Game set to embrace the idea of forensic evidence at last

The Azerbaijani linesman who helped Geoff Hurst win the World Cup would have remained in obscurity; Chesterfield, not Middlesbrough, would have been in the 1997 FA Cup final; Pedro Mendes would have scored the only goal at Old Trafford two years ago, enabling Tottenham to finish eighth instead of ninth. Furious debate about whether the ball had crossed the line in those three instances, and many others down the years, could have been resolved in seconds had the Hawk-Eye system used in tennis been available at the time.

Backed by funding from the Premier League for development and research, it is now all but ready for football. The International Football Association Board agreed at their meeting in Manchester to further experimentation, likely to take place in reserve games at a Premier League ground next season. If successful, all Premiership matches could be benefiting within another year or two.

But those who want a video referee in the stand to adjudicate on everything from goals to disputed throw-ins will wait a lot longer. Trials were sanctioned on the strict condition they will apply only to goalline decisions and that there must be an instant signal as to whether the ball has crossed the line.

An alternative system using a microchip in the ball was tried unsuccessfully at the World Under-17 Championships two years ago. Hawk-Eye, brainchild of Paul Hawkins, a 32-year-old former Buckinghamshire cricketer, will use four cameras positioned around each goal. As long as 25 per cent of the ball is visible to one of the cameras, computers automatically send a signal to the referee (via an earpiece or watch) within three seconds. Unlike tennis, there will even be a photograph available to show to disgruntled managers.

The Ifab's other stipulation was that the system must be 100 per cent accurate, which is why Hawkins, confident as he is, does not want to rush things. "The system also took a long time to develop in tennis," he says. "It only has one chance. Fifteen years ago there was a system in tennis which actually worked in a large number of cases, but didn't always work. You've gone for so many years in football without it that it's vital to make sure that when it comes in, it's always right. If it goes wrong it puts the process back a long, long time."

Trials have been taking place at Fulham's ground and for once there seems to be agreement among the football authorities about the need for change. Even referees worried about their authority being undermined are coming round to the idea of goalline technology, which is wholeheartedly supported by Keith Hackett, manager of England's full-time referees, and FA chief executive Brian Barwick.

Cost is estimated at £50,000 per year for each ground and it would be up to individual leagues to decide whether clubs could afford it; tennis actually makes money from the system by having it sponsored. One of the arguments against video technology has been that it would be impractical at many levels of the game, down to park football, but Mike Foster of the Premier League argues: "We can't go at the pace of the slowest. I think Fifa themselves have already come away from that. But we're very keen that in our competition there would be a level playing field and that every game would feature it."

How soon might that happen? "2008 might be a tad optimistic," Foster says. "Hopefully this summer we can prove to everybody that the system meets the criteria and then go into live testing. One of our clubs that plays reserve games at its main stadium would be ideal. Once we reach a certain point, Fifa will want to test it in one of their competitions." Patience will still be required, as statistics suggest that there is a goalline dispute only once every 30 games.

Hawkins is nevertheless adamant about the moral and philosophical justification: "We respect our police a little bit more now they use forensic evidence. We're the equivalent of forensic scientists." Sir Geoff Hurst, of course, might prefer a bobby on a bicycle with dodgy eyesight.