Now THAT is a soccer ball.

They need to go back to these ones.

This ball is 440g. I'm getting tired of having to delete references to it being 'lightweight' or 'superlight' in the stories off the wires. It's about as heavy as a ball can be to stay within the stated tolerances of FIFA.

It's not the weight that's the issue, it's just aerodynamics and the effect of altitude.

And the same debate seems to come round Every. Fricking. Tournament...

Apart from the marketing potential, I really don't understand why they need to spring a new ball on players at the start of every WC. Just use one they're used to and paint it a different WC colour. Or something.

I think the 02 Ball copped a lot of heat too. Pretty much outfielders wanted to keep it along the ground for fear of it ballooning off, but that was mainly to do with shooting not passing and crossing which is what is happeneing here.

Unlike previous World Cup balls this one seems to be under fire from outfield players as well as goalies, I know us and the Danes arent the best passers of the ball going around but some of the stuff was pretty ugly the other night.

given the complaints are coming more from the goalies, i'd say its designed to more to increase scoring rates. but i remember the ball flying in Mexico 86 with some cracking long distance goals, so maybe it is the altitude.

Did it ever occur to this bloke to actually design a ball with properties to minimise the altitude effect....????

So is it time to go back to the old Telstar design? Mmmm maybe not

As far as the weight of the ball, laws of the game, Law 2 states the ball is not more than 450g and not less than 410g. Surely the official world cup ball would fall within this range and the players should be able to deal with this, even if it is potentially 10% different to what they use week in week out. At least it is the same for everyone.

The ball has to meet FIFA Specs for weight, roundness, water absorbtion etc, which this does, so its not 'physically' too light as such. the fact it is so perfectly round compared to hand-stitched balls may be a factor in stability in flight (like the teamgeist), but one would think the floatiness is altitude related.

The SBS world game site has a video of the testing of it if anyone cares...

My jabulani floats similar to my teamgeist. I think the altitude is the main reason for the negativity.

Your theory is actually spot on, marty. Though I refuse to believe that the boffins at Adidas didn't consider this. Forgetting basic physics when you've spent tens of millions of dollars developing a ball would be extremely amusing. The 'Gripngrove' aka 'texturing' of the surface of the ball to us less savvy, may not be sufficient displacement in additional surface area to make the ball stable in flight.

Maybe...

What happens when you hit a ping pong ball as hard as you can? It floats and curves in the air - it's unstable because it is so smooth. A cricket ball and a baseball are stable because of the stitching - friction with the air creating differences in air pressure in the ball's wake. A golf ball is stable because of it's dimples creating differences in air pressure. I think something similar is happening with the Jabulani. The new heat bonding of moulds and lighter material has probably meant there is less friction in the air, thus less stability. The high altitude matches just reveal this problem due to thinner atmosphere, whereas the issue is masked more at sea level. With more traditional balls the small grooves where the stitching is helps stabilise the ball in flight.

EDIT: I see in wiki that the ball is textured with small grooves for 'improved aerodynamics'.... well it doesn't seem that way.

Edited by martyB: 3/6/2010 04:03:06 AM

Edited by martyB: 3/6/2010 04:22:40 AM

Each time they criticise the ball for being too light. Can it really be getting noticably lighter and lighter each time and still actually have any kind of physical mass at all?

what ball did they play with at the confederations cup last year? I guess there would be more "weight" behind the ball if you saw the African teams start complaining loudly too. As far as I know some of the Brazilians don't like it that much either and they have to play some qualifiers at altitude too.

how much more of an affect does this ball have over previous balls such as the teamgeist from 06 (which i personally think has a better design than the jabulani) and fevernova from 02. Both teamgeist and fevernova were criticised for being too light but it seems more prominent this time around??

Are the intended aerodynamic improvements and roundness of the ball really playing that much havoc at altitude or is it just the initial shock - I think it could be more the latter since there's always going to be criticism but hey we dont want our goalies to be fumbling all over the place and kicking it out unless thats germany, ghana and serbia lol

I still want to know how the balls are getting more round. How does a ball become MORE of a ball? ](*,)

One would think that any ball succeptable to altitude is going to be an issue generally. Altitude only exacerbates the problem.

the ball was running away from the wingers in the denmark vs australia game, schwarzzer was unusually kicking the ball out of play in clearances etc and it all looked in replays to be due to the ball floating through the air and changing course. i think the description of it being a beach ball is quite right.

I like the ball but some of the concerns carry weight...


What do you think about the FourFourTwo article Designer Defends World Cup Ball?
THE MAN behind the World Cup ball today defended it against mounting criticism as more and more nations and players line up o pour scorn on his design.

Have your say.