Have Video Officials Killed Our Belief in Sport?

Claims by former Netherlands football coach Louis van Gaal that last year’s FIFA football World Cup in Qatar was rigged in order to allow one of the game’s greats Lionel Messi to win a World Cup have caused quite a storm, and much debate.

Van Gaal was speaking to Dutch broadcaster NOS at the Eredivisie Awards, eight months after his Netherlands side bowed out of the competition in the quarter finals, losing to Messi’s Argentina.

“When you see how Argentina gets the goals and how we get the goals, and how some Argentina players overstepped the mark and were not punished, then I think it all premeditated game,” van Gaal was quoted as saying in the Independent.

Sadly there are frequently such questions when it comes to World Cup matches and the debate rages on for years.

For example it is vital that the host nation does not lose the opening game of a World Cup. Incredibly Qatar became the first host nation to lose an opening game in the Men’s World cup in 2022. There have been 22 editions of the FIFA World Cup and the host nation has only lost the opening game once! Although the host has drawn the opening game six times, Japan in 2002, South Africa in 2010, the USA in 1994, Spain in 1982, Mexico in 1970 and England in 1966.

The most recent of those draws came in South Africa in 2010, and many will recall that the host nation in some people’s minds should have gone behind against Mexico, but Arsenal’s Carlos Vela had his ‘goal’ ruled out for a very marginal offside. Siphiwe Tshabalala then gave the hosts the lead with a goal that will live long in the memory ten minutes after half time. Mexico tied things up in the 79th minute. A draw was okay, but a loss would have been disastrous for FIFA and the competition.

It is remarkable that Qatar are the first host nation to lose the opening game in 92 years of competition.

If you look at the FIFA Women’s World Cup again only once has the host nation lost the opening game of a World Cup, and that was in the second edition back in 1995. The Women’s game did not attract as much attention in that era, but Sweden went down 0-1 to Brazil in their opening game in a tournament that boasted the best 12 teams in the world at the time, so there were no easy games against lower ranked sides to open the tournament.

There have been a number of events over the years that have subsequently raised eyebrows.

In 1974 East Germany defeated West Germany in their final pool game. The West Germans were far from happy, and allegedly went to the World body stating that this was very damaging to their nation, and could not happen again. The two countries were never ever paired to play against each other in another FIFA sanctioned tournament.

Four years later In 1978 when Argentina was host and won its first ever World Cup, their nation was in turmoil. A military coup having taken control of the country two years before the tournament was to take place.

There was a great deal of controversy surrounding the host nation. For a start all of their games in the first round kicked off at night, which gave the Argentinians the advantage of knowing where they stood in the group, and what they had to do to progress. For the Government of the day it was imperative that the nation succeed.

In their second group game against France, Argentina benefitted from a number of favourable calls. After France were denied what looked to be a clear penalty in the first half, an anonymous French player said he had heard the referee tell Daniel Passarella, who had committed the foul on Didier Six, “Don’t do that again please, or I might have to actually give it next time.”

There have been other accusations surrounding this tournament, that the Argentina players were using performance enhancing drugs and that come the drug testing post game their water boy along with his wife supplied the required urine. Hence why the tests allegedly showed that a player was pregnant! Nothing was done about the pregnant test.

Fast forward to Japan/Korea 2002 and many are still convinced that South Korea were given decisions to assist them to progress in the tournament as hosts, as this would benefit football in Asia and in the nation.

There was some controversy in their group game against the USA, but it was the round of 16 match versus Italy that is the one that stands out. Italian fans were incensed that referee Byron Moreno only gave Kim Tae-young a talking to after he elbowed Alessandro Del Piero following a tussle between the pair. Most felt that a card was definitely warranted.

One has to remember that at this time there was no VAR. It was in the 13th minute of extra-time that Francesco Totti was sent off when he received a second yellow card. The referee believed that he had dived in the penalty area. Today there are still mixed views on this decision but the replay appears to show some contact by Song Chong-gug. Was it enough? The debate rages on.

However, the moment that still infuriates the Italians came in the 20th minute of golden goal extra-time. Damiano Tommasi broke clear, rounded goalkeeper Lee Woon-jae and thought he had scored. His effort was wrongly ruled offside and the goal was disallowed. South Korea claimed a winner in the 117th minute.

Their luck would continue in the quarter finals against Spain. Five minutes after half-time a Spanish free-kick from the right hit the back of Kim Tae-young and flew into the net as a group of players challenged for the ball. The goal was disallowed, apparently for a push by Ivan Helguera on the Korean defender.

Luis Enrique found himself through and one-on-one with the goalkeeper only to hear the whistle and be called offside. Replays showed that he was onside. Again in extra time golden goal Spain’s Fernando Morientes thought he had scored the winner when he headed home a Joaquin cross. His effort was ruled out after the linesman adjudged that the ball had crossed the deadball line. Replays showed that it clearly hadn’t.

South Korea would go on to win the penalty shoot-out 5-3, where there were again accusations that the South Korean goalkeeper had come off his line.

Incredibly in that tournament there were five disallowed goals for South Korea’s opponents.

Now the sport has Video Assisted Referees. This was supposed to be used to make sure that the correct decisions were made, and that teams did not lose out due to an error by the officials on the field of play.

We now have a chip inside the ball that is supposed to confirm whether a player was offside or not. Yet many are far from convinced with the computer technology being used, and feel that it is far from clear. Even those operating the technology in some sports have admitted that the computer is not 100% accurate. Also that it can be manipulated if so desired. Which raises the question as to whether this technology has validity. Yes it may be better than nothing but it is still not definitive.

The key thing to remember is that there is no algorithm for reality. Reality is often unpredictable and chaotic.

As one would expect there have been questions over some decisions in the recent FIFA Women’s World Cup hosted by New Zealand and Australia. These will no doubt come up again in years to come. Decisions we were told as viewers had been made by the official in charge of VAR and relayed to the referee, but fans and viewers were not always shown that footage to be able to comprehend how that decision had been reached. Then there were other decisions that did not appear to have been reviewed, when to the average viewer they appeared to warrant a review.

USA goalkeeper Alyssa Naeher has come out publicly and said that she is convinced she saved the penalty in the shoot out against Sweden that was deemed a goal and saw the defending Champions eliminated. On an episode of the podcast “Snacks” she said “Truthfully, I will go to my grave claiming that I saved it, you cannot convince me otherwise. I have the pictures saved on my phone. I have looked at it an unhealthy amount of times since the game has ended, I’ve watched it over and over. I genuinely thought that I had saved it.”

There were many decisions in this tournament that appeared questionable. There were decisions that made some overseas fans question whether FIFA was ‘looking after’ Australia as the host nation, in terms of penalty claims and the disallowed goal against France. Sadly that is the nature of sport.

The big issue has to be if you are going to use video technology to make a decision that footage has to be shared with those who are inside the stadium and have bought tickets, as well as the viewers at home who nowadays have paid for a subscription to that channel to watch the match. It should be imperative that this vision is shared so that everyone can understand why a decision was made. This will in turn put a stop to accusations and innuendo.

There is a very genuine concern that video footage is being used to influence an outcome, rather than ensure the correct decision is made. If so this needs to be stopped immediately. Although with so many sports and sporting bodies entwined with betting companies, and receiving revenue from them is it really any wonder that this is happening at the highest levels of sport?

Knowing that sporting bodies are gaining financially from betting, would it not be in their interests to see more upsets? To see the favourites bow out far earlier than expected?

If the “right teams” progress there are more viewers and ticket sales, there may also be more bets placed on the match so it is a huge money-spinner for all concerned. That is why the video decisions have to be shown rather than a computer graphic to justify a decision. Or maybe it is time that the powers that be go back to trusting the officials on the pitch? Appoint the best and put faith in them, accepting that they are human and will make the odd mistake, but overall they will make the right decision.

What is sad is when technology is used to change an outcome. In recent amateur sporting event involving judges, participants were awarded points for their performance. The rules of the competition stated that these points would determine the final outcome of the competition and the placings of all the competitors. The head judge did not agree with the outcome of the person who came second. They asked for video footage to be shared of their performance, only footage of that individual and no one else’s. They picked holes in the performance and relegated that individual not just from second place but out of the top three. Why wasn’t every performance subjected to such scrutiny?

Here is a prime example of video footage being used to influence an outcome, and this is in an amateur competition with no money attached to the result. So how often are we witnessing the same behaviours in top level sport where millions of dollars are at stake?

It is very sad that no longer is video technology being used as it was intended, to ensure that the right decisions were made, to eliminate glaring errors. It would now appear across the board it is being used to ensure that the ‘chosen’ ones get the decisions.

Many may not agree with Louis van Gaal, and put his comment down to sour grapes, but maybe there is some validity to his claim. Certainly it will be debated for many years to come. Let’s not forget that South American teams were convinced that England as hosts were the predetermined winners of the 1966 FIFA World Cup. That belief led to Brazilian Joao Havelange challenging the European domination of FIFA, and when elected as President of FIFA he changed the game in ways few could have imagined. Some would say that these changes are a legacy of his time at the top. It is certainly interesting how many of the controversies mentioned happened on his watch. .

As the line in the song “Video Killed the Radio Star” says, “We can’t rewind we’ve gone too far.” That would appear to be the case in the world of sport. There can be no doubt that the Video official, has changed the game and our belief in the outcomes.