Like a lot of people, I spent a lot of time following the football World Cup over the few weeks that it was on. FIFA doesn't care one way or the other who wins the Cup, but it would probably give itself more credibility, and keep the fans happier, if it did.
The first issue is disciplining those players who blatantly cheat. Anyone can, in the heat of the moment, make a clumsy, or even reckless, tackle and I'm not talking about those players – the penalties that they receive on the field are punishment enough. I'm talking about cynical, calculated violations of the rules. The most obvious of these was committed by Uruguayan playmaker Luis Suarez, who infamously punched the ball off the line in his side's win against Ghana. Ghana missed the subsequent penalty and lost a penalty shootout, so this act changed the result of the match. The second example when Spanish player Joan Capdevila fell in the Portuguese penalty area and got a penalty for his team and a red card for his opponent, Ricardo Costa. Replays are not conclusive as to whether any contact occurred, but if it did it was not enough to cause Capdevila to fall. It was certainly a pre-meditated, cynical action, and though it didn't change the course of the match – it was late into normal time, Spain already led and no goal resulted – it is the sort of thing that should be strongly discouraged. Both times punishment appeared to be warranted, but all that happened was Suarez received the mandatory one-match suspension for his red card. Fortunately Uruguay lost its next match, against the Netherlands, but Spain went on to win the Cup.
In both cases, a stronger penalty was surely warranted. There are plenty of possibilities: a fine, a lengthy ban, referees having the ability to award a goal automatically in such cases, or even a committee having the opportunity to change a result post facto. I don't mind which of these is chosen, but there has to be the possibility of doing something. This raises another concern: FIFA said that it was happy with the quality of the refereeing – for which it is ultimately responsible. Whether it is scared of harsher disciplinary penalties because that would effectively be giving itself a vote of no confidence I don't know, but regardless of the reason things have to be changed.
The second is the use of referees. As at the Under 17 Girls' World Cup, the choice of referees leaves something to be desired. Despite FIFA's assurances, as noted above, many did not have a good tournament, but even if they had, it would still be pointless to have the selection policies that they do. There were a large number of referees from, dare I say it, second- or third-rate footballing nations, who are much less experienced than those from stronger countries. There are referees who officiate every week in the Premier League, Bundesliga, Serie A and Liga who would surely be more qualified. True, this would mean that the referees would come from only a small number of countries, but surely selections based entirely on merit, rather than partly on nationality, would be preferable to having poor decisions.
The third is the choice of ball. A large number of players have complained about the choice, and it is not used in any of the world's major leagues. There is some suggestion that it was chosen rather because of Adidas's ties to FIFA as major sponsors than because it is the best ball in existence. Whether it would have made a difference to any of the matches is something that we will never know, but FIFA owes it to the players and fans to get this one right.
On the whole, it was a very good tournament, but if it had been aimed less at populism and PR and more at serious football it would have been far better. There are a lot of people who took this World Cup very seriously, and the event would have been improved if more of them were involved in organising it.