I think it's fair to say that EVERYONE in the world (perhaps even in Uruguay) would have preferred it if Ghana won the game against Uruguay and the whole world cup. A Ghanaian victory would have made them the first African team to progress past the quarter-final stage in a world cup, and guaranteed them fourth place, that's quite a big thing. Judging by Marcel Desailly's reactions to them simply scoring a goal in the group stage, it clearly means quite a lot.
...and this one...
Obviously it's a shame that Adrian Chiles has to get involved but you can see that Desailly, as Ghana's French representative, really does care.
Uruguay on the other hand, have had their time to shine. They've already won the world cup. Twice. Albeit in 1938 and 1950, where no-one really gave a shit, but still, they've had their go. It's like Ghana and Uruguay are both little kids, and they've been taken to the shop to buy some sweets. They both got their sweets, but greedy little impatient Uruguay ate all of theirs on the way home (in 1938 and 1950, it was a long car journey home). Ghana however, saw foolish Uruguay gobbling down their Haribo Football Mix, noticed the error, and decided to save their sweeties until now, 2010. At this point in time Ghana's sweeties have somehow matured, despite them somehow now being seventy-two years old. Ghana's footballing ability, and metaphorical sweeties are now both at their finest, but that bastard Uruguay isn't finished yet.
No, Uruguay saw Ghana quietly eating their delicious sweeties in Soccer City last night, got a bit worked up, and then just knocked the whole damn bag out of Ghana's hand! The childish 'If I can't have it, no one can' mentality comes into full effect here, with 'It' being the world cup in this situation. Ghana can't have it now, they've been knocked out, despite the fact that if Luis Suarez hadn't cheated, they would definitely have scored. Uruguay probably can't have it either, because Suarez might be banned from the the next two games, and he's their top scorer. Actual results aside, I think Ghana are far more entitled to 'it'!
This is where the rule change would come in. Referees should have the power to enforce more ridiculous punishments, none of them would be stated in the official rule book, they could just think them up on the spot. It would make the forfeits a lot more subjective and relevant to the game being played. In last nights case, when Suarez handled the ball on the goal-line, he was doing the job of a goalkeeper, but Uruguay already have one of those. One is enough, that rule should stay the same. However I don't think Ghana's penalty really makes up for the definite goal they would have scored. There's an element of chance involved in a penalty, and an element of skill. That element of skill lies partially with the person taking the kick, and equally with the goalkeeper trying to save it. Therefore to even things out a bit, last nights referee should have been able to say something along these lines;
'All right then Suarez you nob-jockey, if you think you're a goalkeeper, try saving this. Prick.'If Suarez was left to save the penalty, with presumably little or no goalkeeping experience, and without the luxury of gloves, the mindset of Gyan may have been slightly different. The pressure on him to score a winning goal against a world class keeper with the last kick of the game is obviously quite high. If he was taking the kick against a striker who had just been sent off and would consequently be hated by his whole country, Gyan may have been a little more confident. As it stands now, Gyan made a fool of himself and looks responsible for Ghana's elimination, and Suarez is a national hero. It just doesn't add up.
I think the referees just need to use a little common sense.
