It’s pretty hard to think of an argument against using computer technology to get calls right. The one that seems most plausible in soccer is that it might disrupt the flow of the game, which isn’t constantly broken by time outs like American sports. But I don’t buy this. First, soccer is far from a continuous flow, but has stoppages all the time (ref whistles blow play dead on a frequent basis for fouls, balls gone into touch, etc.). Second, goals are already stoppages of play. Adding a few moments won’t change much, especially if the review is limited only to disputed goals.

Given FIFA’s centralized command-and-control structure, change will come more slowly to soccer, but it’s only a matter of time before they give in to the rising replay tide, and when they do the sport will be the better for it.

If you know Inzaghi’s game you will know that he invariably plays on the shoulder of the last defender or bats the ball into the net with an improbable piece of his anatomy, start reviewing every unorthodox goal and you will remove a large element of the interest in watching football.

So, since play already had stopped, this is a situation that might call for some kind of instant review based on recorded video. All goals might be subject to review. Was Inzaghi really in an onside position for goal #2? I believe so, but the goal was excellent precisely because it was extremely close. Or Liverpool’s coach, or perhaps the captain of the victimized side, might elect to throw the equivalent of the NFL’s red flag, electing to have the play reviewed.

Would this upset the spirit of the game? Would it undermine the referee’s authority in any sense? Would it lead the sport down a problematic slippery slope?

1. The ref regards the infraction as intentional. A foul is called and the play is whistled dead. Penalties are assessed (more egregious handballs might get a yellow or worse if in the box or near the goal).

2. The ref regards the infraction as unintentional. No foul, no whistle, play continues, and whatever happens as a result of the deflection from the arm or hand is part of the continuation.

So here, the ref clearly seems to have thought the Inzaghi non-handball fell into category 2, hence no foul was called and whatever happened to the ball as a result of the contact with Pippo’s arm–here, a goal–was allowed to take place.

The rules indeed don’t seem to include any tiebreakers in borderline cases (i.e., close cases are always infractions), but here my guess is that the ref simply didn’t see what went on very clearly. I thought the goal went in direct from Pirlo’s free kick, and only saw the Inzaghi deflection on the replay. By the time anyone realized there might have been a handball, it was likely way too late to revise the non-call.