There is something to be said for maintaining the purity of a sport by keeping technology out of the equation. There is also something to be said for keeping the game as fair and accurate as possible, and in this year’s World Cup, officiating has done anything but keep the playing field level.
Following Germany’s 4-1 win over England in the round of 16 on Sunday, the argument for instant replay in soccer seems more effusive than ever. In a tournament that has already been marred by a plethora of blatantly erroneous calls and non-calls, the officials messed up once again, with England falling victim this time around.
It’s hard to argue, after losing a game by three goals, that a single disallowed goal was the turning point. But despite whether or not you side with England coach Fabio Capello, the man has a point.
The England non-goal would have tied the game at 2. Midfielder Frank Lampard booted the ball over the head of German goalkeeper Manuel Neuer, and although replays show the ball unquestionably landed about a yard inside the goal line before bouncing back out, no signal came from referees. Neuer himself later said that he knew the ball had crossed the line.
Yes, after that, England did allow two goals as the team spiraled out of control and axed itself from the competition. But knowing that one goal would have tied the game, how can anyone argue against the fact that the complexion of the rest of the match would have been totally different had the score been 2-2 instead of 2-1?
"The game would probably be different after this [disallowed] goal," Capello told Bloomberg after the game. "After this moment, Germany would have had to play different."
It’s true that Capello could have handled himself better after the loss. He could have been more dignified in defeat, and he could have held himself more accountable. After losing an elimination game, it’s never a good idea for the coach to deflect the blame solely onto the officials, no matter the sport. You never want to be remembered for your lack of class.
But after all the blatant, inexcusable mistakes the officials have made during an event that only happens once every four years — an event in which a nation’s pride is on the line — it’s inhuman to expect all of that frustration to be suppressed. It’s going to come out, eventually — and with Capello, it did.
Now, he’s fighting for his job as the coach of the national team. It’s not completely fair to say that one blown call could be the difference between Capello carrying out the final two years of his contract or getting the boot early, but it definitely is a contributing factor.
And it’s possible that all of the controversy could have been prevented had instant replay been in effect.
The arguments against using instant replay in soccer are the same the arguments against it in any other professional sport. Major League Baseball has long insisted that it would slow the pace of a game that already tends to be far too long, as it is. It interrupts the flow of the game. It’s a slap in the face to the umpires to take all of the power out of their hands and hand it over to computers. It detracts significantly from the purity of America’s pastime.
But it also could help the right team win — in baseball, and in soccer, too.
It is rare for a soccer game to feel like it’s dragging, so that argument is out the window. As for interrupting the flow of the game — why not do something about all that diving, if the concern is to keep the game moving without interruption? And yes, it’s true that using technology to improve the accuracy of the calls on the field takes power away from human officials, but since when did it become a bad thing to make a game fairer? When did it become an impediment to the game to try as hard as humanly possible to make the correct call?
It would be different if FIFA could come up with a valid argument as to why instant replay on goals is a bad idea. It would be different if FIFA offered any sort of apology, reasoning or excuse when officials completely blow it like they did on Sunday.
Instead, FIFA stays mum. It offers up bland, impersonal statements about how errors are part of the game and implementing instant replay would lead to a slippery slope of too much review.
"Please do not insist on the technology," FIFA president Sepp Blatter told Yahoo back in December. "Referees shall remain human, and we will not have monitors to stop the game to see if we are right or wrong. There will be no more discussion [between fans] and then no more hope and then no more life."
Yes, errors are part of the game. Errors are a part of life. But that’s no excuse for failing to correct them.
The real slippery slope has nothing to do with implementing instant replay. The slippery slope is that this sport is relying upon outdated and nonsensical logic to oppose a perfectly valid argument, and that slope is leading to a complete and utter lack of integrity within the game.