
And you thought a ball was just a ball? From the iconic 32 panel black and white Telstar introduced in Mexico City in 1970 to the latest unveiled today for South Africa, the goal for Adidas, naturally, has always been to build a better ball. Soccer players want a ball that feels good on the foot and flies predictably no matter where on the ball it’s struck. Teamgeist achieved its improvements by reducing the number of panels from 32 to just 12, by thermally bonding the panels thereby eliminating inaccurate stitching and by forming the outer panels in 3-D versus making them flat and bending them into shape.

While Adidas would not provide numerical flight data, it claims that robotic kicking and wind tunnel testing at Loughborough University in England and at its own football lab in Germany show that Jabulani is its most accurate ball. To be sanctioned FIFA Approved, a ball is only subject to a handful of more static tests, which the Jabulani ball obviously meets.
• Circumference: FIFA Standard: 68.5-69.5cm, Jabulani: 69.0 +/- 0.2
• Roundness: Diameter is measured in 16 different locations. FIFA Standard: max 1.5% difference, Jabulani: max 1.0% difference
• Water Absorption: A ball is pressed and rotated in water 250 times: FIFA Standard: max 10% weight increase. Jabulani: 0% weight increase
• Weight: FIFA standard: 420-445 grams, Jabulani: 440 +/- 0.2 grams
• Uniform Rebound: The only dynamic FIFA test, the ball is dropped ten times onto a steel plate from a two meter height. The difference from the lowest to the highest bounce can be no more than 10 cm. Jabulani bounced in a range from 143 to 149 cm.
• Loss of Pressure: Air pressure measured three days after inflation. FIFA Standard: 20% max loss, Jabulani: 10% max loss
For a unique look into complex manufacturing steps to create the ball, see the video below.
Five amazing, clean technologies that will set us free, in this month's energy-focused issue. Also: how to build a better bomb detector, the robotic toys that are raising your children, a human catapult, the world's smallest arcade, and much more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor: Rose Pastore | Email
Contributing Writers:
Rebecca Boyle | Email
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email
Well, with high-tech swimming suits being banned, these soccer balls will follow the same faith.
Any thoughts on the apparent inversely proportional relationship between amount of scientific pre-sell about accuracy of new balls and the actual accuracy/"trueness in the games?
You mention yourself the knuckling poor goalies had to put up with last time and I remember the accuracy fanfare before the release of that ball too.
Can the robot legs and mechanical testing replicate the ranges of spin, swerve, power, differing impact locations etc. that happen in a real game? Or are we going to be watching freak goals from 40 yards that keepers would have saved with a normal ball?
Wow, I had no idea manufacturing a simple soccer ball was so complicated. How much do one of these cost? $500? Jeez. No wonder they can afford to pay Beckam like $80 mil for standing around and being injured all the time.
Back in my day we were happy to play socker in our Converse high tops and use the kid down the street for a ball.
Come to think of it, the little jerk was pretty hard to get in the goal.
The high-tech swimsuits gave individuals an advantage, the ball is used by both teams, so it shouldn't be illegal to use.