Debate has raged in football circles since the goal line debacle in the Geelong-Collingwood clash on Saturday, where Shannon Byrnes was clearly shown by video replays releasing the ball before the goal line meaning a six-pointer ought have been awarded.

This comes hot on the heels of an abominable and, as it turned out, a far more critical mistake in the recent FIFA World Cup, where England was denied a Frank Lampard game changing half-time equalizer against bitter rivals Germany. It was to be the last gasp in trying to turn around a forgettable World Cup for the mother country.

Many sports grapple with the conundrum that is the integration of technology. Cricket has made some but, for many, not enough strides in the use of Hawkeye, while rugby has certainly embraced technology in the awarding of tries.

Tennis, it has to be said, was somewhat reluctant to sign up to line calling technology. As far back as 1998, tournament officials at the Hopman Cup (including, I must confess, yours truly) were becoming frustrated with traditional line calling, and Tennis Electronic Lines (TEL) replaced lines people at the 1999 Hopman Cup. This dalliance with technology was short lived, brought unstuck by an antique metal racquet used by Frenchman Cedric Pioline. His racquet was inadvertently and repeatedly "tricking" the TEL machines into making out calls, so the experiment was stopped and the lines people returned.

Mark two for tennis technology would take another six years, and it was Hawkeye, which made its international debut to elite players (not coincidentally, I suppose!) again at the Hopman Cup in January 2006. Under the watchful eye of the ITF, the ATP and the WTA, it performed brilliantly and was ushered in that same year at various Tour events and at the US Open, with the Australian Open soon to follow.

If there's one thing technology can do and do well is deliberate on contentious line calls, both accurately and quickly. But is it quick enough for the AFL and for soccer?

Tennis is not continuous given there is 25 seconds between points, certainly enough time for a line call "review". The same can be said in cricket, where there's enough time between balls. And similarly in rugby after a try is scored.

Australian Rules prides itself on being continuous, but there are stoppages, and certainly after a score occurs. True, the rules now allow virtually immediate play-on after a minor score, but nevertheless, there is a break in play, certainly enough time for a goal umpire or field umpire to call for the replay if in any doubt whatsoever. It would bring certainty and integrity to scoring which should be sacrosanct, and in all likelihood, would rarely need to be used.

On the contrary, it is far more problematic to introduce in soccer as there is not a break in play if a goal is not awarded as, by definition, the ball has been deemed not to have crossed the line and therefore is still in play (as in the Lampard example). At what point would you stop play to review the call? A further goal may already have been scored (by either team!) before there's a natural break in play.

So, in that sense, based on the experience in other sports, I believe there's a compelling case for goal line technology to be introduced into AFL, but I understand FIFA's reticence to do so in soccer.

Let's hope the next AFL pre-season ushers in a new era, before a real game changer kicks in.