BY NOUSHYAR PANAHPOUR ESLAMI | April 26, 2016

Why, Oh Why?

When I was six years old, I lived in the small city of Kerman, Iran. There, a few neighbors and I played soccer in dirt streets with a plastic soccer ball. Four large stones, presumably from a crumbling wall in a nearby abandoned construction site, determined our goals, and with that we played. The beautiful game—futbol, soccer, no matter what you call it—the sport is simple. It was simple when the great Pele played; it was simple when I played in Iran; and it should be simple when my children play it someday. Recently however, the debate over the use of technology in soccer, specifically Goal-Line Technology, has taken over and complicated the sport. This new technological feat has come to be on the minds of fans, players and soccer analysts throughout the world. It has taken the media by storm from small excerpts on CNN to the front pages of ESPN, the issue has indeed caused a frenzy.

It all began following the disputed goal of Pedro Mendes, which would have won the Tottenham Hotspurs the game against Manchester United in 2005 (Cirocco). The ball is obviously across the line in the fullest extent, yet due to the goalkeeper’s valiant effort to bring the ball out, the truth was not seen by the four pairs of eyes that mattered. Since then, incidents like this have plagued social media and sparked the Federation Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) to introduce what we now know and love: Goal-Line Technology. This technology allows a gentlemen sitting in a booth to review the goal, and inform the referee about the decision. This would then do away with any uncertainty and allow the referees to make the correct call as well as allow teams like Tottenham to receive the correct call. Perfection is a great temptation and I love it as much as the next guy, but that just is not how the world works. With this addition, FIFA has blatantly destroyed the integrity and humanity of the game. This is quite simply the start of a journey of deviance from a game that includes as much human error as our own lives. Soccer was made by imperfect humans and therefore like us, it too is imperfect. It is those imperfections that give soccer its character, its rivalries and quite frankly it is those imperfections that make it the game so many know and love. For this reason, as a lowly sports blog writer, I ask you FIFA, why oh why would you do such a thing?

What’s the Big Deal?

Knowing whether or not a goal is for sure a goal, can be truly beneficial to the game, especially for tournaments like the FIFA World Cup where the results are incredibly impactful, and the stakes are as high as possible. With Goal-Line Technology, the referee is alerted within one second if a goal has occurred or not (Cirocco). I bear no ignorance here, this is a phenomenal feat. So then what is the big deal? Humanity, my friend, humanity.

When we live our day to day lives, be it as a student, a teacher, a CEO or a garbage man, do we not make mistakes? Our lives are a dedication to our very own imperfections. If we, as humans, made absolutely no errors throughout the entirety of our lives, then we would be considered as binary as the very computer I am using to type this. Goal-Line Technology is not a necessity, it is simply a method to attain a level of perfection that is and forever will be unattainable. Any further development of this technology (replay technology, foul technology etc.) is just another bit of our humanity given away. The purity of soccer as a sport is at stake, and we cannot allow it to be controlled in this manner. See, if soccer were to become this perfect game with full and complete certainty it would be boring. And in all honesty, so would our lives if we were perfect human beings. The controversies that have come from errors, the rivalries that have been built, the historic moments that we have witnessed; these are all results of human error and will forever be the aspects that make the sport so near and dear to our hearts.

The Destruction

In 2010, FIFA President Sepp Blatter stated, “one of the main objectives of FIFA is to protect the universality of the game” (Blatter). But sir, this technology is a complete step against this so-called protection!

Now, I realize Blatter has not exactly proved to be the most honest man in the business, so I by no means expect him to live up to his word; however, an objective is an objective. When a child watches a FIFA sanctioned soccer game, s/he is looking to replicate it completely. Children want to become soccer stars. (Yes, I wanted to be Messi, and on some level, I still believe I can.) Their impressionable young minds, want to be the identical copy of what they are watching, and this technology impedes this dream. Soccer’s integrity as a sport lies in its accessibility to people of all backgrounds and opportunities, use of technology would cause this to take a great hit. Furthermore, it will create a divide between the game played on the streets of Kerman and in Camp Nou in Barcelona. Such a divide in a sport that has for so long unified the world cannot be tolerated as we cannot have a sport within which those without access to this technology are alienated from the others. Soccer is a sport that requires only friends and a ball (or kickable round object of sorts), and I see no reason why this list should be extended.

One More For Good Measure

Another issue that damages the purity and integrity of the game is presented very well by Emily Ryall who claims “the nature of football (its fluidity and rhythm) would be adversely affected with the use of GLT [Goal-Line Technology]” (Ryall).

In places where this technology is used –like the NFL– referees will take a very long pause during the middle of the game to not only review the play but to also come to a consensus over the call. Furthermore, this time is auctioned off as ad-time to the highest bidder throughout the game. Firstly, soccer is a game known for being played in two uninterrupted 45 minute halves. When stereotypical soccer hating individuals want to complain about soccer, they complain of the length of the game! Furthermore, theses guys hate the fact that the time taken for fouls in the game is accounted for and added to the end of each half, thus ensuring he is bored for a complete 45 minutes. My point here is, the rules of soccer are made to ensure continuous play. The whole point of the game is to leave our soccer-hating friends as angry as possible. You see, what these individuals fail to understand is that in soccer, the viewer expects non-stop action for a solid 45 minutes; the thought that any one pass, cross or header can lead to a goal keeps the eyes of the viewers glued to the game. In a world where the game is constantly interrupted by reviews—a pause is inevitable even in a one-second review time—the appeal and integrity of the game are both in jeopardy.

I Leave You With This

Soccer is a simple sport. It is one of integrity and purity, an ancient game that has developed into a universal human sport. This sport had brought together people of all races, genders, religions, financial statuses and social statuses. It is incredible to view the effect of something as simple as kicking a ball into a net, on billions around the globe. To stop such an impact, or to do anything that would hinder such an impact is incredibly appalling. Goal-Line Technology is a phenomenal idea, but it is not good for the sport. As simple a sport as soccer is, it is equally imperfect. It is an imperfect sport made by imperfect people, and that is what makes it so human. That is the appeal that has united people around the world over something so simple and menial. So I leave you all with this, I am not perfect, I am not binary and I do not wish to be either of those, and nor do I wish to play a sport that is either of those. Soccer is becoming binary; it is becoming a sport in which all sources of error are slowly being abolished. It is time we take a moment as fans and see if this removal of errors will do more harm than good. It would be a shame to let a game loved by so many diminish into nothing more than a uniform task completed in precisely 90 minutes.