NO other sport in the world is shown on television as extensively or is viewed by as many people as association football.
And the fallout to refereeing errors and perceived injustices in the likes of basketball, cricket, rugby union and tennis is nowhere near as great.
Yet, when it comes to the use of video replays to assist officials in the decision-making process, the beautiful game still lags light years behind.
The frustrating situation regularly results in controversies - like the one that has erupted in Scotland this week in the wake of the Scottish Cup semi-final between Inverness Caledonian Thistle and Celtic.
The influence of Sepp Blatter, president of world governing body FIFA since 1998, has been largely responsible for a bizarre reluctance to keep pace.
Blatter was vehemently opposed to the use of technology in football in any way for many years due to a desire to protect what he described as the "universality" of the game.
"A group of teenagers in any small town around the world should be playing with the same rules as the professional players they see on television," he once explained.
However, the 79-year-old has softened his notoriously hard line stance of late and, in a typical self-promoting fashion, is now portraying himself as a champion of change.
The Frank Lampard goal for England in their last 16 tie against Germany in the 2010 World Cup in South Africa - that was not given by the referee despite clearly crossing the goal-line - was a definite turning point.
As a direct result of that incident, the International Football Association Board, the body that determines the Laws of the Game, approved the use of two goal-line technology systems, Hawk-Eye and GoalRef, in 2012.
There is now a growing appetite across Europe and further afield for video replays to be introduced due to a increasing number of avoidable incidents like the one that occurred at Hampden at the weekend.
Carlo Tavecchio, the president of the Italian Football Federation, wrote to FIFA last season asking for permission to experiment with the technology following a particularly explosive Serie A match between Juventus and Roma.
Meanwhile, their counterparts in the Netherlands, the KNVB, have already taken that step in an innovative scheme named Armitage 2.0.
A video referee last season examined replay footage of contentious incidents filmed by television cameras inside a stadium during a game.
He was not in direct contact with any match official. However, the exercise provided Dutch officials with practical experience of how the procedure would work. The results were hugely positive and quite startling.
"We explored the possibilities of a video referee," said KNVB competition affairs manager Gijs de Jong. "We were very pleased with the pilot. On average, there were two or three contentious moments per game where the video referee could have had a supporting role.
"In those situations, we found that the video referee could have given correct advice to the refereeing officials on the pitch within ten seconds. This could have added to the fairness of matches."
Ten seconds. That is how long it would have taken for an official located within the stadium to relay to referee Steven McLean at Hampden that Inverness centre half Josh Meekings had handled the ball at the weekend.
The KNVB's remarkable findings do not tally with the views of those who fear that introducing video replays will slow down games and cause irrevocable damage to the spectacle.
They did, however, show that having the ability to refer to video replays will not be a panacea for all of refereeing's ills. Having spent days debating the ins and outs of the Meekings incident, that is no surprise.
De Jong added: "We found that in some cases, the video referee may find it difficult to support the officials on the pitch. For instance, when the referee has stopped play for offside. In that case, it will be difficult for him to intervene."
The KNVB applied to the IFAB to step up their ground-breaking project and use video referees in a competitive situation in the Dutch Cup next season. They had hoped to have the officials connected via a headset in that competition.
Those trials, though, have been put on hold for a year to allow further discussion. Fifa general secretary Jerome Valcke said: "It is the biggest decision ever in the way football is played."
Proposals to experiment with a system that allowed managers to challenge a stipulated number of decisions a half at the FIFA Under-20 World Cup in New Zealand next month have also amounted to nothing.
Sadly, the use of video replays to aid referees make correct decisions may not be imminent. However, the clamour for it among players, managers, club owners, senior officials and supporters is escalating and it is surely inevitable.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article