2014fwc_tsg_report_15082014_neutral

134Goal-line technologyMatch 10: France v. HondurasThe tournament phaseGLT was a resounding success at thetournament as it greatly assisted the matchofficials, particularly in three decisivesituations. In the first incident, duringthe group-stage match between Franceand Honduras, even TV images were notconclusive in showing whether it was a goalor not. In the second incident, which occurredduring the Italy v. Costa Rica match, the matchofficials’ view of where the ball had bouncedwas blocked by the Italian goalkeeper, whowas lying on the ground, and they weretherefore reliant upon the new technology.The third incident was in the Netherlandsv. Argentina semi-final, and once again thesystem indicated to the Turkish referee that nogoal had been scored after the ball span backtowards the goal after a penalty had beensaved. In seven further incidents, the systemconfirmed the referees’ decisions by means ofspecial GLT replays on TV (see table below).GLT replays on TVCamera angle 1: goal? (GLT camera)Camera angle 2: goal? (GLT camera)Match Team 1 Team 24 CHI AUS10 FRA HON17 BRA MEX23 URU ENG24 ITA CRC44 BIH IRN47 KOR BELCamera angle 3: goal? (TV camera)51 NED MEX53 FRA NGAAll 171 goals (including penalties) wererecorded by the system and displayed correctlyon the referees’ watches. Consequently, thereferees were very happy with the system’sperformance and with the assistance itprovided during matches.GLT confirms: goal