By Nkem Ifejika, London

媒體英語(yǔ)會(huì)帶大家一起學(xué)習(xí)BBC撰稿人在報(bào)道世界大事時(shí)常用到的單詞和短語(yǔ)。

Background: 背景：在2010世界杯比賽中，英格蘭的一粒有效進(jìn)球卻被裁判誤吹無(wú)效；而阿根廷在越位情況下對(duì)墨西哥的一粒進(jìn)球，卻被判有效。綠茵場(chǎng)上，裁判頻頻出現(xiàn)錯(cuò)誤。為什么足球場(chǎng)上不引進(jìn)現(xiàn)代電子技術(shù)來(lái)改變裁判的誤判呢？這成為一大爭(zhēng)議。

Commentary...

And yes, with the hindsight of video replays it was in. Frank Lampard, the England midfielder, chipped the keeper, the ball hit the underside of the crossbar, bounced over the goal-line and back out.

It all happened quickly and in a matter of split seconds, neither the referee nor his assistant had seen it and the game went on. So why not introduce technology which eliminates such mistakes by referees?

Well, the reasons for football's resistance are ideological and practical. Sepp Blatter, who's the president of the world football governing body, FIFA, says the organisation hasn't as yet come upon a foolproof system. Trials of the 3-D Hawk-Eye was found to be 95, and not 100 percent, accurate. Another system which uses a computer chip in the ball is too expensive as it requires the entire pitch to be wired.

Mr Blatter also said that the way the game is played and the technology available should be the same from grassroots to the top level. There is also the flow of the game to consider, which opponents fear would be spoiled by interruptions to solve disputes.

Then there's the slippery-slope argument – if instant technology is used to settle goals today, then why not for fouls tomorrow? But the final and perhaps most compelling reason for resisting technology and keeping referees fallible, is that despite the heartbreaks it keeps everyone talking.