Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Goal-line technology has moved a significant step closer after the International FA Board today agreed to re-examine the issue.
IFAB's business meeting in Wales ended with members - made up of FIFA and the four British home associations - agreeing to look again just seven months after the game's law-making body ruled it out.
A statement said: "The technology would apply solely to the goal line, and only to determine whether a goal has been scored or not.
"The system must be accurate; the indication of whether a goal has been scored must be immediate and automatically confirmed within one second; the indication of whether a goal has been scored will only be communicated to the match officials."
A deadline of the end of next month has been set for companies to make a first presentation of their technologies to FIFA.
A testing period will then take place with a number of companies to determine the accuracy of each system and this will be reported back to the IFAB annual general meeting on March 5.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments