Peat believes there's a stronger case for goal-line technology

Had goal-line video technology been in use, Lampard's "goal" would have stood. Germany deservedly won the match 4-1, but how different might things have been had Lampard's effort counted?

There was no little irony in the fact that the man who has consistently blocked video technology in football, FIFA President Sepp Blatter, was in the Free State Stadium in Bloemfontein to watch the match.

It is hard to conceive of Blatter squirming in his seat over anything, his hide being tougher than teak, but perhaps two other men who were present in South Africa had the good grace to cringe at the injustice they had inflicted on fellow Britons.

For when the International Football Association Board (IFAB), keepers of the Laws of the Game, met earlier this year, Welsh FA president Philip Pritchard and Ray Kennedy, outgoing president of the Irish Football Association which controls the sport in Northern Ireland, joined FIFA's four representatives in voting to stop video technology being considered for goal decisions or any other onfield matters.

The Scottish Football Association and the English FA had wanted the technology at least put on trial, but Blatter and his FIFA friends - the thought of any of them voting against Blatter is laughable - formed an unholy alliance with Pritchard and Kennedy to block it.

The latter two gentlemen have just been in South Africa for the World Cup on official business, so maybe they heard Blatter's apology and his promise to have a re-think when IFAB meets in Cardiff on Wednesday and Thursday.

Ludicrously, Kennedy has already indicated that he is to stand down from his IFA presidency following the botched sacking of former chief executive Howard Wells. So a man who is going to be out of office amid acrimony in September will be discussing the future of the game worldwide.

The matter will definitely be high on the agenda in Cardiff, for SFA president George Peat yesterday confirmed the association's strong stance in favour of goal-line technology which was previously put forward by departed chief executive Gordon Smith.

"The Scottish FA remains in favour of using suitable video evidence to assist referees," said Peat, "but only in the form of goal-line technology. This type of technology has been available for a number of years and has been experimented with by various organisations.

"The events of the World Cup may have brought the issue of video technology back on to the public forum.If anything, I think it may change the stance of other associations."

Peat does not support widespread use of technology for other matters such as penalty claims or offside decisions, even after Carlos Tevez's blatantly offside goal for Argentina against Mexico.

"It would open up a can of worms to begin using video technology for other incidents," said Peat. "It has been said often enough, but it remains valid: where would you draw the line? If you sanitise the game too much you are in danger of losing the beauty of debate and opinion.

"Other sports like tennis and rugby are cited for their frequent use of video technology, but the fundamental difference is that these sports are stop-start by nature and, thus, decisions are made during natural breaks in play.

"Penalty claims are often based on interpretation - even in the media the validity of these claims are often debated even after countless replays - so it is important to protect the referee's authority and the integrity of his decision-making powers."

The problem for all those who want fairness and progress in the game is that any move to use video technology can be vetoed by FIFA as all law-changing resolutions on IFAB must be passed by at least six votes.

Sepp Blatter still holds all the cards and only a real change in his heart will allow technology to assist referees who can't spot a good goal when they see one.