UH-OH! Refs made another TWO blunders in the World Cup. Time for Replays?

Before this Cup, and before 2006, there was a lot of talk about the implementation of goal-line technology to negate any mistakes caused by the human eye. Since goals in soccer can be few and far between, one missed goal could change the entire complexion of the Cup.

The two main technological breakthroughs talked about in the soccer community are the Adidas Micro-chip and the Hawk-Eye 3D photo system. Adidas' innovation comes from inserting a microchip into the ball that can instantly relay the message of a goal being scored to the center referee. It is an interesting concept that claims to be extremely accurate. The Hawk-Eye technology is comprised of multiple camera angles that generate a 3D image in which a main computer analyzes and relays the message of goal or no goal to the ref.

The other obvious video element would be to include the standard instant replay.

FIFA, the officiating body of the World Cup, ruled out any replay or goal detection for this Cup in order to preserve the human element in decision making. FIFA explains that they want to make sure that the traditional elements are in place and that the game on TV is the same as the game in the park. With such goal-line technology, there is the fear that unnecessary stoppage and technical difficulties may kill the flow of the sport, which is a critical element.

The human eye has already been tested twice in the first knockout phase of the FIFA 2010 World Cup. England could have tied the match between Germany 2-2 but instead were neglected an obvious(after watching the replay) goal by Frank Lampard. Instead of tying the match, Germany held the lead and knocked in two more as the demoralized English squad could not fight back into the game

Argentina was able to benefit from a missed off-side call to put themselves up 2-1 against the Mexicans in their first round game. This was an easy call for the replay, but the speed of the game made it difficult for the human eye to see it in real time. Argentina scored one more to seal the deal, 3-1.

Argentina is known to have benefitted from such mistakes by the referee in the past. The infamous ‘Hand of God’ put them up against England in the 1986 world cup when Argentina coach, then player, Diego Maradona controversially scored using his hand to punch the ball past the English Goalkeeper. This put them ahead 2-1 and they won that Quarterfinal match and eventually the entire World Cup--still a sore subject for most British soccer fans.

After huge mistakes by the referrees assistant in two knockout matches in this World Cup, FIFA will yet again have to make replay a key agenda item as many fans are infuriated by the lack of accuracy. FIFA released a statement that the replay should not have been shown at Soccer City stadium following the Argentina goal in case it incited any sort of riot.

My friends and I debated that if the ref was just allowed to look up at the screen he would have seen the blunder with his own eye and could have quickly made the correct call--so what do we do? Side with replay and new technology, or continue to call the game with the human eye and maintain tradition?

Slowing down the continuous flow of soccer would be detrimental to the sport, but something may have to be done about the lack of accuracy in the most watched sport in the world. If the Hawk-Eye Technology is as accurate and fast as claimed, i don't see a real reason not to use it. While I am a traditionalist in most sports, seeing a team get cheated out of advancing to the next round is unfair to the fans, the players and the sport. I hope FIFA reconsiders their decision for 2014.