I have
discovered that I like sports a lot more than I thought I did. So, beating the
Arizona heat last weekend, I decided to catch a game on TV. The upcoming game’s
preamble showcased the always-present suited men sitting behind an over-designed
desk, a token woman, and so many graphs, statistics, and news blurbs I get
frustrated after attempting to keep up with half the info my boyfriend comments
on. The overly complex pre-game show finally gave way to one of the simplest
yet elegant sports I think is around… a soccer game.
The U.S. men’s
soccer team had miraculously pulled off the chance to
play against the three-time reigning FIFA
Confederations Cup champ Brazil. The Confederations Cup (in case you are
unfamiliar) is but one tournament held by FIFA (soccer’s international
governing body). The tournament matches
champions from each continent against one another, and spices up the recipe by
inviting the hosting country and the reigning World Cup Champion to join the
fun. Maybe it’s not the admired World Cup, but it’s still a pretty important
tournament.
I settled
into watching the game. Two quick goals in the first half made me shout like a
fan in the stadium. The constant, dissonant buzzing from horns the fans were
equipped with mesmerized me - my mind started to wander. I was thinking about
the simplicity of soccer. There really aren’t that many rules for playing the
game, which means there is little room for tomfoolery. There are only two kinds
of penalties dealt to a player – a yellow card (caution) and a red card
(ejection) – little colored pieces of plastic the official carries in his or
her front shirt pocket. Introduced in
1970, this uncomplicated intervention allows a referee to traverse language
barriers while directly and succinctly communicating their decision on a
particular play.
I snapped
back to the game – it looked like Brazil had cut the U.S. lead in half, but
U.S. keeper Tim Howard caught the ball and threw it back into play. The ref,
unaided by high-tech interventions such as instant replay like in American
football or basketball, decided that the whole ball did not pass the keeper’s line;
it was not a goal. While the ref could not re-watch the play from different
angles, those of us at home glued to the TV did. Even though I was excited and
devoted to the idea of the U.S. winning the Confederation’s Cup, I felt bad for
Brazil – they scored that goal. The announcers started talking about FIFA’s
decision against incorporating instant replay technology into the game and how
they would probably revisit the idea. FIFA has toyed with technologies in the
past: before the 2006 FIFA World Cup, a few companies, including ADIDAS,
experimented with soccer balls with RFID (radio frequency identification) chip
implants. Coupled with a tracking system, refs would be notified via wristwatch
if the ball had passed the goal posts. Complications
with developing the technology meant the 2006 FIFA World Cup went on as it
usually did, with unaided and faulty human witness, and the hype over
developing a be-all end-all system eventually died down.
In the end,
the goal-that-wasn’t didn’t really matter. Brazil controlled the second half,
just like a reigning world champ would, and won the game 3-2. Call me a Luddite,
but in a world that is so complex, and often exacerbated by our attempt to
control complexity through more technology, I relish the idea of having one
thing the world can share that is unfettered by the latest attempts at
artificial perfection. One place left where a human being is still held
accountable and the buck isn’t passed off to some piece of technology or just
another faceless committee. A place where, even at the most highly skilled
level, all you need to play the game is a ball, a net, and a team.
Thanks to
Matthew Villegas for increasing my knowledge about the game.
About the Author: Shannon Lidberg is a Ph.D. student in Human and Social Dimensions of Science and
Technology, and a CNS graduate research associate.
