The Head of FIFA referees: "Vincic is very good; he reacted to the final appointment just like I did in 2002... We invest millions in technology, hoping it will be 'thrown away', meaning the referee has done well. But it was absurd that fans were watching replays while the match officials weren't."
Pierluigi Collina, the referee. "He's the best in history," say the French from France Football, the Ballon d'Or organisers. He has officiated the most important matches, featuring the strongest players, and finals of all kinds: the Olympics, Champions League, World Cups. Today he is the head of FIFA referees, and 24 years after his Germany-Brazil match, he found himself on the other side, as the person responsible for delivering the best news a colleague will ever receive in their career: "You will referee the World Cup final".
Spain v Argentina, Slavko Vincic to referee. "He's had a very good journey. I'm happy for him, as I am for the others who were here; making a choice wasn't easy". What was it like to announce the referee for a World Cup final for the third time? "Every time I get goosebumps. I know what these men and women have done for years, sacrificing so much, including their families. I expected Vincic's emotion; it was the same I experienced myself".
The World Cup saw several innovations: let's start with the eight seconds allowed to goalkeepers before restarting play? "In certain leagues, they held onto it for more than twenty seconds, an eternity. Referees didn't blow the whistle because the 'penalty' – an indirect free-kick inside the box – was disproportionate to the 'offence'. So, we gave them more time, eight seconds, and they know that if they exceed it, a corner will be awarded. The same applies to throw-ins and goal kicks. There have been few infringements, which demonstrates the positive impact of this introduction, making the game more fluid and enjoyable".
It was the most technological World Cup ever. "Technology was introduced to resolve a paradoxical situation. In the stadium, over 80,000 spectators had the chance to see in real-time what had happened on the pitch, but the only person who couldn't was the one who had to make the decisions... There were two paths: either we created an Amish community inside the stadium where technology was banned, or we gave the same opportunity to the referees. We invest millions, hoping, however, that they will be 'thrown away': that would mean the referees have done a good job and haven't needed it".
How much has the referee's role changed? "From the 90s to today, football has changed. Players are different; the game is played at a much higher speed. And throughout all this, technology has played an important role, including for referees. I remember the Brazil-Germany final; when I asked the local Japanese staff if they could give me VHS tapes with videos of the two teams, they looked at me strangely. Today, there's FIFA AI Pro, developed with Lenovo, which can provide useful information for preparation".
The spider-cam incident in Norway v England was discussed. "It's incredible that people can't be convinced that a ball didn't touch any cable... A graph was shown where, when the ball is touched by a player or an object, a peak is visible. In that case, a flat graph was seen from the moment the goalkeeper released the ball until the other player controlled it. There was only a slight wave, related to the air. The same applied to the ball's rotations, and the camera also remained stable. There are technological tools that allow you to clarify certain things".
And in Portugal v Croatia? "Here too, the graph was clear. There's a peak when it touches the Croatian attacker's head, then a flat line, and another peak when it touches the Portuguese defender's back. Since the system doesn't detect contact with hair, the peak is determined by contact with the head".
Some say technology 'kills' emotion. "That's historically inaccurate. For offside, there's a few seconds' wait for confirmation, but the player celebrates when they score. And if the goal is confirmed, there's a second celebration; if it's disallowed, the opposing team celebrates. I find it much fairer that emotion is based on a correct decision, rather than an incident destined to be debated for weeks or decades. Even today, sixty years later, people still question whether, in England's goal in the 1966 final, the ball truly crossed the line..."
Source: Gazzetta
