The FAI's missed opportunity

As the row over Theirry Henry's handball in the France v Ireland World Cup playoff match begins to subside I look into football's missed opportunity to make the game better for officials, players and fans. 'That' handball could and should have sparked a series of events that changed the future of football. Instead all we got from the Irish Football Association (FAI) was a series of implausible, inconceivable suggestions. There is no disputing that Henry's handball was a blatant act of cheating but as soon as the referee allowed the goal to stand FIFA were never going to grant Ireland a replay or an extra place in the World Cup and, however outraged they felt, the FAI must have known this.

The human reaction to Henry's handball was to shout 'unfair' from the rooftops but large institutions (be they companies, governments or governing bodies) don't respond to 'unfair'. Ireland's pleas for France to be thrown out, for the chance of a replay or to become the 33rd team in South Africa was never going to become a reality - logistics & politics clearly stood in the way. Offering Ireland a replay or a place at the World Cup would have offered other countries the opportunity to state their 'hard done by' cases. Costa Rica is the obvious example but Georgia could legitimately say if it wasn't for a wrong penalty decision in their game against Ireland it could have been them, not the Irish facing France in the playoff match. In essence offering Ireland any more than an apology and a token gesture could have seen other footballing nations start legal proceedings to contest their right to play in the World Cup.

Media interest was intense in the days after the game and the FAI had a prominence they are rarely given. They had the opportunity to deplore FIFA to begin using video technology, they had the evidence to show why and they had the sympathy of the fans, media and other footballing nations. They could have used the world's press to help start a bandwagon in favour of video technology and they could have lobbied the influential football nations with the next time itcould happen to you' argument. FIFA's argument against the inclusion of video technology is that it will undermine the authority of the referee, this is absolute rubbish and cricket, rugby and tennis have disproved this. The FAI had the opportunity to make this argument clearly and loudly.

The specifics of how football uses video technology is not easy and merits a completely seperate discussion but football is big business and players, managers and referees are under pressure to make the right decision every time. This is an impossible task but video technology could ensure the referee gets the important decisions right. I would suggest using video technology only to ensure a goal has been scored fairly. To give a recent example Chelsea's goal against Manchester United was scored from a wrongly awarded freekick. I don't think video technology should be used to decide whether a freekick was the correct decision as Manchester United still had the opportunity to defend the freekick but video technology could have been used to determine whether Didier Drogba was offside when he put the ball in the net or if there was a foul on Wes Brown after the freekick had been taken.

The FAI had an opportunity to bring football into the 21st century and start a movement that Sepp Blatter would have struggled to resist, yet in the days and weeks following Ireland's elimination they did not appeal for video technology to be introduced. Prominent managers, ex-players and journalists renewed the call for technology but without the voice of the victims their calls were hollow. The FAI had the chance to make the game better, instead self-interest took control and football, for the foreseeable future, will be significantly poorer for it.