On my 'and son?
It’s one of the most hotly discussed topics amongst football fans, and sport fans in general and even more so since the World Cup. No, not whether football’s stars are a bunch of over-hyped, over-paid prima donnas, but whether the once beautiful game should ‘get with the program’ and embrace the wonders of modern technology.
Judging by the boos ringing around the Nelson Mandela Bay stadium whenever Uruguay’s Luis Suarez touched the ball against Germany, it’ll be a while before he’s forgiven. But whether one brands Suarez a cheat who deprived a courageous African team of their destiny, or a selfless soldier who sacrificed himself for the good of his team, the incident has raised an intriguing debate. The referee and FIFA dished out all the punishment allowed by the rules – a penalty to Ghana and a red card for Suarez followed by a one game ban – but the truth is that Suarez would do it all over again if he knew that the outcome would be beneficial to his team, and any other player or fan would do the same if it meant that their side would stay in the tournament – whether the perpetrator were to be banned for the next match or not.
Likewise, Henry’s handball against Ireland caused an equal amount of controversy and saw the player suitably punished. But a few million Irish hearts were still broken and the French still made it to South Africa. Would Henry say it was worth it? Well, perhaps not after the shambles at the World Cup but one month ago his answer would have been an unequivocal “Oui”.
These are the moments that have grabbed the headlines, but there are far more that have had a similar influence without the furor. Many players will “win” a penalty in questionable circumstances with the end result being exactly the same as in the cases of messrs Henry and Suarez. So is there a difference? Is diving for a penalty any better than stopping a certain goal with your hand? So maybe the ire aimed at individual players would be better focused on the culture of cheating that has developed within football.
How can this situation improve? Well the obvious answer is through video technology which is already used in sports such as tennis, cricket and rugby and where fans unanimously agree that such technology has improved their game. With the introduction of even the most simple replay technology Lampard’s goal would have been spotted in seconds, Henry’s handball would have been seen before he finished celebrating, a blind man would have seen that Maradona used his hand and history as we know it would be different.
The main argument against the use of video technology seems to be the amount of time it would take. If you think the same then Rugby League is an example that you would do well to pay close attention to. As a similar action-packed game, video replays have been available in live games for almost 15 years without a noticeable impact on the speed of the game and adding a new feature to games that fans would now be lost without. However, Rugby League does provide an answer to fans who think that video replays would resolve all cheating and poor 50/50 calls from the referee: it is not right all the time (mention the 1999 Grand Final next to a Bradford Bulls fan for confirmation).
So, video technology is better but not perfect. There will still be the debate about refereeing decisions that people seem to cherish so much – they just won’t be so crucial.
As for Suarez, just ask yourself one question: “If Asamoah Gyan had scored the penalty would there be any debate about rules, punishments or cheating?” Case closed.
