Germany were the better team. They deserved their win and even if England’s ghost goal was allowed, Germany still would have won. The game was played very fairly. No diving, no nasty tackles. Germany humbled England, the ghost of 1966 has been buried – end of story.

Now that is out of the way (due to probable correspondence about the writer being biased) we can tackle the issue at hand – video replays. Should we? Or shouldn’t we?

Last week, this newspaper’s leading article discussed the issue of our blind addiction to technology – information technology in particular – but technology nonetheless. We spoke of the way that everything from business, to markets, to hospitals, to offices and people, of course, are absolutely and hopelessly dependent on technology.

So it poses the question… should video replays be used in football? We all know the controversy. There have been a couple of dodgy decisions in this World Cup, but how can anyone justify two such terrible calls by referees in consecutive second round games. The first, of course, is in relation to Frank Lampard’s strike, while the other is in relation to Argentina’s offside goal.

FIFA’s Sepp Blatter was vehemently opposed to the introduction of football technology, saying: “If play were to be stopped to take a decision, it would break up the rhythm of the game and possibly deny a team the opportunity to score a goal. It would also not make sense to stop play every two minutes to review a decision, as this would go against the natural dynamism of the game.”

After the England versus Germany game, Frank Lampard argued: “We had a meeting before the World Cup when we were told about a million different rule changes that hardly affect the game. The big one, the one that affects the game today, hasn’t been brought in so it is a no-brainer.” There was another recent call after the famous Henry handball that sent France to the World Cup but, still FIFA stood fast. But, perhaps as Alan Shearer puts it best: “All the managers and the stars of football are calling for it. Not everyone can be wrong, can they?” In the end, Blatter relented. He apologised to England and Mexico and has opened the discussion on goal line technology.

But aside from the technicalities, perhaps what makes football, football, is the simple fact that the whole game is down to 11 players on either side, the referee and his assistants. Perhaps if we did take away the aspect of being robbed, the human error factor, we might only be left with a pale shadow of the game. What if Grosso was adjudged not to have been fouled in the box against Australia last time round? What if the second goal against Slovakia was allowed to stand? What if Sir Geoff Hurst’s ‘goal’ had not counted in 1966? What if Maradona’s hand of God had not been allowed?

These are issues which must be taken into account and perhaps the World Cup would lose a good many of its legends. We have been talking about 1966 since it happened! And this is what FIFA does not want to lose. Granted, video replay technology works in the US and it also works in the European sport of rugby. But, do those sports have the same legends?

This is a difficult argument to put across, especially to those who feel aggrieved. And of course those who say that a goal which is a goal should stand, no matter what, are completely correct. They are also correct when they say it should be used to rule out offside goals. But aside from all this, where do you draw the line? Will we end up using video replays for everything from offsides to analysing a retort to the referee?

It’s a very big decision to take.