Markus, I'm only interested in the level playing field issue here. The game will always need refs and officials. The difference really is that they should embrace new technologies in order that they can make better informed decisions.
Oh don't get me wrong, personally I'm
totally in favour of adopting available technology that clearly shows what's what, be that video, a chip in the ball, whatever.
Just saying we shouldn't blame anonymous FIFA that is no more than the sum of it's national constituting parts, so we should all pressure our very own national boards that together get to decide what gets implemented or not.
Difficulty there seems to be tho that
there there is no agreement on what is wanted, eg I guess right now a lot of national boards are kinda split in the middle between the conservative
"it's always been this way" on the one hand and progressive
"let's develop" crowd on the other hand.
Watching a press conference recently of team Germany in South Africa you even had the players split down the middle, with one player saying he was for, and the next saying he was against pulling in technology.
So I guess it's down to the media and the public to figure out what the
majority of spectators really want, and then pressure the national boards to push that through.
I guess it's just a social thing between those living more in the past and resisting change vs those open for improvement and innovation kinda thing.
But again, I'm all for technology that unequivocally provides correct assessments of what really and truly happened, particularly in the day and age of big screen reruns that provide a clear, unassailable depiction of the real past for all the spectators to see.
If that clearly clashes with referee decisions that go against what really happened then imo that can't be good for the game in the long run, so that's just another argument for adopting available technology.
