...and so still a lot of controversy to discuss down the pub.
FIFA President Sepp Blatter invokes the ire of fans for a lot or reasons, but in light of the recent Thierry Henry affair perhaps the issue he gets most heat for is his insistence on blocking the introduction of TV replays to the game.
Most other team sports — almost all with far smaller budgets, audiences and 'stakes' than football — now regularly employ state-of-the-art video methods to ensure decisions are correct and miscarriages of justice do not happen.
FIFA, however, have steadfastly refused such a move in football—and will almost certainly continue to do so.
Arguably, that is justified. One of the beautiful aspects of football is that it is a game that is intrinsically the same from grass-roots level right through to the World Cup final—the same shaped ball, pitch and goal dimensions, and number of players.
Utilising technology would destroy that—and not just between the professional and amateur games. Once it has been decided who will pay for the technology in the Premier League (you can bet clubs will resist footing the bill, as will the Football Association or Sky), who will pay for it to be deployed in the Championship or Leagues 1 and 2?
Their audiences might be smaller, but they are no less deserving of accurate officiating. A situation like we currently see in cricket, where the host broadcaster or international games decides which technological aides (Hawkeye, the Snickometer, Hotspot) are available to the third umpire, should never become a part of the beautiful game.
At the moment, however, video technology would almost certainly only cater for the biggest and most expensive games—which is not what football is all about.
Until that changes, and such technology becomes affordable enough to be deployed at all professional levels (which will surely take ten years), then FIFA are perhaps right to resist the desire for change.