June 27th, 2010
06:05 PM ET

Just give us the truth: Allow goal-line technology

Frank Lampard's shot clearly crosses the line but the officials do not award a goal. (Getty)
Frank Lampard's shot clearly crosses the line but the officials do not award a goal. (Getty)

The truth. We all seek it in life, and consequently, we all seek it in football as well. In life, it is difficult to get the truth. However, in football it should be easy. As easy as implementing a system that already exists.

Before arguing the various cases that could help implement justice and clarity to football, I will make one thing clear. England were not knocked out of the World Cup because Frank Lampard’s goal didn’t stand.

They lost because their defense was ripped to shreds by a Germany team who played them off the park. If the goal had counted, surely the result would have been more respectable, but the outcome would have been the same.

So, onto what I believe can be done to improve the beautiful game. Recently, I had the opportunity to speak with the head of world football's governing body – FIFA president Sepp Blatter – about various issues. One of them was goal-line technology. Blatter told me there were three reasons why it had not been implemented:

(i) The Adidas "Cairos" technology, which features a chip in the ball, is too expensive. It would take wiring the whole field of play in order to guarantee accuracy of the sensors. Furthermore, since Adidas is the only company that has this technology, it would only be available in the competitions that feature balls made by that brand.

(ii) The Hawkeye system - whereby cameras placed in key locations around the field of play combine to allow a three-dimensional recreation of the action and trajectory of any ball in motion - is not accurate enough. If the line of vision of the various cameras is blocked, then it doesn’t work.

(iii) Football should be the same from the top level to the grassroots level.

My reply then, as it is now, was that in a World Cup or a Champions League or another elite tournament, referees should have all the tools necessary to get every major decision right.

Let’s forget video technology for a moment because everyone at FIFA and UEFA is against it, but why not hold a meeting with all the ball manufacturers, work out a deal to share the Cairos technology and implement it in the tournaments and games where champions are crowned?

The poorer federations may not be able to afford it, but at least at the top level when there are billions of people watching, the truth would be known.

So what will transpire after this latest goal-line gaffe? I presume very little. What has happened is that FIFA has recommended all federations implement five match officials in every game.

This refereeing format has been tested in the Europa League and it could be a positive development in the game. Let’s hope so. I certainly do.

Posted by ,
Filed under:  Football
soundoff (209 Responses)
  1. Karl Lusbec

    Great article Pedro,
    Why is technology in a ball required when a replay the 4th ref would monitor would suffice? I agree with you that Lampard's goal would not have affected the final score, considering how good the Germans were, but we will never know for sure, and that is the point...the truth is missing.

    June 27, 2010 at 7:30 pm | Reply
  2. Maxin475

    Two games today ,:
    two huge referee 's mistakes ! In this day and age of hi-tech when everyone at home can have their own replay and see when a call is wrong, When 50,000 spectators in the stadium ,can see a wrong call on giant screens. it is a shame to see that the most popular sport in the world still refuses to follow the change in times.
    If those fossils at the head of FIFA don't allow challenges on determining plays the World Cup is doomed to failure. I have seen so many wrong calls this far that I'm no longer watching the game. I go online and check the results.

    June 27, 2010 at 9:43 pm | Reply
  3. Ted

    "Before arguing the various cases that could help implement justice and clarity to football, I will make one thing clear. England were not knocked out of the World Cup because Frank Lampard’s goal didn’t stand."

    As an Englishman, I am aware I may be accused of being biased but it is naive to say that Lampard's goal would not have changed anything. Yes our defence was terrible, and we would most likely have been ripped to shreds but who knows? Remember Istanbul 2005, Milan destroyed Liverpool in the first half to lead 3-0, yet were shell-shocked when Liverpool drew level. Similarly Germany may have folded; 1 minute 2-0 down the next 2-2. Instead they have a major reprieve and we get caught out on the counter while pushing for an equaliser. Such is football thought, and having said that we would never have deserved to win if I'm being honest. But we'll never know....

    June 27, 2010 at 9:51 pm | Reply
  4. Dean

    I think that it is ridiculous that FIFA has not instituted goal-line reviews. The replays come so fast for those watching it on TV, that there is no reason the 4th official cannot have an instant review and make the correct call. This has shown itself both in the England vs Germany match, and the Agentina vs Mexico match....

    It's about time to do the sport the justice of accuracy for game changing results.

    June 27, 2010 at 11:08 pm | Reply
  5. FootyMan

    This debate is an ongoing and it will never-ever get fixed.
    Pedro, this are some very interesting questions that you asked FIFA President, but if he is saying that it is too expensive, then why on earth is that when players transfers could reach up to millios of dollars. This just a ridiculus remark made my Mr. Blatter. If hawk eye is too expensive, then why not have a Vidoe Referee intead like how they do in Rugby Matches. Its an easy technology and all the got to do is to rewind the tapes, and project it to the Big Screen. Simple and effective.
    Its just the stubborness of FIFA that causes this ongoing issues to escalate and nothing been done even if they said they are doing something about it!!!.
    Human error is something we cannot stop, but we can always prevent it from happening again.!!!

    June 27, 2010 at 11:17 pm | Reply
  6. Mark

    here we go, some guy wanting to p*ss* a game he barely know. stick with your american football replays, and leave the FOOTBALL alone.

    June 27, 2010 at 11:20 pm | Reply
  7. Martin Helsingborg Sweden

    It's about time the sport got video refs. Enough with diving, faking, borderline bought refs and too grave an error such as this.

    Let it be about the sport, not who can pull one more on the ref.

    June 27, 2010 at 11:25 pm | Reply
  8. Robert

    FIFA should be run by Americans. They know how to find solution to
    to refree problems in sports. Look at american football instant replay. when they see a problem they fix it right a way .
    Current FIFA system can't not tackle this problem, same thing happens in every world cup.

    June 27, 2010 at 11:31 pm | Reply
  9. Richard

    Why not simply have refs specifically at the corners to keep an eye on the goals rather than have the assistant refs attempting to sprint up the lines as quickly as elite athletes? Sure, it still wouldn't be as accurate as a chip, but having dedicated refs for that purpose (a la the line judges in tennis) would add that extra set of eyes as well as be easily applied from the elite levels down to grassroots. Still not the iron clad system that folks (mainly Americans evidently) want, but an improvement that fits the purported FIFA "goals".

    June 27, 2010 at 11:33 pm | Reply
  10. Flavio Oliva

    The matter is that this man, the man that didn't give the world Cup to Italy in 2006, the man that has allowed patrick Vieira to deliver the Cup this year to the organizers, as if it was one of the winners, this man is still in that place........ What would you expect from him ?

    June 27, 2010 at 11:42 pm | Reply
  11. Rob

    The worlds most popular sporting event, is in the stone ages with regards to Technology and its board of directors. All you need is a video reply for the referee to check with, Goal or no Goal, this does not require brain surgery to figure, nor is it expensive....

    June 27, 2010 at 11:51 pm | Reply
  12. shaka

    On a side note, Manuel NEUER (the German goalie) clearly knew it was a goal. The replay shows based on the angle of his head watching the ball bounce beyond the line. Now this is no deliberate hand ball but has the same effect of robbing the other team a goal just like Henry's handball did. if Henry's integrity has to be questioned then certainly this is on the same plane and should be questioned at a minimum. Poor sportsmanship is certainly not good for any sport.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:12 am | Reply
  13. Beejoe

    Who told you the acceptance of the goal wouldn't have made any difference? Do you know that tactics and mindset of players could be altered at every development of a football match? The nullification of the goal by the referee apparently affected the England team. The referees should be checked.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:17 am | Reply
  14. WeMbLeY1966

    fact is that the german team was better and played much more beautiful
    best example was the bullseye shot between the legs of cole into the jackpot 4:1
    for me this was a great art of soccer and a real thriller to watch

    June 28, 2010 at 12:22 am | Reply
  15. WJA

    Even though there is fierce resistance to the technology available to take some doubt out of some decisions, I still cannot fully understand why. FIFA President Ballter has laid out three reasons why technology will not be implemented and I understand why he has done so but it still is a weak argument.

    I am a fan of all sports, in particular rugby, where video technology is implemented and used to make decisions on points scoring events. In rugby there is a TMO (Television Match Official) who is at times called upon to review replays and slow motion video to come to a decision if the referee on the field is unsighted or not sure. The TMO is available for most, if not all, top league and professional league games, especially World Cups, championships and international tournaments. This system is as simple as having one official sitting in a video booth somewhere in the stands ready with basic video playback technology. No special cameras or ball technology is required, just the cameras available at the ground.

    Football may have to rewrite or review a section of rules to accommodate such 'technology' to restart play if a no-goal decision has been made but it seems to be a lot more simpler and cheaper than Calros Technology or hawk-eye.

    The grassroots level may not get to benefit from TMO's but surely internationals and especially World Cup matches need such technology to keep the game beautiful and fair.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:23 am | Reply
  16. Javier

    If the goal had been validated,maybe it would have changed the outcome I think because England team's motivation would have increased and they could overcome the score.They would start controlling the game with 2 -2 score but it didn't happened and the goal was not validated and England attacked with no order and Germany counterattacked and finished their aspirations.Anyways I'm from Peru and I'm happy that teams from South America are showing off such a great performance ,which means that this region is very competitive.The funny thing is that this world cup looks like the American cup lol! I'd like a final between Brazil and Argentina.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:39 am | Reply
  17. Fabiano Galbiati

    I'm a football fan that like to see goal rather than a world-class-play done a mega star footballer, that inspires everyone too. The referees or the system use in the football games jeopardize my expectations of a good football game. It's very hard to see a beautiful finished done by Mr. Lampard became a last breath of, no I can't believe.... or an offside of Mr. Teves that frustrate the four year Mexican world cup's dreaming. Let's say that both things would not change the final results of these games but frankly, even to the professionals on the field, it felt like a cold rain in the middle of a great afternoon. But in the end, how frustrate can be that? I'm just a fan.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:42 am | Reply
  18. Siddharth

    The accurate technology excuse is quite baffling , just use the simple videos and challenging System (Say 3 or 1 ) .
    The main objective is to get bad decision out of game , also team usually protests it takes time , better bring in the challenges and the game will become fair.
    For the border line inconclusive videos , the original decision stands.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:50 am | Reply
  19. Wei-Jen Seah

    I respectfully disagree that the result would have been the same had England's equaliser counted anyway. Football is a game of so many what-ifs that to discount the significance of that equaliser would be a massive injustice to a great fightback from England in the first half.

    While it is undeniable that Germany hit England for 2 more in the second half, those goals really came as a courtesy of England having to abandon defence in search of the the equaliser which they were denied, and thus were much more vulnerable on the counter. Had the come out of half time at 2-2, we might have seen a more cautious (read: boring) England side, that might simply have looked to contain the Germans.

    Also, the technology is already almost there! Yesterday's video replay showed the ball crossing the line clear as day. While we wait for the powers that be to thrash out a Cairos system, why not allow referees simply to call for a time out to verify the legitimacy of a goal, or to give both coaches a "challenge" system a la Wimbledon?

    June 28, 2010 at 12:51 am | Reply
  20. alex

    blatter is full of it. why can't they use the same video feeds for replay that are used for television? his refusal of the hawkeye system is bogus. in american football the official's call stands when video evidence is inconclusive. but usually the video evidence is clear. proposal a. is just a ludicrous option that blatter "considered" in order to try to perpetuate the status quo. extra officials on the field are definitely a good idea. the notion that all levels of soccer must have exactly the same resources for enforcing rules is another ridiculous excuse for perpetuating the status quo.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:54 am | Reply
  21. oscar dickson merd

    clearly it was shameful decision by the referee which change the entire complexion of the game. A lot need to be done if we are to enjoy the game we love so much.. For me, i think referees are given too much authority on the field of play. South Africa 2010 has been characterized with so much evil officiating.For example, the opener in the match between France and Mexico which saw Mexico won by 2 goals to nothing. America's last goal which was disallowed in their 2-2 draw against Slovenia The second goal in the match between Brazil and Ivory coast by Fabiano was a clear hand ball. Argentine's first goal in their match against Mexico was an off-side goal. We need to clear the mess out of the game we love so much. God bless you all..

    June 28, 2010 at 12:57 am | Reply
  22. WTF

    Tiny cameras can be embedded into the goal posts at various places.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:04 am | Reply
  23. Tom

    There's a simpler solution: how about more competent referees?

    That referee should never be allowed to referee another game.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:04 am | Reply
  24. Carlos

    Well, yeah, but ... I don't know. I think I might just prefer the endless drama. You can bet that some English fans will complain about this goal for decades to come, claiming it would have totally changed the game would it have been given (totally ignoring the fact that they already had been outplayed when the game started level at 0:0).
    But I might settle for two "goal referees" on the lines. It's an improvement but also leaves a little room for erroneous decisions. As long as nobody gets shot ... it's just a game, after all. :)

    June 28, 2010 at 1:04 am | Reply
  25. Philip Gibson

    FIFA can't handle the truth!

    I don't know about chips in balls and wiring the field, but Blatters second justification for not allowing video technology is wrong. All the bad calls in the World Cup so far would have been sorted out easily and quickly using slow motion video replays; from the Kaka sending off, to Lampard's disallowed good goal, to Argentina's first goal that was clearly offside offside. Hundreds of millions of us watching on TV saw the truth clearly only seconds after the incidents. It's ridiculous not to let the officials have the same access to the truth as the TV audience.

    I don't blame the officials for the bad decisions – they can't be expected to see everything, even with a fifth official. I blame Sepp Blatter and FIFA for being blind to, or disinterested in, the truth about football games. Immediate video replays would add hugely to the excitement of the game as well as giving us the truth. I love to watch, with added tension, the Hawkeye slow motion replays in tennis. If that system had been in place years ago, we would all have been spared the horrible McEnroe histrionics.

    FIFA seem to drop the ball at every opportunity, and turn away from anything that can reveal the truth about football!

    They refused to fairly address the France v Ireland issue after Henry's handball, ignoring the fact that millions of us saw the truth on TV seconds after the incident; they didn't ask South Africans to leave their horrible horns at home so the true sound (roars, gasps, groans, applause and cheers) of the vast majority of the crowd could be heard; and they didn't agree to the use of limited appeals using slow motion video replays to definitively settle disputed referee decisions by quickly showing officials the true details of disputed incidents. .

    So why do FIFA consistently turn their backs on decisions that can show us the truth we all want?. Hopefully, there'll be a completely new and enlightened FIFA board by the time of the next World Cup.

    This FIFA board can't handle the truth!!!

    June 28, 2010 at 1:16 am | Reply
  26. Amit Kar

    Hi There,
    None of Sepp Blatter's reasons for denying us this improvment to the Global game hold any water. The first one can easily be worked out via a sensible commercial arrangement, as you said. In addition, we don't need Cairos around the whole field, only around the goal mouth. Similarily Hawkeye is only needed around the goal, and if it's good enough for tennis grand slams, it's good enough for football. (And let's not forget that top tennis matches are officiated by 5 to 7 individuals who only have to watch over 2 to 4 players and a quarter-acre of playing surface). And it is ridiculous to claim that football should be the same at every level when top flight players get paid millions, play in stadiums worth hundreds of millions, and for clubs worth billions, a situation with which Bloater, sorry, I mean Blatter, is clearly ok.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:42 am | Reply
  27. Ray

    There are actually two additional "officials" that we're forgetting - the goal tenders. In this game, the German goal tender clearly reached in past the line to get the ball and throw it out. Perhaps in the excitement of the game, he neglected to signal that there was a goal? Or worse...the system doesn't allow for him to do this? I don't believe he was being dishonest; the eyes of the world were on him...

    June 28, 2010 at 1:49 am | Reply
  28. koh

    when the english loses,everyone is at fault .
    lets face it,england did not just lose it was annihilated.
    the press has portrayed it to be invincible when in reality it's so vulnerable.
    find no excuse to justify its exit but recognise its sub-standard soccer and inferiority as exposed by the youthful Germans.
    you cannot win just by exaggerating and harping on something that you do not possess.... soccer talent.
    wayne rookie is not where near to be considered a talent.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:58 am | Reply
  29. Will SA

    Blatter must resign. Video technology to assist referees is essential. Millions are at stake and one wrong decision can swing a match. Captains should have the ability to go to a video referee twice each half for important incidents. This would only take as long as a corner or free-kick. This is the only way we can ensure the best team wins. Also introduce match review panels to pick any player simulating to stamp out this scourge.- Ban them for 3 matches.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:58 am | Reply
  30. Superhoops

    Pedro, excellent point although I'd have to say that if that goal had been allowed I'd suspect it would had an impact on the mental state of both teams, one full of confidence and youth, the other, lacking confidence but showing moments of flair.

    A young team might have panicked, having given away a 2 goal lead. It was a very open game but events like that can change a game. Don't forget Muller put Germany ahead 1-0 in 1966 and that pivotal goal by Hurst turned the game.

    Technology has a place in the modern game. Tennis and Cricket have embraced it and it has improved their game for the better.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:06 am | Reply
  31. Hopgins

    FIFA needs a new president. This "old school" Blatter should step down.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:19 am | Reply
  32. Mehdi

    It was not fair what happened to England today... you work hard to qualify, prepare for years and idiots referees destroy everything...

    June 28, 2010 at 2:32 am | Reply
  33. Juan Felipe

    The easiest solution is to allow officials to review goal plays, and only that. It's ok if they want to stir controversy and debate among fans, but a disallowed goal (or a wrongfully allowed, like that of T. Henry against Ireland) can make many people sad, and, more gravely, infuriated. Hooliganism is rejected by FIFA, but this kind of policies can only help to breed it. There's a fourth official, whose only responsibilities seem to be lifting the board in injury time and substitutions and arguing with coaches when they cross the bench area– why not make them also responsible for reviewing potentially illegal goals?

    June 28, 2010 at 2:39 am | Reply
  34. Com Mummery

    FIFA is above all else a political body so decisions are more politics than rational thinking.

    If rational thinking was the determinant of what is best the answer would be the blindingly obvious approach taken by other sports which is to have refreees off pitch with access to the video being shot and a capacity to communicate to the central umpire if needed.

    In Australia football and Cricket use this approach without problem. Indeed in Australian Football it has greatly enhanced respect for the rules by players. Cheating in Soccer is ugly and inapproriate penalties make FIFA and the code look dumb.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:45 am | Reply
  35. Guest

    For starters, how about just looking at the replays? Is that too much to ask of referees when sole purpose of their existence on that field is to ensure fair play? FIFA is talking rubbish; may be getting too sluggish or paranoid to not want to do anything about it just so they can have some control on the results of the games, which will be taken away from them should this extra measures be implemented. FIFA i.e. Forever Ignorant Forever Arrogant

    June 28, 2010 at 3:12 am | Reply
  36. Mike

    Unfortunately, this ultimately would not have helped England, who are woefully inconsistent on the World stage, and would likely have lost to Germany anyway.
    But, yes, goalline technology and video review for contentious situations (like the famous "hand of God" incident with Maradona) are long overdue for this sport.

    June 28, 2010 at 3:35 am | Reply
  37. Thomas Moersheim

    Why not starting with a simple light barriercamera system integrated into the goal posts ? Why do we want to control the whole game by video ? start simple, with the most important decision goal or no goal

    June 28, 2010 at 3:37 am | Reply
  38. Bernardo

    Dont bring on that crap that its too expensive or any other excuse- Rugby has been using it for a while in which if the referee cannot see the result he asks to be told the replay and based on the replay and the 4th referees comments the decision is taken. simple- if u wait 1 more minute then u would know what happened

    Although i do agree that Germany would have won anyways- they played a much better game, however, if england had tied u dont know what would have happened.

    June 28, 2010 at 3:51 am | Reply
  39. ladygugu

    no, the outcome wouldnt be the same if the goal was allowed. it would have been 2-2 and germany would be pressured as well. its all about psychology. england would have more motivation!

    June 28, 2010 at 4:05 am | Reply
  40. pwherman

    being new to soccer, I find the world cup very exciting. However, the many errors, goal misses, offsides, etc...plus the DRAMA from the players whenever they get tapped by the opposition is annoying. They need to have a better system of seeing the goals than what they have if they want to get Americans hooked on this...and to be fair to the players of the world, also....

    June 28, 2010 at 4:08 am | Reply
  41. PN

    It is an absolute disgrace that this level of blunders are spoiling the beautiful game. Sepp Blatter and co have their heads in the sand and too busy counting money rather than drive outcomes which would make the game better. Sooner or later, a world cup final will be decided by a monumental stuff up by a referee!

    June 28, 2010 at 4:13 am | Reply
  42. rosh

    First of all – yes, Germany looked superior when going forward. BUT, remember in football as in any other sport or in fact in life itself MOMENTUM is everything. And after those two defensive howlers which allowed the Germans to go 2 – 0 up, England had already hit back with one goal and had the MOMENTUM with them when THAT clear goal was not given. They may well have added a goal themselves before halftime and made it 3 – 2 as the Germans themselves weren't exactly brilliant at the back at that time.

    After the break England were still dominating but not quite with the fluency of the first half. Of course with the English defense looking vulnerable it was perhaps inevitable that the Germans would catch them out with a counterattack and that's the way it happened. As for the final outcome, I'm glad that the more accomplished team won BUT then again who says that the better team will win all the time. Recall 1954 – Hungary or 1982 – Brazil. It all depends on what happens on that day. But Argentina vs Germany is a mouth watering prospect to look forward to.

    By the way how about introducing two additional 'linesmen' tasked with only looking at penalty area incidents.

    June 28, 2010 at 4:16 am | Reply
  43. han

    Cairos what? Who needs sensor? What for?

    All the technology already exists, there are hundreds of cameras around the field already!

    Take the match in question yesterday for example.

    The second the disputed decision was announced, replays were already playing showing the facts of the shot.
    Just use the damn bloody replay!

    What a bunch of bollocks, with ball sensors.
    Allow instant replay. THATS ALL!

    June 28, 2010 at 4:41 am | Reply
  44. marcos from Brazil

    I totallt back u up on this Pedro! Also video proof could b used in cases to what happenned when Kaka received a red card and that Ivory Coast player should receive the oscar for being so dramatic... Seriously that guy should had been banned of the competition for that... Well they are out so I can say I am happy with this... But true to b told referees do make mistakes and we should help them doing a better job using the tecnology we have in hands.

    June 28, 2010 at 4:55 am | Reply
  45. StanTofe

    What Blatter is saying makes no sense. One one hand he refuses to use cameras like in ice hockey or rugby to let the ref see the truth. One the other hand they use exaclty this technology as an evidance to proof if a player has done something wrong during the game. In this case it is called a videoproof. It is true that not all teams, levels or what ever can effort hawkeye or the chip in the ball technologie but I am sure that every big tournament has plenty of cameras to clear ALL situations. Who cares about a wrong desicion done in 4th leage? But at least we should have the real champions that win without a mistake done by the referee. Does Blatter realy believe that no one in FIFA or UEFA want this? Maybe nobody from these "old" men. He should ask the young.

    June 28, 2010 at 5:00 am | Reply
  46. Goncalo

    Its a shame... This Fifa people are just embarassing...
    Why not use this tecnology on main events like World cup, Eurocup, African cup, champions league etc...
    Individual country leagues would implement it based on their own will to invest.
    I agree that should not be some feilds with this system and other not within the same league, but in main tournaments its out of the question, it should be there for all matches.
    My guess is that this type of discussions "if it was goal or not, penalty or not, out of play etc.." they create buzz, that sustains a big industry.
    Can you just imagine if we could eliminate this doubts, and make it all fair... many ppl would be out of job, no crapy soccer game tv shows where they discuss stupidity for hours, less newspapers sold... etc..
    I guess ppl in Fifa think that this type of discussions after a soccer match are beneficial for the game.

    June 28, 2010 at 5:01 am | Reply
  47. C Halloran

    Your reporting on theWorld Cup from your news team in London is completley chauvinist towards England. Germans don't think of England as great rival and they dont remember the 1966 World Cup and the disputed goal the way the England seems to. If CNN is trying to offer a World Service its news team in London could bes less chauvinist towards their own country!!!!!

    June 28, 2010 at 5:32 am | Reply
  48. waseem

    why not have sensors inside the goal posts that can possibly detect the football. Or perhaps have a "third umpire" (fourth referee in this case) that the referees on ground can call to for decision making like how it is done in crickt (sport).

    June 28, 2010 at 5:35 am | Reply
  49. Norman D. Beeches.

    to begin, i should point out that, though, as a child and youth i loved the game, ever since the profit motive overode the sporting side of football, and it bacame just another business to make a few otherwise talentless individuals obscenely wealthy, i have had very little interest in football.
    still, i was saddened by yesterday's diabolical refereeing decision.

    what i find the saddest thing of all, however, and it's something that no-one seems to acknowledge is that the players themselves are totally devoid of any sense of personal integrity.

    when france, and thierry henri put out ireland in the qualifiers, he could, and had he had any sense of moral values at all, SHOULD have said that he had handled the ball.

    similarly, the german goalkeeper was fully aware that the ball had crossed the line, and yet again, sad man that he is, played on.

    so yes, i'm glad to see france departed early, and i hope that germany are beaten soon as, for me, had france, or if germany go on to win, the whole of the the tournament has been devalued.

    the world cup is, i believe, intended to be a test of skill. unfortunately, it seems that this particular competition has now become merely a matter of luck: how good, or possibly how corruptible is the appointed referee, and how much cheating can a team get away with?

    am i alone in feeling that the reward for winning by unfair means, especially when half the world has watched you cheat, is not respect for your achievement, but derision, and makes the whole event pointless?

    June 28, 2010 at 5:36 am | Reply
  50. Dylan

    I'm sick of this "England were" "Germany are" ... England WAS Germany IS ... it is ONE country and ONE team.

    June 28, 2010 at 5:36 am | Reply
  51. Dylan

    Uruguay also got snubbed by the refs... the South Korean was clearly behind the lind when he caught the ball (as was the ball) in the second half and he even looked around like he was expecting the refs to indicate a goal, but one wasn't awarded.

    June 28, 2010 at 5:40 am | Reply
  52. mr Cairo

    Tell you the truth.., we can't really blame the reff and his linesmen..,although they

    blunderd massively..,it is the fault of the FIFA and EUFA, and the old generation like

    Blatter and Platini, its unbelieveble that these 2 oldies with no vision are STILL at the

    head of the biggest football org in the WORLD..of course they did some good things in the

    past ..but we are now in 2010..time to move on, time for goal-line technology.
    In a way I am glad this happenden in a few big maches..it means that they CAN NOT ignore

    it anymore..
    unless mr Blatter himself is into fixxing the games.

    June 28, 2010 at 5:46 am | Reply
  53. Jay

    You really do not know what foot ball is? Study more about the game before you write such a senseless article. By the way, I love both English and German team.

    Jay

    June 28, 2010 at 5:59 am | Reply
  54. DolphT

    Until soccer widens and raises the goal, the games will continue to be so low-scoring that they are boring. Without a major rooting interest, soccer is about as watchable as bowling. The technology is a minor point compared to all the 0-0 ties and 1-1 ties. Anytime more than two goals are scored in a game, you have to assume folks pulled their goalies early on. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

    June 28, 2010 at 6:03 am | Reply
  55. Mya Thet Ni

    I am not understand why Lampard's goal didn't stand. I think if the goal had counted the result will be change for England.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:07 am | Reply
  56. John Underwood

    Where can we protest online to see that goal line technology and red card replays are introduced??

    June 28, 2010 at 6:09 am | Reply
  57. S@m

    " If the goal had counted, surely the result would have been more respectable, but the outcome would have been the same "

    Really?! Apparently the writer has a sixth sense (or is surely a Germany fanboy). If the goal had been counted, the scores would have been level at the starting of the second half. Perhaps things would have turned out differently. I guess we'll never know... C'est la vie!

    June 28, 2010 at 6:11 am | Reply
  58. jorgen friis

    its conjecture to suggest that england would have lost anyway even had their 2nd goal been called good. granted, england played some of the worst football i've ever seen and on that basis they didnt deserve to win,however, if england's 2nd goal had stood it would have been 2 all
    and that for sure would have put a different complexion on the game.clearly the referee and his linesman werent up to the task and should in my view be suspended. the ball was over the line by nearly one meter and why the ref and his assistant didnt see it when the rest of the world did beats me. Did they have an agenda? we live in a hich tech age where anything is possible so FIFA should stop dragging its feet and get on with finding ways to apply technology to avoid similar gaffes.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:14 am | Reply
  59. A. Zudervici

    Well, the extra refereeing at the European Cup matches is one big laugh. What you see at the moment is that the referees behind the goals firstly look at the (main) referee, then to the assistent-linesman and when they both haven't seen anything, then he doensn't dare to react.

    I've witnessed it myself couple of times that every spectator around the goal area sees an offside or an penalty foul, but the extra referee doesn't react, because he sees his colleagues not reacting. So I hope that (especially) the FIFA wants to adept itself to the 21 century, because otherwise disappointsments like these will be happen in almost every game.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:22 am | Reply
  60. Rina from Tel l Aviv

    Amazing!
    and amazing game too

    June 28, 2010 at 6:24 am | Reply
  61. Thomas Davis E.

    Dear Pedro,

    I read you article and thought if the ruling members of the FIFA and UEFA really care about the sport and its effect on the world should not they be doing all they can to ensure the respect and nobility of the game? As I have been watching this World Cup I've been thrilled, but also shocked at the number of missed calls or wrongful penalty cards given for fake injuries. It is frustrating and heartbreaking. I know in hockey there are sensors placed in goals to monitors shots, would it be so difficult to do the same for the "beautiful sport"? Extra officials on the field is a first step. Perhaps if there were extra officials at both goals during champion matches, mistakes like these could be avoided. Thank you. Adios.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:26 am | Reply
  62. nicky

    Without a doubt, technology MUST be brought into the Football arena. I support Germany to win the World Cup, but felt deeply for the English team. To have a fair game is to see the true art of the winning team.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:43 am | Reply
  63. chew siew meng

    Why FIFA makes things so complicated? Just use five officials or make decision based on slow or ultra motion tecnology. It does not require rocket science to make it looks complicated. FIFA makes football look stupid.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:45 am | Reply
  64. rickytj

    i cant accept the stupid decisions made by the referee yesterday during the england match, i'm pretty sure that poor decision has entirely and negatively changed the mood of the soccer audiences around the world. Not only the ball has clearly passed the goal line (in most other bad decisions, whether the ball has in or not was obscure) , but it happened in the highest,best and most prestigious sport even in the world where millions of people are watching and where the referees appointed should be among the bests.

    However, i argue that isn't that necessary and urgent to implement those chip technologies. Soccer and like most other physical sports is supposed to be naturally played, and thus naturally judged. Having the robotic element will only breach the purity of soccer. Thus rather than abruptly implement the chips, FIFA should better extensively train the referees and appoint the only bests to lead the prestigious games. The decisions should be made only after some careful considerations among the FIFA, UEFA, other football instituions, including the coaches, players, audiences representatives, and the referees themselves. I am pretty sure that the money used to materialize the technology should more fairly be donated to some local football institutions for the development of their stadiums, soccer facilities and trainers, and other components necessary to improve their soccer teams both nationally and internationally. So we can have a better world cup next time with more diverse teams and better judging decisions and the same time the purity and naturality of soccer can be kept.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:49 am | Reply
  65. HANYUHAN

    I tend to agree with Sep Blatter. The game is pretty much the same everywhere and that's why it is succesful. The technology could only be applied to 'elite' expensive games and I dont think this would be positive overall. The elite groupings whether World Cup or Premier League etc are not the overall important things. Human error is part of luck/fortune etc and the occasional errors are part of the flow.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:57 am | Reply
  66. intyang akpan

    Technology is very essential to avert injustices in the game of football. I support the view of pedro pinto, most def.......

    June 28, 2010 at 7:01 am | Reply
  67. Tyrone Tellis

    Hi Pedro would a fifth official really help if he doesn't use video to review?

    June 28, 2010 at 7:03 am | Reply
  68. wariner

    I'm not convinced of Blatter's arguments. Ball tracking technology is sound in both tennis and cricket; both games using smaller balls travelling faster. If the problem with Hawkeye is line-of-sight, then just add cameras for redundancy.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:05 am | Reply
  69. Monte Minhas

    A World Cup without some controversy is part of mystic of the beautiful games biggest competition. Human errors occur, and are part of game. Has FIFA considered having a goal line official?

    June 28, 2010 at 7:09 am | Reply
  70. Dezmond

    Technology is even used at Wimbledon. Wake up FIFA, your becomming the laughing stock of international sport.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:14 am | Reply
  71. PeteSA

    It's about time! This is the 21st century Mr Blatter (not the 19th century where you are apparently stuck in) Why not use the TV replays as is used in rugby? Doesn't take that much time.... The reasoning that soccer should be the same from the ground up is bull...... there is much more at stake at a major tournament than at a friendly in rural Africa.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:18 am | Reply
  72. CJ Jackson

    In tournament sports at such a high level the fans DESERVE the right to be witness to a proper and perfect officialting, FIFA has to pull themselves out of the dark ages and realize the " beautiful game" becomes ugly when bad calls are made at such a high level of competition. The fans deserve better FIFA needs get an grip on that concept. Bad calls have marred this World Cup forever , too bad for the fans of the teams who suffered at the hands of the bad officiating , I just hope and pray that the as we are now heading into the final 8 , there is better officiating and FIFA must consider using technology to counter bad officiating without hesitation..............

    June 28, 2010 at 7:27 am | Reply
  73. Gingerich

    Definitely FIFA should use goal-line technology. I am not even a die hard soccer fan, but just watching the World Cup has made me scratch my head when obvious goals have been disallowed. It amazes me that on a World Stage that the technology isn't in use, especially, since some referees and their assistants have made some bogus calls; let the truth be told through the technology.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:43 am | Reply
  74. Andre Magri

    If hawkeye depends on the line of vision not being blocked then apply it when the view is clear. The England goal would have been obvious to clarify and it would put some faith back into the tournament.

    As it is, it's a joke.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:50 am | Reply
  75. hüseyin torun

    I was very upset on behalf of Britain. It was my favorite in the World Cup, the referee was very bad to be defeated because of errors. Antalya, Turkey.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:54 am | Reply
  76. T1Brit

    There is no need to install expensive systems.
    Just allow the refs to look at the same instant replay
    that EVERYBODY ELSE can see.
    At least then the ref and the spectators would be in agreement.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:59 am | Reply
  77. Ariuka

    Stupid FIFA... very Stupid

    June 28, 2010 at 8:07 am | Reply
  78. rickytj

    ive written a friggin long and constructive comment to share to the whole world, but i cant understand why cnn hasnt approved it.
    sigh...cnn just discouraged me to share more constructive feedback and contradict the nature of freedom of speech.

    June 28, 2010 at 8:09 am | Reply
  79. Andy Ip

    The images of the disallowed England goal I saw on TV seemed to come from a low-tech, ordinary camera placed at a strategic location and seemed to be good enough to determine if the ball had crossed the line.

    Has Sepp considered what the referees want to help them do a better job? I bet the referees who later saw the England "goal" on TV must be feeling lousy. I would.

    June 28, 2010 at 8:13 am | Reply
  80. Norv

    I do not agree that the outcome would have been the same.

    It must have been a psychological setback for the English team to not have been awarded the point. Anyone could see that it had an adverse effect on their performance. It had the opposite affect on the German team, it gave them an extra boost to increase the gap. As the gap got larger the English became more despondent and the Germans grew bolder.

    June 28, 2010 at 8:19 am | Reply
  81. thailand

    it is mistake of referee .i think ,we will replay video .

    June 28, 2010 at 8:20 am | Reply
  82. MN

    With the quality of referees we've seen, what's going to happen with our beloved team of Navigators?
    I sure hope we'll end up in better shape than England did!
    Força Portugal!!!!!!!!!!!!

    June 28, 2010 at 8:25 am | Reply
  83. Fred

    I'm not a football fan, but I do like to watch the big events with friends and a couple of cold beers. These continuous blunders dampen the mood quite a bit and I hope Fifa wakes up a little! It might not have changed this particular match, but I can think of a couple where it would.

    June 28, 2010 at 8:30 am | Reply
  84. Martin van der Werf

    Of course we want the truth, also in football matches. Mr. Blatter thinks it is romantic that we don't know the truth. I would like to know what Mr. Capello, coach UK, findss romantic about the mistake of yesterday. Two years of hard work and coaching of the English team, working at the top of sports, wiped away by one mistake...

    Martin

    June 28, 2010 at 8:31 am | Reply
  85. Gabriel

    Thanks Pedro for this nice article.

    It's not accepted in the 2010 and we are still suffering from the technology illness, the technology wont take the place of humans or the passion of football it will just make us more accurate.

    June 28, 2010 at 8:33 am | Reply
  86. somdarong

    i really shocked for that reffereece (England vs Germany) it was bad view for peoples in the world , they will think eventhose football are bad desicion too ...so that's why have corruption in the world

    June 28, 2010 at 8:34 am | Reply
  87. Bruce

    i can't believe Germany becomes shark as Maradona, he should beat England as brighten way rather than this.

    June 28, 2010 at 8:38 am | Reply
  88. Michael

    Billions of dollars are wagered on the World Cup and Championship games and with no goalline technology it is far easier to get away with bribing an official than without such technology - this is the only explanation that makes sense. A contributing reason for the lamb-like acceptance of there being no goalline technology is that many Europeans believe that what the official says is what matters where as in the US what actually happens is what matters. For Mr. Blatter's to believe that there is no solution to goalline and the other realities of the games shows him to be ..... (I'll leave it to others to fill in the missing words.)

    June 28, 2010 at 8:45 am | Reply
  89. Patrick

    I agree that there needs to be something done about replays. Too many games have been affected and until Mr. Blatter remains in power, there seems to be no way around it. I wanted to make clear that I am a huge soccer fan as well as American football, and the instant replay in American football slows down the sport even more than it already is. American football last for over three hours and has breaks every twenty seconds. It can get annoying after a while, I totally agree. This could not work in soccer unless you have a fourth refferee in the stands who can overturn a call instantly or within less than a minute and the time can be added on just like it already is when there is an injury. This is a problem that can easily be fixed. I feel that the problem will never be fixed when you have someone as old fashioned as Mr. Blatter in charge of FIFA. I am convinced that only with a new and younger president will we see the implimentation of instant replay. Until then, we will continue to see games like the one last night.

    June 28, 2010 at 8:55 am | Reply
  90. kailax

    I think FIFA should really do something about this as soon as possible. There were already many controversies about bad calls from referees and they should put a stop to it. These players work so hard to reach the world cup and when they do they lose just because of a bad call? It sucks!!!!! It broke my heart upon seeing the reaction of the English players and their coache's reaction. They have worked so hard and it has all gone to waste.

    June 28, 2010 at 9:04 am | Reply
  91. Vivian

    Simply replay the tape, if it cannot be sure to overturn the decision, then let the decision stand as they do in rugby, cricket etc. Let each team have lets say 2 oportunities in a game to refer to the video ref so time is not wasted. Have more cameras installed at the goals to make sure every angle is covered, not rocket science mister Blatter! By alowing these mistakes it makes the game not a true reflection of what really happened.

    June 28, 2010 at 9:15 am | Reply
  92. Dr. Cajetan Coelho

    Good article Pedro. Sports and Games are all about justice and fairness. Remove these two principal items and you are left with an empty bag with "sports" written on it in bold letters.

    June 28, 2010 at 9:16 am | Reply
  93. MarkSousa

    FIFA is TRULY backwards when it would rather maintain controversy than implement a simple instant replay system ~ if no where else, only when goals occur (which is only 2 – 3 times per half of play (tops). Guess it would completely eliminate their opportunity to get the FIX in when needed......

    June 28, 2010 at 9:21 am | Reply
  94. stratedy

    the goal was in definately.the goal could hv changed everything coz rem england had practised penaties for several weeks!
    fifa makes lots of money from viewership n they should knw i will only watch the final if wont be busy!

    June 28, 2010 at 9:32 am | Reply
  95. Unnikrishnan

    These guys are crazy – various technologies had been implemented in sports like cricket, and works well. People here want to start from top most technology – if they can start with video technologies at least obvious mistakes that is obvious for even common people could be corrected.
    They should think of advanced technologies at a later stage. If you need to keep the trust in tournaments like world cups, they need to step in with some basic min. PROCESS to handle the obvious errors.

    June 28, 2010 at 9:37 am | Reply
  96. Mario

    Five officials (two of them as goal linesmen) as used in the Europa League, has proven not to work: The goal linesmen are too close to the 'barras bravas' to dare anything..... They become mere spectators.

    June 28, 2010 at 9:38 am | Reply
  97. andre

    I think the FIFA will need a very good pr & marketing director next years. It seems they are out of their mind over there. By the way, how much of the profit do they invest back in South Africa for the local community?

    June 28, 2010 at 9:47 am | Reply
  98. JustNOticed

    Hilarious! The FIFA isn't showing the controversial denying of Lampards goal in their match highlights.

    http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/highlights/video/video=1261437/index.html

    June 28, 2010 at 9:50 am | Reply
  99. kimosabe

    Goal robbing in 2010 has been a very good business by World Cup referee's.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:01 am | Reply
  100. Darren Smith

    It is not FIFA it is Blatter. He is a crazed dictator, after taking over from Lennit Johanssen all he has done is come up with lunatic suggestions. Platini is just as bad. He seems to be sticking his fingers in his ears and says la-la-la-la-la about this. But then you look on the FIFa and UEFA sites and nothing will be mentioned about the goal that did not count, much like the blackout on those sites when Henry handled the ball to put the French through against the Irish.

    FIFA can go up against the Vatican for crazed, secretive, bloody minded organisation of the year.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:03 am | Reply
  101. Mario

    What would have happened if the referee yesterday had shown guts and simply rolled back Argentina's first goal right after seing it on the stadium screen?
    It was like that the Berlin Wall fell down!

    June 28, 2010 at 10:04 am | Reply
  102. Gron

    You know, the technology is here. In South Africa we use a series of cameras for rugby and cricket. These include high quality slow motion cameras. In other words, the technology is at the stadia as we speak. FIFA just need to give approval.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:04 am | Reply
  103. T.C Looi

    This German 4 vs England 1 football match is a piece of joke. It insults our intellegence and makes us look stupid in witnessing the true outcome as it unfolds right before our very own eyes. I think no one should be held responsible for this other than FIFA which continues its refusal to allow changes to be made to rectify the current sickiening practices. FIFA, either you change or we will boycott your games. Afterall no one could tolerate oneself to be continuously treated like a stupid idiot by others!

    June 28, 2010 at 10:05 am | Reply
  104. Gron

    Only problem with video technology is that the English will still complain, even with all the video evidence! (For example the Rugby World Cup 2007)

    June 28, 2010 at 10:07 am | Reply
  105. FIFAcrooks

    The world has known about FIFA's antics for years. It's a blow to human intelligence to allow this (the lies and deceipt) to happen every World Cup, when so many people rely on the outcome. How can we, intelligent humans using technology every day, watch a game played with such beauty and speed, be tarnished by money hungry control freaks ensuring they can change the outcome of any game due to their "mistake"? I feel like I'm watching a pre-WWI or II futbol game, controlled by the puppet master Sepp Blatter himself and his cronies. It would be very easy to implement digital technology (like other professional sports around the world) and modernise the game, making it truly "the Beautiful Game", but as it stands now, we are all being slapped in the face by old, irrational rules used by those to control outcomes of matches, when we can see through the lies due to today's live television replays. Even the replays are being censored. The World Cup is a farce, and the people responsible think we are all monkeys. Perhaps they are right, as we never seem able to do anything about it.....Sepp, looks like you will again, vote yourself into power and continue to earn more and more money without any accountability with what goes on the field of play. You and all your cronies will one day be caught out, and the real truth of your illegal activities be brought to life. It's like we are living in the world of Orwell's 1984. People stand up and change this disgrace to our human intelligence !

    June 28, 2010 at 10:10 am | Reply
  106. Tom

    Saying "Football should be the same from the top level to the grassroots level" is like saying "The Catholic Church should be the same from the top level to the grassroots level".

    June 28, 2010 at 10:16 am | Reply
  107. RENZ

    I FIND IT VERY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT FIFA HAVE SAID THAT IT IS TOO EXPENSIVE TO INSTALL VIDEO CAMERAS FOR SOCCER GAMES...WHEN ALL THEY HAVE TO PUT IN PLACE IS A RULE THAT ALLOWS THE REF TO GO UPSTAIRS TO A 3RD REF TO MAKE A CALL AS THEY DO IN OTHER SPORTS LIKE RUGBY AND TENNIS.

    COULD THIS BE THEIR WAY OF COVERING UP THE CORRUPTION THAT HAS DOGGED THE PAST WORLD CUPS AND GAMES???

    YOU BE THE JUDGE.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:17 am | Reply
  108. Siim

    A lot of bad refereeing in this years wold cup. Just sad to watch. Could not watch the Argentina-Mexico game after that first "goal".

    June 28, 2010 at 10:18 am | Reply
  109. salayem

    Screw hi-tech loooooooooosers. England couldn't win that match even with a GPS implanted in each player. Besides controversies add to the excitement of the game and prevent it from becoming just a ball chase like the American football.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:29 am | Reply
  110. Shaibu

    Football games are won and lost by the scoring of goals.
    Scoring a goal is the most important objective of any football team.
    If those goals do not count, even at the highest level of football, then the credibility of the game is at stake. Whatever technology (expensive or not) that is available to stop teams from being robbed of their goalsby human error or otherwise, should be implemented. This should be done at least at the world cup and all continental championships. These represent the highest levels of the most popular game in the world. Its the least FIFA can do!

    June 28, 2010 at 10:31 am | Reply
  111. TheFanboy

    lmao rosh did you even watched the game?
    you are talking without sense "England was dominating the game" When?
    I just saw a really nice football game, a very fair game ok ok the goal could be given but it wouldnt have change anything England made his worst WM this year ever just hoping in 1 man is a fault so its their own fault.

    So, great wishes from Germany see you in 4 Years

    June 28, 2010 at 10:40 am | Reply
  112. ad

    Two wrong decisions in a single day both of which might change the final result (read maybe). What is FIFA thinking? Seems like very biased and hypocrite behavior on their part. Whereas, in other games the video technology is proving to be a success and in football which is the most watched sports on the planet they have done nothing. If the technology already been implemented at least we weren't questioning FIFA or suspecting them of any wrongdoing.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:41 am | Reply
  113. Patricia

    Thank you for your article.

    This was the first time I was interested in the World Cup, an interest which quickly faded due to the constant bad calls - often with no explanation. It has soured my interest in a sport which otherwise would/could be a lot of fun to watch. As it is, it resembles a schoolyard melée with no real credibility. Wake up FIFA ... it's the 21st century.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:43 am | Reply
  114. GB

    Why is the media so convinced that England would have been hammered despite that disallowed goal? This was a do or die situation and England had to chase the game in the 2nd half right from the off – no point in sitting back and waiting for Germany to leave an opening. It is clear to me that Germany's half time briefing was, "sit back and wait for the inevitable opening", which is exactly what they did and what happened. If it had been 2-2 at half time, the game would have taken a totally different course. England were 2-0 down and came back to level it 2-2 (that's what it should have been) so how on earth can these pundits tell us that England were well beaten anyway? I will never be convinced.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:49 am | Reply
  115. Doug

    You don't need chips in balls, hawkeye or anything else. Video replays work well in both rugby league and rugby union. Not infallible, but available at pretty much any game of any significance. A video replay official – a 5th official? – would be a small cost for the money involved in football these days.

    The suspicion remains that Blatter likes referees that can deliver results in favour of the teams he deems it would be 'good for the game' to progress.

    June 28, 2010 at 10:54 am | Reply
  116. Omar

    Putting technology to use will only diminish the excitement caused by "human error calls" in soccer matches worldwide!

    June 28, 2010 at 10:54 am | Reply
  117. Guilherme

    Great article.

    But here in Brazil, and perhaps, around the world, there is a "little" problem that stop this idea: a kind of mafia, that needs to manipulate the results. The referees here, when the teams from São Paulo or Rio de Janeiro play against others, every time gives little faults for the big teams. It's incredible! These little faults that shouldn't exist happen all the time! So, the other team starts to be nervous, yellow and red cards start to be given and the final results everyone know: the big teams wins the match for 1 or 2 gols ahead (perhaps for a bad indication of a penalty)...

    So, that's why I think tecnologies like this will wait much more to be on our stadiums. There are a lot of interests around the results (like big brands too, that needs their sponsored teams go further on final games, por exemple).

    That's it!

    Brazil 3 x 1 Chile and will be the champion 2010!!
    : )

    June 28, 2010 at 11:05 am | Reply
  118. Maxin475

    @ Ted. I agree totally with you. People who say that the call wouldn't have affected the outcome , never played Football in their life . The psychological effect on players can be devastating . It also changes your tactical game plan . When you're at 2-2 , you don't play the same way as when you're down 2-1.
    The same in the Arg Mex game later . When that offside goal was given it forced the Mexicans to take risks ,and one knows you can't afford to do that against Argentina.

    June 28, 2010 at 11:06 am | Reply
  119. mj

    We need fresh thinking in FIFA and as much as it is true that Blatter has brought alot of good to the game, he is probably too old to embrace new thinking. He has to retire. And for those of you who think that the goal would have made no diference I urge you to think again. football is as much a physical sport as it is mental. going into half time with a 2-2 scoreline would have made a huge diference and even instilled a sense of we can do it in the english.

    June 28, 2010 at 11:21 am | Reply
  120. Linda Barron

    I agree that soccer needs to embrace technology – Blatter's response is to be exepected from a "a silent generation" person. Bet he thinks that Twitter is something to do with birds. However, setting aside this – England lacked the fire in their bellies which was evident with Germany and then later by both Mexico and Argentina. This was "for my country" stuff. Capello is not my favourite, but hey you are so right the English players need to take the heat. They never looked like winners from their first round match and they owe their fans a huge apology. If the money they are paid by the clubs is a indication of their ability – then they have been totally overpaid. There must be awesome talent in England – get out and do a talent search and get serious – if they don't and they win the World Cup bid for 2018, they too may be the only host country to not go through to the final 16!!! Linda Barron South Africa

    June 28, 2010 at 11:24 am | Reply
  121. Raed

    I would go with video technology, but we are missing more importantly ethics.

    The players have to report the truth to the ref. If they lie(Maradonna and Henry's Hand of God, etc), and force a video reply for the ref to make a judgement, then they are to be yellow or even red carded. Not only about goals, but also fouls, diving (red carding of Kaka).

    It's shameful to watch top players who are supposed to be role models for the young commit these acts.

    June 28, 2010 at 11:25 am | Reply
  122. switzer

    I agree with some of you that the result of the match could have been different if the goal was allowed. Why not use a system like is used in cricket using a third referee using TV replays of different cameras. If a system like this was used, then for sure England would have got the goal.
    In my opinion each side should be given a equal number challenges so that if in doubt they can refer the decision to the forth referee.

    June 28, 2010 at 11:28 am | Reply
  123. Steve W

    Instituting instant replay at the world cup would ensure that the calls of the ref are correct. The technology is already there. There does not need to be much disruption of the flow of the game. If you have an official reviewing the replay. He could signal the main ref of a wrong call via head set. Limits on when the replay can be used (Goal shots, offsides calls with in the larger box, red card penalties) can ensure the flow of the game.
    It is not rocket science. Football (soccer) is a great game where ensuring the calls are correct should just add to the greatness of the game.

    June 28, 2010 at 11:33 am | Reply
  124. kobe

    Oh yes, it was miss-judgement.
    However, the behavior of British athlethes was excellent.
    If we Japanese was at same situation, we might abondon the game.
    England does not do that.
    England taught us what the foot ball is.
    I want to say "BANZAI" for England.

    Sorry for my poor English, but I want to say.
    We Japanese respect England.

    June 28, 2010 at 11:49 am | Reply
  125. percy klien oppong miller GHANA

    the referee that handle the match between ARGENTINA AND MEXICO should be banned ,simply bc the first goal from ARGENTINA was off side which the referee shouldn't have accept that ,but any way the Mexican tried their possible best but did not work out for them and am wishing them better luck next four years ......

    June 28, 2010 at 11:51 am | Reply
  126. brillisoft

    I have to disagree.

    The psychological effect of this goal, if counted would have been huge.
    And it was huge, in the other direction, when it was not counted.

    The team coaches should have a right to call for a video replay check when there is a dispute, even if only 1-2 times in the game each side.

    This will also improve the quality of judgements by referees – they will be more careful, to avoid the replays.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:00 pm | Reply
  127. Ralf del Castillo

    I think the 5 referee system will do especially on the goal lines. Frank Lampards strike was clearly a goal and it would have changed the tempo of the game but not the outcome. It does not have to be ultra high technology but accuracy and conviction. I hope Sepp Blatter is reading.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:01 pm | Reply
  128. ulebae

    So many unfair calls by referees this World Cup. The next topic that you should address is the "fake" injuries that cost the opposite teams the outcome of the game (when they lose a player to yellow card or red card" because the referee based his judgment on what he (didn't)see ...

    June 28, 2010 at 12:01 pm | Reply
  129. Steve Skeete

    I'm all for technology, but what about honesty? Why could the German goalie not go to his captain and say, the ball was over the line, and the goalie say to the ref. it was a clean goal? Are we going to have the "hand of god syndrome" over and over again? If so there is nothing "beautiful" about the game.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:16 pm | Reply
  130. JasonXR

    Tired, old men living in the past that can't think creatively anymore. Get rid of this board and rotate in new members every 4 years. If my girlfriend can do a better job of refereeing just by watching a replay 10 seconds later then there is a problem with the refereeing.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:24 pm | Reply
  131. Romeu

    Sorry, but both teams that lost Sunday were victims of stubborn old men in suits. The psychological blow these teams received are too much to overcome. Maybe Germany would have collapsed as did Englans had the latter tied the game. Mexico was stronger than Argentina and simply collapsed after that irregular goal. Both goals were clearly wrong. Within a couple of seconds the play was being reshown. Evryone at home and at the stadiums saw it. The refs in the MEX ARG game had time to discuss it, and still got it wrong. What does the 4th guy do other than hold up a sign when there is a substitute or show the added time (another thing that should be changed). They could pick someone from the stands to do that! By far the worst part about this is the fact that qualifying takes two years. Players travel from all over the globe to represent their countries ............. and then a "mistake" sends them home. Where is "FAIR PLAY" that they shoe down our throats? You think the German goalie didn't see the ball in the goal? Mr Henry should never have been allowed to be on a FIFA field after fooling the ref and then celebrating, costing the Irish a trip to the WC. Embarassing!

    June 28, 2010 at 12:25 pm | Reply
  132. Mischpoke

    Just put the goal referee behind the goals according to European League (EL)... So easy!

    The same happend because of offside... You needed two more referees on the line

    June 28, 2010 at 12:30 pm | Reply
  133. FIFAcrooks

    FIFA continuously censor information. Both during and after a match. If you go to FiFA.COM, and try to make a comment, if they do not like it – it does not get published. So much for a democratic voice. It's all a scandal waiting to go off ! I ask everyone who has interest to check out the following book: "Foul!: The Secret World of FIFA: Bribes, Vote Rigging and Ticket Scandals". I'm not it's author, but have worked in sports marketing for years and believe it's a very insightful book and may provide some reasons for what we are seeing in this WC. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Foul-Secret-Bribes-Rigging-Scandals/dp/0007208111

    June 28, 2010 at 12:35 pm | Reply
  134. Gary

    Sepp Blatter is too old to see any sense. He just sat in his VIP box enjoying all the wrong decision he believe everyone should just accept them as part of real live football. He's too stupid to understand that people are travelling thousand miles to watch the game. They don't pay their money to be disappointed by unprofessional officials and injustice of the game.

    The massive TV screen at the stadium clearly showed the offside goal by tevez. I just couldn't believe the goal still standing even evidence in place. I can't see adding another two officials would benefits the game any better because they are simply can't always in the same line as the football. It surely would delay the match much more with two more people's opinion.

    Is it really that expensive even with the help of that massive screen replay? OK, I can see that its impossible to get every decision right, even camera can have some stupid angle. Then again, that's unpredictable situation which needs to be compromised somehow. However, the two incidents are far off to be compromised in such massive game. Everyone can just say, "look at the screen, it's offside or it's clearly a goal."

    Both incidents were massive decisions and they let down two teams of players & fans supporting their countries. Mexico were dominated the game at the beginning stage until that goal which turned around the equilibrium of the game. England's disallowed goal could have changed the team's display totally. At least, everyone can understand game can be so much difference playing at 2:2 not 2:1.

    FIFA is such a DISGRACE.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:39 pm | Reply
  135. Djee

    Mr Blatter's reasoning is faulty. If he really wants the game to be the same across the board he would also not allow the ball to differ from tournament to tournament. Or not allow distracting moving advertisements allong the field.

    Let's not pretent 'grassroot' games and professional tournaments are the same and the game would suffer if technology was used in one but not the other. The stakes are hugely different and so is the audience.

    As remarked by many before me in this forum video playback available to the 4th referee does not cost a lot of (extra) money because the communication technology is already there (which btw is also not availbale for all levels) and would not hold up the game.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:50 pm | Reply
  136. Saitey

    We all know football is one of the most watched sports....because its about skill, tactics, flowing football ....and luck. Why should we introduce technology? Yes it maybe unfair for the loosing team, but it is part of football game. What about the own goals scored by teams? those are also mistakes. For those who cant digest the pressure of loosing, too bad.....they should move on. Let this game be it is and let it be part of human game....not a game played on technology, for those we have Video Games.

    June 28, 2010 at 12:56 pm | Reply
  137. Wnuck

    ... enlarge the goals to have higher scores?
    Please, american friends, if you don´t like it because a score like 1-0 is generally boring for you, just don´t watch it. And don´t try to change it.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:05 pm | Reply
  138. Agyemang Kwaku Ofori

    Yes indeed goal line technology should be allowed in the game and the Referee should be allowed to watch videos to take decision while the game is going on. I think the Three Lions spirit went down when the Referee disallowed the goal. And one thing about the English team is that, They never brought a team but stars. And about Rooney , no manager would have bought him a million Pounds for the job he did in the world cup. Wising them good luck next time.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:07 pm | Reply
  139. fuzzylogic

    Sepp Blatter should resign. He's held the position for far too long and considers himself as God's gift to football. He's an idiot.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:08 pm | Reply
  140. Monica

    How can this even be a debate? Obviously, goal-line technology needs to be allowed, cause the game just isn't fair without it, as we've seen many times, including yesterday with England.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:14 pm | Reply
  141. david

    the ref was dull.he could have stopped the game and consulted his linesman if he was not sure but let things ioose.i was upset because that dissallowed goal could have certainly changed the paceof the game.germany just capitalized on the over worked defence

    June 28, 2010 at 1:20 pm | Reply
  142. Henrik

    Hey,
    no we do not need any other technology!
    This is footbal,
    it lives from wrong decision of referees, unseen fouls etc.
    Otherwise we Germans would have won the worldvup in ´66 and up to now England and Germay have some"special" in any england – germany. of counrse we should have won in ´66 but still nobody of our countries misses any germany – england. it is legendary and that´s good! both of our countries discuss this for over fourty years and we never lost again them afterwards and england cannot win any international title, all connected with their unjust winning back then.
    that is exactly what makes football football.
    it´s fun! enjoy football.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:27 pm | Reply
  143. Shawn

    Let us not forget that France was allowed into the World Cup at the expense of Ireland due to lack of technology.

    Clearly there is an argument, based on many other sports as well, that implementing such capabilities could provide much to ensure as fair an outcome as possible.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:27 pm | Reply
  144. Gilmar

    I think that all countries should create a boycote and no have participation in any tournment around the world ,so this way FIFA will recognize that they need urgently apply the TECNOLOGICAL RESOURCES to avoid the SHAME the was the 2 games yesterday.

    I dont know whay the internal Federations accept it.

    England and Mexico were stolen !!!!!!!!!

    June 28, 2010 at 1:33 pm | Reply
  145. Varun

    No need to include silly breaks into the game, its an excuse by Advertising companies to have their ads running while a decision is made just like in other sports.

    On Sunday the Referee's were at fault, it was stupid human errors, another skilled referee would have done better.

    We need better trained Referee's not technology

    June 28, 2010 at 1:40 pm | Reply
  146. Alexander Ewering

    Anyone who still watches such a ridiculous sport after this event is beyond help.

    June 28, 2010 at 1:50 pm | Reply
  147. Bob

    Every time us Americans see an obvious mistake in offsides or goal scoring by a referee, especially in that sport's most important tournament, we just laugh and think how silly this sport is. When soccer wants to join the 21st century, give us a call (ring).

    June 28, 2010 at 2:00 pm | Reply
  148. Romeu

    An example of FAIR PLAY that we unfortunately rarely see: There was a shot on goal during an Italian League game and the ref pointed to a goal kick. The goalkeeper called the ref's attention and gestured that the ball touched his fingertips. The ref changed his call to a corner kick and immediately ran over to the goalie to shake his hand. This my friends .....is FAIR PLAY!!!!!!!!

    June 28, 2010 at 2:02 pm | Reply
  149. UChianRen

    Since FIFA is so adamant to live in the stone age,and refuse to upgrade to modern technology so that their corruption and control can carry on, it is a good time to start up a new world football body who will embrace modern technology to make the game enjoyable and fair. DOWN WITH FIFA!!!

    June 28, 2010 at 2:02 pm | Reply
  150. Gary

    Who actually ask for that fancy tech ~ a chip in every football for World Cup. Many precedent in other sports already and none have created any disrruption to the games.

    We aren't exactly ask for 2 more officials. We want video playback which already exist even with the present tv coverage of the game. Is that so hard to ask for? Is that so hard to see the sense of using it? I can't really see this existing technology are so much expensive compare to the "chip in football tech."

    If three officials misscalled it, and IF the video can't really tell because of some angle problems, then God, ok, no choice, flip a corn to decide. Some bloody decision, why is it so hard for Sepp Blatter to understand.

    The German goal keeper should have known the ball crossed the line and still acting like its not a goal, that's cheating. Tevez should have known he's in offside position, and he celebrated that header, that's cheating. They have 90 mins to prove their worth and that's the game.

    I see England were really outclassed by Germany, but then the win would be more convincing without such poor call by the officials. I can only see video playback come to reinforce the game. If this is so hard for anyone to understand, I guess you don't really into football or the spirit of sports that much.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:03 pm | Reply
  151. UChianRen

    Sepp Blatter is not an idiot, he is a crook. Platini is his crony. No wonder the most beautiful game is now the most controversial game. If Blatter wants the poorer federations to come on par, he and his cronies should gave all their salaries and everything they got from football to upgrade the poorer federations. All talk Blatter and no action!

    June 28, 2010 at 2:12 pm | Reply
  152. darknessangel

    Well... let's drop all the trendy tech... How about a simple camera! I mean it got caught in so many angles! You don't need a chip in a ball or some other crazy stuff.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:14 pm | Reply
  153. Gron

    All those discussions of 'take away human-error', 'slow down the game' etc etc etc... we've all heard it years ago with Cricket, Rugby, Tennis etc. Now you'll find very few people against it in those sports. If FIFA has any sense, they'd allow it from the top 8 round.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:15 pm | Reply
  154. chas

    the saddest thing was that the ref and linesman felt that they couldn't change the decision. everyone had seen it and knew it was a goal, including the ref and linesman. they should have had the balls to make the "right" decision.

    I suppose that if there was any honour left in this sport (or is it a business!!!!?) the Germans would have said it was over the line. Or being very fanciful, when knowing it was a goal, that they let England score to make up for the poor decision.

    Oooops best get back down to Earth and reality.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:18 pm | Reply
  155. Vasil Bratanov

    The point here is not who was going to advance after 2 : 2 score but the fact that an obvious goal was not recognised and FIFA don't take any measures to stop/improve this. This cases are not good for football.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:27 pm | Reply
  156. WJA

    I have just viewed Pedro Pinto's interview with Blatter and all I can say is that Blatter is a delinquent. He firstly only argues two forms of technology that cannot be introduced into the game citing complicated set-ups and possible game situations which may interfere with the technology. This portrays him as a closed-minded fool with zero ambition to create fairness in the game.

    Pedro then goes on to ask him what he wants eliminated from the game and he states that cheating (diving, overly aggressive acts of defense, etc) should be curbed, but all of these issues can be dealt with the simple television replays and a television official.

    He also states that penalising a team by expelling a man from the field for a period of time doesn't work. Blatter says that they have tried with a two minute penalty which is a ludicrous time as it takes a lot longer to build momentum and opportunities to score a goal than two minutes regardless if a team is down a man. In rugby, a yellow card for a player is ten minutes on the side-line and usually this translates into points for the team with all members on the field. Granted it's easier to score in rugby than in football, but the psychological affect and defensive effort that the penalised team has to battle can, and most times, does change the momentum. I believe that this option should be explored more to prevent players from feigning injuries and 'milking' free kicks/penalties. I do realise that diving is a yellow card offense but this doesn't prevent players from playing with an unfair attitude. There are ways to stop players from wasting time, such as when a player 'wastes' time the 4th official should stop the clock and give the player a moment to 'recover' and resume the clock once the player is up.

    Blatter is a fool that is either paid to be an idiot or is truly a fool. I would put my money on the latter.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:27 pm | Reply
  157. bedig

    "In life, it is difficult to get the truth."

    Not really... because truth is not a knowledge but is a person!

    June 28, 2010 at 2:31 pm | Reply
  158. Zeta1125

    The FIFA is a dictatorship, this man is a dinosaur and he is too stubborn to change anything.

    All this man cares about is money, as an official rule of the FIFA anything the FIFA sells in the country hosting the World Cup is tax free, its money that should go to the country yet the FIFA greedily takes it as their own.

    Sepp Blatter is a dictator.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:36 pm | Reply
  159. Walter von Ballmoos

    I do think the game could have changed if the 2:2 would have been given. The losing team in a knock-out game has to take more offenive action and therefore weakens its defense. Could you imagine how it would have gone off if the Germans would have scored a goal right after Lampard's? The result 3:1 seconds after an actual 2:2..... Red cards for half the English team. I woud have a lot of understanding for for players in their 20ies who would not be able deal with such a situation!

    June 28, 2010 at 2:37 pm | Reply
  160. Gary

    I totally agreed the transparency of fifa. Its more like a dictating body than a football governing body. FIFA is such a disgrace, no word, no comments on those controversial incidents, no apology to public but insist they are correct to carry on. Damn it man. On the FIFA official website, the video highlight of GER-ENG game skipped the disallowed goal. Can't believe this is happening to football. We are watching football governing by such a foul body. Seriously Blatter step down!!!!!!! You spoilt the game.

    June 28, 2010 at 2:37 pm | Reply
  161. Marco Steven

    Why so many people using this media access to show yourself pity??!!
    It is just a sport and a game. Why have to take everything so personal and brought all kind of excuses and politics to the table??!!
    I don’t see other countries complaining up to this level, after they lost their game.
    Just train your players to be better and show the world what you got on next World-Cup instead of complaining non-stop.
    Be a good sport, and as an adult should able take it as is.

    June 28, 2010 at 3:03 pm | Reply
  162. Chi

    You don't need any of that complicated technology. All you need is Instant Replay and video review, like the NFL has. It's not easy getting away with a foolish mistake like the refs made in this game, when there are cameras, challenge flags and basically a reply-for-every-play system, there's no one that English goal would not have counted...

    June 28, 2010 at 3:11 pm | Reply
  163. Nuno Costa (Portugal)

    I am a motorsport journalist, but i love soccer, and i think if FIFA have a strong will to promote new thecnologyes in the sport they allready put that in service. For me this 28 June 2010 will marked as a Day of Shame to the World Cup, because is a disgrace to censure images of polemic plays in the stadiums. What FIFA going to do next?! Censure the images in tv live broadcasts?! I like to know what Pedro Pinto thinks about this. For me the games between England & Germany and Argentina & Mexico have to many mistakes make by the refrees...They are humans, ok. But please; FIFA use the new technology, put a chip in the ball or something else, but the way the things are is a disgrace for the world of soccer

    June 28, 2010 at 5:20 pm | Reply
  164. ricky

    I say, an obvious Goal that might change the course of the game.
    If 2-2 by HT, the game might go into extra time. ho knows.
    Why didn't the referee award the gold. Too many bettors are betting on England. If England had drawn or won, I guess many syndicate would have lost millions of dollars.

    June 28, 2010 at 6:21 pm | Reply
  165. RB

    I agree with Marco – you never hear of any other country's fans who complain and cry as much as the English! I am sure they get their share of bad calls that go their way. It is a moot point anyway because the English team was no match for the far superior Germans. Stop crying!

    June 28, 2010 at 6:45 pm | Reply
  166. iveeno

    It should be technologically enhanced. How can mistakes by judges be considered "part of the game?" A player can perform perfectly, flawlessly, according to all that he or she has learned and practiced, but a 'mistake' can wipe out the integrity of all of that effort, and that of the game.

    On the other hand, not enough people here in America care about cleaning up our National Pastime to improve the integrity of that game, much less a game that gathers interest mostly among a very narrow following.

    June 28, 2010 at 7:49 pm | Reply
  167. Saul Yudelowitz

    Mr Pinti I have a question. Why do you think FIFA hasn't taken on technology to ref soccer, since this is an excellent way to grow the sport in the US, potentially the biggest and richest market? Makes you think there is more than meets the eye............

    June 28, 2010 at 10:30 pm | Reply
  168. TheTruth

    You can't have any technology or replays. Football isn't about winning or losing, it's about whining and crying! If folks don't have something to moan about they won't watch. That's why the sissy players are always falling down and grabbing their legs, their fans expect it. Watching "football" is like watching a couple of nerds having a slap fight!

    June 28, 2010 at 11:20 pm | Reply
  169. mike

    FIFA should not be allowed to hold a billion soccer fans and lovers
    world wide by not using replays as evidence to allow or disallow a goal
    etc.Since when the world cup belong to Flippant Idiots False Authority?

    June 29, 2010 at 1:46 am | Reply
  170. Kyle Geiger

    The FIFA presidents argument about cost and keeping the technology the same between the top tier levels and the grass roots level is flawed. No sport gives recreational youth leagues the same treatment of officiating that the pro leagues receive. Second, as an official of the sport for the last 15 years of my life off and on, I have never once come across the technology they have at their fingertips. 1) The fourth official. 2) Wireless headsets to communicate between officials 3.) Beeper flags that send a signal to the center referee when paged by one of the assistant refereees. Adidas has provided the gameballs for the World Cup and European Championship since I was born in 1981 as well as far before that. I don't see this changing anytime soon....Seems like a no brainer to me. It's just stubbornness to not allow the game to evolve with the technology.

    June 29, 2010 at 4:51 am | Reply
  171. peter

    If FIFA is still giving excuses to start implementing the goal line technology , it it simple. Boycott FIFA. It takes 3-4 countries to start the ball rolling.

    June 29, 2010 at 4:58 am | Reply
  172. robert

    Let forget about who FIFA is. Their priority is controlling the amount of money they can get on rights, etc etc.... In the end, we the ones watching are charged for it. And they will keep raising the charges.

    June 29, 2010 at 5:03 am | Reply
  173. CJ Jackson

    FIFA and Blatter balking at reply the excuse expensive?? Nonsense! Replay certainly would make it harder to FIX matches as well , come on Mr. Blatter what are you REALLY afraid of???

    June 29, 2010 at 8:34 am | Reply
  174. Wantty

    Nigeria lost to Argentina via a clear foul on a player and FIFA admits this. The problem is that the harm has already been done and the result on the day stays. USA drew also when they should have got 3 clear points and the result held. If FIFA preaches fair game at every football encounter, I would think that also applies to the referees and the governing body as well. Especially when it affects the outcome of the entire result. If it must be fair, then we must be willing to employ any means that makes it so including technology. The human-error story is not just working anymore. The only reason I see is that match-fixing is still an option that FIFA intends to keep for the powers that be to exploit when needed. FIFA, wake up, some things are just outdated in these times. If you can allow for the development of a new ball, then allow for other developments to make the game fairer. The WORLD calls for it and you are not supposed to be above the WORLD I guess.

    June 29, 2010 at 9:03 am | Reply
  175. kent

    strongly support goal-line technology using at next world cup tournament!

    June 29, 2010 at 9:47 am | Reply
  176. Philip Gibson

    The situation has changed. I've just seen Pedro Pinto on CNN announcing, with obvious delight, that Sepp Blatter has decided that FIFA will 'take another look' at the use of technology in making decisions in games during their board meeting next month. That was indeed great news until Pedro started banging on about chips in balls and saying that they would be looking at that and the Hawkeye technology (like in tennis), but NOT at VIDEO REPLAYS!

    Tell me that's not right Pedro! Slow motion video replays would have quickly and accurately sorted out all the bad decisions in this World Cup, including Lampard's goal – it doesn't need sophisticated technology like chips in balls or even cameras in goalposts. Video replays are already here and will do the job Pedro, as 98% of the people commenting on your blog here have stated.

    June 29, 2010 at 10:21 am | Reply
  177. Gron

    In rugby we're testing, at a lower level, a concept to give power to the captain. The captain can ask for 2 video replays per game, for whatever he feels was a wrong call. If the video replay shows the ref to be correct, they lose that right, and the game goes on. If the video replay show the captain to be correct, the don't lose that option, and the call is overturned.

    Since so few goals are scored in Football/Soccer, surely a few quick replays would not influence the flow of the game!

    And I agree with posters here, it isn't about who would have won and who not. It could have been the other way around in both cases.

    June 29, 2010 at 10:48 am | Reply
  178. Michael Lee Rogers

    Pedro,
    I live in Vinhedo, São Paulo, Brazil and watching your coverage of the world cup I couldn´t agree with you more on the urgent need for a change in Fifa´s view of technology helping the blunders of so many judges. It is vital that durning a world cup event the blunders we saw do not happen again this is what the fans REALLY want to see who knows what emotional response Germany would have had if they had suffered 2 goal in less than 10 min ....keep up the excellent reporting ...

    June 29, 2010 at 12:18 pm | Reply
  179. Carol Seliak

    I was so excited to be able to watch the World Cup games again but am so disappointed in the problems with goal decisions. Being an American, I know soccer is gaining momentum in this country and I worry that refusal to use technology available to make games accurate and fair will have a negative influence. I strongly disagree that the game has to be held the same at all levels, four years of working toward a World Cup puts it in an entirely different category. These teams are representing their countries and everything that can be done to make the games fair and to build rapport between countries should be used. I sincerely hope the number of incidents so far and all the comments being sent in by supporters will be taken into account, that FIFA get in touch with the times and that the technology that is already there and proven in other sports be used to make the games what they're supposed to be, a coming together of two teams that we're supposed to be able to enjoy.

    June 29, 2010 at 12:37 pm | Reply
  180. Ibraheem

    I don't know why people keep on making noise about goal-line technology to be introduced. Is it because this situation affects one of the most powerful States in the world? How many have suffered due to this issue and nobody raise an eyebrow on it. So as for my own opinion i don't support the goal-line technology to be introduced, we should continue as such, for goal-line technology will create more confusion on and off the pitch.

    June 29, 2010 at 1:02 pm | Reply
  181. JPMiami

    Join the support group on Facebook for FIFA to take action:

    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=136701196342639&ref=mf

    It is fine to apologize, but it is too late, teams and fans have been devastated by these unfair and inexplicable calls and the course of the World Cup has been affected as well. There is a strong need not just for goal-line technology but for “Instant Replay”. It’s only getting worse, four years ago in Germany this issue was very bad, this time in South Africa it has been a disaster. The referees have always made these huge mistakes.

    June 29, 2010 at 1:14 pm | Reply
  182. JPMiami

    Too late for apologies, the harm has been done!!!

    Join the support group on Facebook for FIFA to take action:

    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=136701196342639&ref=mf

    June 29, 2010 at 5:28 pm | Reply
  183. Liz

    Those saying they want to keep football 'pure' are a joke. Do you see the players running around on the pitch with wooden shin guards or leather shoes? The game is evolving. Instant replay, FIFA. That's all you need. Interrupting the flow of the game? It took all of one second to see the ball behind the goal in the England/Germany game. England isn't even my team of choice. You're embarrasing yourselves. Look at Wimbledon, Rugby, American Football ... time to enter the 21st century.

    June 29, 2010 at 5:33 pm | Reply
  184. Padre

    Referees make costly mistakes. Sensors are so cheap these days. Make yourself some money MAFIFA!

    June 29, 2010 at 5:35 pm | Reply
  185. Philip Shook

    What about an apology to the U.S. team!

    June 29, 2010 at 6:12 pm | Reply
  186. ALYSSA

    I keep thinking that they, FIFA, do want technology helping in football because people benefit anomously from it. Millions and billions of dollars in the wager around the world.

    June 29, 2010 at 7:13 pm | Reply
  187. Stingray

    I think the following situations should have a 4th ref looking at an instant replay of the situation:

    1) possible offside goals
    2) possible direct red cards
    3) possible penalty situations
    4) most important, possible ball crossing of the goal line

    This does not require expensive technology, just the instant replay already available, instantly, and narrowing tehnology input down to these 4 scenarios allows for the dynamic of football to continue as refs still hold absolute powers over calls outside the box.

    This would be cheap, easy to implement, direct, and most important of all, fair.

    June 29, 2010 at 8:16 pm | Reply
  188. Denise Catalfamo

    It is time for FIFA to step into the 21st century and start using goal-line technology. With the Hawkeye system I would go one better and tie all cameras into a small recorder/watch the referees wear. They could see the instant replay automatically, thereby alleviating the "extra time" issue.

    June 29, 2010 at 8:56 pm | Reply
  189. German Fan

    All time the English soccer need a casualty. The best League is in England, and also the best teams, but there is no English Team. 2006 against Portugal was C. Ronaldo guilty. 2002 was Beckham guilty. 1998 it was David Beckham. 1986 it was Diego Maradona.
    When the German Team lost, then they lost like a team.

    best regards from Germany

    June 29, 2010 at 10:07 pm | Reply
  190. lennart torstensson

    swedish television made an own replay of david villa´s goal on portugal.
    on that replay you can see that he is offside when xavi passes the ball to him! so the goal should not have been permitted! he is onside when iniesta passes to xavi, and not everyone sees that xavi touches that ball!
    in the official broadcast no replay of this goal was shown! they often send replays with the offside area marked... but not in this case!

    June 29, 2010 at 11:28 pm | Reply
  191. Erik

    Video replay on goals is needed!!
    There is also a need for correctly calling goal and corner kicks. What is wrong with more corner kicks which might equal more goals? I understand why they don't want the replay but they need to just get with the times or they will lose interest from many viewers. Especially if these calls keep hurting different countries there will be an uproar!
    Also why is he not apologizing to USA for their 2 goals in 2 different games called back?

    June 29, 2010 at 11:35 pm | Reply
  192. Mowen

    Blatter didn't apologize to the US about the 2 legal goals which were denied in 2 different matches. When a player committed a foul, he got yellow-carded, red-carded, and suspended. But when a referee committed serious mistakes, he still continue to be in charge the game, the next game, ...and the next. How nice the system is! And If the goal line technology is in place, will it catch the Zidance's Incident in 2006?...I doubt it.

    June 29, 2010 at 11:48 pm | Reply
  193. Idiotinside

    Now, to all those who ask for digital, video etc.
    Football/ soccer has done well for more than 100 years without those.
    It is a game for humans with humans. It is a game for fun, drama, etc.

    If you want total control over the game, then why you do even bother to start with it and play it? It is a useless game if you look from that point of view. Better dont waste your time and go only for working, eating and sleeping.
    I want football to reflect how life really is: unjust sometimes, lucky / unlucky etc..
    Once you start with all that technology , the charme will be killed and it will become a sterile competition without any flair.

    June 29, 2010 at 11:50 pm | Reply
  194. C Timothy Fetscher

    FIFA should consider putting 2 refs on the field, A soccer field is hard for one man or woman to police, An extra pair of eyes would solve many of these issues.

    June 30, 2010 at 1:24 am | Reply
  195. Philip Gibson

    Pedro, you are suggesting here and on TV, that the only change FIFA will consider is one that would decide the very rare cases where it's unclear whether the ball has crossed the goal line or not. You say that video replays will not be considered in determining offside decisions because offside decisions are 'subjective'. That doesn't make sense! The offside calls certainly are subjective if they are made in real time with the official scurrying down the sideline and having to make a high-pressure, split-second decision. Having (limited) appeals and the fourth official calmly taking a few seconds to look at the freeze-frame video reply would be a million times less 'subjective'.

    Pedro, slow motion and freeze-frame video replays are already here; they invite minimal ‘subjectivity’ compared to the present system, and they will allow the important decisions to be made accurately, as 95% of the people commenting on your blog here have stated. I can’t even see any reason not to start using them IMMEDIATELY!

    June 30, 2010 at 1:48 am | Reply
  196. John boy

    Soccer is a string of random events that occassionally leads to a goal, if the spectators are lucky. The best solution to the problem is to watch football and leave soccer where it belongs, as a young woman's sport.

    June 30, 2010 at 2:28 am | Reply
  197. Brad South Africa

    Is Sepp Blatter maybe a little too old, and rusty, to handle an organisation as massive as Fifa?
    How is it possible to deny technology when it only leads to the game being more fair??
    The World Cup is way more than a soccer match, and to send a team home over a PREVENTABLE mistake is ridiculous.
    If he does not agree to the game being as fair as possible, he should go!

    Brad
    South Africa

    June 30, 2010 at 7:03 am | Reply
  198. Martin

    It is indeed hard to swallow the ossified FIFA top official’s rigid belief that implementation of high-tech equipments on the field being not possible. He chooses to trust the human eyes of the referees but not a video replay saying that the technology might not be accurate enough. Who on earth can give me the logic behind this, when millions of people around the world can instantly see a wrong call on a regular TV replay but a high-tech equipment on the field is not good enough for the officials? It’s just ridiculous. “A replay will disrupt the continuity of the game”, so they say. And the FIFA officials stick to their motto of not stopping the game at the expense of the agony of victims on wrong calls. What is the big deal for spending a minute or two to justify a call? Why is continuity of play so important, even over a just call?

    June 30, 2010 at 7:35 am | Reply
  199. jay nanagas

    the picture says it all. it was a GOAL! but the game officials and the members of soccer's governing body say – that's not the way we see it, sorry.

    that the goal would not have changed the outcome of the game? only if you looked at the final score. had the England goal been counted . . . who knows . . . that could have rallied the English team to attack and defend better during the rest of the match and possibly win the game.

    while the English lost this particular match – all soccer fans are on the losing end – when will the same thing happen to their team; where is the fairness in the game. what message are we sending sports lovers.

    June 30, 2010 at 7:36 am | Reply
  200. YUSUF

    Blatter, You Will Ruin This Game!

    The game of Football can be perfect, only Sepp Blatter does not think so.
    The problem of implementing goal-line technology is being stifled by Blatter. It is not his fault, it is because the system allows him.

    The genesis of this problem is that Blatter has stayed too long at the helm of affairs in FIFA that he finds it difficult to accept a change. He stubbornly refuses change. When you have a system that allows you to seek re-election as long as you want, there is nothing precluding such a person from perpetuating himself in office. A hero suddenly turns a Villain. That is what Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe has become. That is what Issa Hayatou, President of Confederation of African Football (CAF) has become.

    When a man stays to long in a place, he resists change and wants it to be business as usual forever. I kid you not, if Blatter decides to harken to the voice of reason today, FIFA will implement the goal-line technology. So how do we achieve this- an amendment to the Articles of Association of FIFA. The AoA shold limit the tenure of the FIFA president to a maximum tenor of two(2) terms of four(4) years each. For crying out loud, FIFA is not and should not be a monarchy where you can stay as long wish.

    Because Blatter has stayed so long as FIFA president, he has become a clog in the wheel of progress of Football. I need remind you not, absolute power corrupts absolutely! When you stay so long at an influential position, its is only natural that you will pocket the major decision makers in the organization, the board/decision making committee becomes your rubber-stamp, you become more of a liability than an asset- that is what Blatter has become. Now he should go. He should quit. No re-election for Blatter. Let’s say no to self-perpetuation in office! I tell you what, if after Blatter spent 10 years at FIFA, another president had come in, he would have brought new ideas, the goal-line technology or a solution would have been implemented. For how long will Blatter continue to rob teams of the reward of their effort.

    At least if Blatter will not allow the video-line technology , why not have one referee each at the back of each goal post. This will help solve the problem. When you win, you should honourably. You should not be assisted by Blatter!

    Blatter, please harken to the voice of reason. The voice of the people is the voice of God. Blatter, Don’t Ruin This Game! Quit honourably! You have overstayed your welcome.

    June 30, 2010 at 10:12 am | Reply
  201. sasos

    When FIFA has two rules for the same offence...then Technology may not help matter. In the current world cup matches we have seen where players have been cautioned (some expelled) for handling the ball while some hanled the ball twice and then scored. Yet, The referee confirmed to the player that he handled the ball with his hand rather than penalised him, the referee accepted the goal.
    FIFA will not allow technology introduced into goal-line decision-making that could enable the mistakes (errors) of the referees to be corrected. So, anyone who looses knows that he does so honourably.
    Technology should be used to revert erroneous decision which makes the game unattractive once such wrong decisions are allowed to hold.

    June 30, 2010 at 11:09 am | Reply
  202. Sam

    Most of the regulation changes in football have been beneficial to the game (even the golden goal was a brilliant addition until they inexplicably did away with it), but TV replays will not improve the game. If anything, it will be a determent to the quality of refereeing. Everyone's just having a knee jerk reaction to the disallowed English goal. Call me a purist, but the judgment calls of a referee are just as much a part of the game as the skill and judgments of players. Keep football as low tech as possible and keep the drama alive.

    June 30, 2010 at 4:11 pm | Reply
  203. Abiraj

    This is True.Bt i think, fifa don't accept this technowlogy, especially most wanted goal line camera technowlogy.Because they believe natural beauty of football.Manual errors are part of it.

    June 30, 2010 at 4:33 pm | Reply
  204. Pàùl

    A long time in the past we din't have Tv Replays and so on ok, FIFA should accept technology but what you have to understand is that if we keep accepting technology the will be no fun the real ambiance will not be present . I think Football should stay as it is a GAME with Players,Supporters,fair-play and Referees that make mistakes No technology (:

    July 1, 2010 at 6:58 pm | Reply
  205. vlado

    I' strongly opposed to applying an any kind of technology to the game because the game will lose its popularity and will be limited to big events instead to local small games which means the world to the stalwart local fans.
    why should I watch game caused by human error when I can switched on my TV and watch the real thing
    What about small clubs and small leagues which cannot install this kind of technology.They will plunged into obscurity and will not be taken seriously having diversed from the "real" thing-precision
    People will inevitably lose their interest in their magical display and the human factor and God hand in all of this will become superfluous, redundant and unnecessary.There will be a fewer players crossing themselves In luck which is not a good thing considering God as a twelve player on the pitch or not who knows.

    July 2, 2010 at 10:41 am | Reply
  206. vlado

    Do you think that there would have been such a debate if there wasn't human factor involved, i think not.So the game is much more popular day after the match in hand then before

    July 2, 2010 at 11:00 am | Reply
  207. Abioye Sunday Segun

    Such inccidences happen with Chealsea in the past either championship or premiership game so its not new thing.Refrees needs more training.

    July 5, 2010 at 11:33 am | Reply
  208. Johnnyr51

    A million pick-up basketball, softball, volleyball, soccer games happen year round without instant replay. The use of technology in professional sports has not hurt the enjoyment of the games on a local level one bit. Never will.
    To me the obvious solution is to have a FIFA official already in position "upstairs" at a monitor ready to make an "official" decision based on the instant replay the tv broadcasters already provide. He signals to the field below with seconds if he can see the foul or the mistake. If he can't determine from the replay, he signals that too and the game continues. This shouldn't take more than 15 secs out of the game – no more than a "fake" injury does repeatedly in every game.

    July 5, 2010 at 2:12 pm | Reply
  209. Deca durabolin 200 mg

    My neighbor and I have been just debating this specific topic, he is often looking for to prove me incorrect. Your view on this is great and precisely how I actually feel. I simply now mailed him this website online to show him your personal view. After wanting over your website I e-book marked and might be coming back to read your new posts!

    June 23, 2011 at 6:00 am | Reply

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.