Politically, this summer’s World Cup in South Africa was a massive success. Taking the tournament to Africa for the first time was a bold and possibly risky move by FIFA, especially given South Africa’s troubled history. For the tournament to pass without any major, headline making incidents or controversies was a vindication of FIFA’s decision, as well as a reward for the hard work and effort put into the tournament by its organisers.

Commercially, the tournament generated billions of pounds, again music to the ears of the FIFA big wigs. But the actual main event, the reason why the tournament takes place, the football, was poor, dire and dull. The World Cup produced the lowest goals per game ratio ever at just 2.27. Teams seemed more content with not losing, as oppose to winning. But what can be done to remove this defensive dross that blighted the supposed greatest tournament on the planet? Here are a few ideas of how to bring back the exciting, free flowing, attacking football that fans pay a small fortune and travel thousands of miles to see.

1. Abolish the penalty shoot outs

The controversial penalty shoot out system has to be one of the most absurd and unfair methods of deciding a match. It seems abhorrent that after 2 hours of football, skill, talent and flair are thrown out of the window for a game to be decided by a 12 yard lottery. Potentially, a World Cup winner can be decided by this test of nerve from the penalty spot (as happened in 1994 and 2006). This completely disregards the true nature of football and ignores the reasons why it was set up in the first place. Football should be 2 teams trying to outwit and outplay each other, not see who has the best 5 penalty takers.

This system encourages defensive play. Teams, particularly if they are the underdogs against a much stronger opposition, will sit back and park the proverbial bus in front of the goal, knowing that they have a better chance of sneaking victory in a shoot out. There is no incentive to try and play football if there’s the fall back of spot kicks.

In its place, matches should be decided by a system of reducing players. If after 90 minutes, a game is still level, then every 5 minutes of play, both teams have one player taken off, and the number of players gradually reduces every 5 until a goal is scored. This creates more space. More space should lead to more chances, which in turn increases the likelihood of goals being scored. With this system, the emphasis is still placed on who is the best footballing side, not who can blast home the best penalties.

2. Abolish the group stages

After the group stage of this summer’s World Cup, an average of a meagre 1.4 goals a game had been scored. Unsurprisingly this increased once the knockout rounds started, although it couldn’t get much lower. The reason for this goal drought? Teams who lose their opening group match have a 1 in 12 chance of making the 2nd round, essentially losing the opening match means that teams have a mountain to climb if they are to reach the last 16. So they play defensively preferring not to lose and instead sitting back and trying to nick a 1-0 win. And it is this defensive mindset that is preventing teams from playing the silky smooth football they are capable of playing.

By switching to a straight knock out tournament, teams would have no choice but to push forward and try to win the match. Sitting back would get them nowhere. No group stages will also see the number of game splayed at the tournament reduced. As a consequence, teams will suffer less with fatigue as they are playing less games and the tournament can start later, extending the break they get from their gruelling club football schedule. And we would no longer hear the pitiful excuse of “teams being tired”.

3. Goal Line Technology

This is perhaps the most called for change in international football. Frank Lampard’s “goal that never was” against Germany in the World Cup sparked a frenzied debate as to whether FIFA should introduce goal line technology and in which format. Do FIFA spend millions of pounds developing micro chipped balls with a sensor on either side of the goal, or some kind of Hawk Eye system? Or do FIFA experiment with adding extra officials behind the goals? Whilst this would be cheaper, human error could still play a part, and teams could still unfairly be denied a perfectly legitimate goal.

The best solution is simple, in use today. FIFA doesn’t need to stretch its already dwindling pool of officials. Nor does it need to splash out millions on a potentially unreliable technology system. Video replays on the other hand, are the way forward. Within seconds of Lampard’s goal being ruled out by the Uruguayan officials, millions of viewers back home saw that referee Jorge Larrionda had made a disastrous mistake. All it would take would be for the 4th official to have access to a TV monitor, and he or she could relay to the referee that they’ve made a mistake. If a replay is inconclusive, there is sufficient doubt and the goal shouldn’t be awarded.

The argument against any form of goal line technology is where does it stop? The doubters claim that people would start looking at offside decisions, free kicks and even throw ins, disrupting football’s natural flow. But there is no reason why that should happen. So long as FIFA and all other governing bodies show some backbone and hold their ground, then video replays can become mainstay that improves, not hinders football. Some sort of system does need to be in place, as it is ridiculous that in 2011, we still aren’t sure whether or not the ball has crossed the line.

4. Penalty Goals

July 2nd 2010. Soccer City, Johannesburg. Ghanaian Dominic Adiyiah nods the ball towards a gaping Uruguayan goal, the Africans seem certain to reach the World Cup semi finals. As the ball reaches the goalline, Uruguayan striker Luis Suarez sticks out his hand, punches the ball off the goal-line and saves Uruguay. Suarez is sent off and Ghana have a penalty, which they subsequently go on to miss. The games reaches penalty shoot out time and Uruguay go through to the semi finals, a place Ghana should have had, only for Suarez’s illegal intervention.

To remove this horrific injustice from football and prevent it from ever happening again, penalty goals-the awarding of a goal if it has been illegally denied, as in Suarez’s case- should be introduced. This simple system, widely used to great effect in other sports, most notably rugby, has been a success. No longer could teams illegally rob others of victory. Again, FIFA should look into this solution to resolve a mercifully rare but nevertheless niggling irritant in football.

By Chris Sykes