Total Disagreement: Technology in Football

Every now and then, I encounter articles that I disagree with. However, I came to one that I agree with particularly vehemently. This was in The Times, arguing that a recent misuse of technology during a cricket match is a reason that technology should not be implemented in football. Here's a little tid bit:

Had the referral system never been introduced, the view of the traditional umpire that Graeme Smith’s bat had made no discernible contact with the ball would have prevailed and life would have gone on, albeit after some tut-tutting and expressions of sympathy for England. Cricket would be accepted as an imperfect game so complex in character that enthusiasts can find themselves praying for its enemies, such as rain and bad light.

Basically, his argument is that we wouldn't be critical of this play and we wouldn't have controversy over mistakes made by mishandling technology. The truth is that the error was made by a person. The introduction of video technology is to get rid of human error. The error in this instance was made by a human. That's where his argument falls apart.

Now, I don't think video technology should be introduced because I think it would change the game. Football is a flowing game of continuous action. However, that's a different conversation on its own. I was really annoyed by this article.