
• Technology must be viewed as support for officials, not as a challenge
• There must be careful design and research for any technology
• Technology must be incorporated in officials’ training.
Insight concludes that technology will improve the game and offer a great deal of support to officials who are taking a great deal of abuse from fans, coaches and players. Technology will give coaches and managers confidence that some crucial calls will be 100 percent accurate. But the challenge is to add technology and not change the game.
Has the NFL game changed with added technology? The NBA? Maybe. But crucial decisions are now accurate in both those leagues. Some change in the game of soccer may be inevitable, but a change for the better is necessary. Now.
|
|
| The Technical Area, NSCAA eNewsletter |
|
|
|
 |
| Soccer Journal - Published seven times a year in print and once annually online, Soccer Journal is the Official Publication of NSCAA and is one of the few publications in the world produced exclusively for soccer coaches. learn more |
| Insurance - Members in the United States automatically receive $1 million in professional liability insurance, providing coverage for most soccer-related activities. learn more |
| Academy Programs - The benchmark of soccer coaching education is the NSCAA Coaching Academy program. learn more |
| Convention - The NSCAA Convention is "The World's Largest Annual Gathering of Soccer Coaches." Held each January learn more |
| Awards and Recognition - The NSCAA administers an outstanding awards and recognition program which includes Coach of the Year, All-America, long-term service and special recognition awards, designed to recognize excellence in soccer, academics and service to the game. learn more |
| Licensed Apparel - A full line of distinctive coaching gear sets you apart as a member of the NSCAA through our licensed apparel program with adidas. learn more |
| For more details, please proceed to the Benefits of NSCAA Membership Page |
|
|
|
|
