Commentary: England the "Lady Gaga" of Football

England began their elimination-round World Cup match against Germany by playing in a familiar way. They will end it by complaining in a familiar way. And, just this once, they will have some justification.

England lost 4-1. A crushing defeat. A deserved defeat.

Yet many English observers will say that, with annihilation at the hands of their oldest and most superior enemy, Germany, they were cheated.

The crime will never be analyzed by a court. However, anyone can analyze, without even referring to notes, just how badly England played.

Here is how they began the game: Hit long balls forward. Bypass the midfield. Bypass elegance, style and guile. Rely on muscle.

The Germans seemed to look at this and chuckle, just as they titter at the anti-German jokes so beloved by many of England's finest.

After all, German football legend Franz Beckenbauer had earlier in the week criticized England for just this very agricultural method of playing. The English, strangely, were offended.

So how odd it must have looked after 20 minutes when a long hoof by German goalkeeper Neuer was misjudged by the ultimate hoofer, England's John Terry. He seemed to stare at it as if it was a shooting star and he was seven years old.

Full Coverage: World Cup 2010
Pictures: World Cup Knockout Rounds

This left his fellow central defender, Matthew Upson, to lamely chase Germany's Miroslav Klose like a police recruit whose application had been turned down by the Keystone Kops.

Klose had merely to stick out a right foot.

England goalkeeper David James, hesitant in his reaction to defending what an elementary school teacher would have put his pupils in detention for, watched it roll to his left, and nestle like a crab in a pot on "Deadliest Catch."

Ten minutes later, Germany ceased chuckling and decided to score with sophisticated, sublime football.

Ozil to Klose to Muller to Podolski, to the wide-eyed, leaden-legged admiration of English defenders. Podolski's shot went through James' legs, a symbol of the way Germany was carving England apart.

Perhaps, though, Germany thought its job was already done.

A Steven Gerrard cross was headed in by Upson as Neuer flapped as if he was celebrating rather than trying to punch the ball.

And within a minute, the moment that would be talked about long after Britain adopts the Euro: A fine chip by Frank Lampard — perhaps the first positive contribution he has made in this World Cup — sailed over Neuer, struck the crossbar, bounced far beyond the goal line and spun out.

The referee from Uruguay, Jorge Larrionda, and his Uruguayan assistant, Mauricio Espinosa, claimed they couldn't see.

Espinosa, in particular, was in a position to see. He was up with play. Perhaps he just wasn't up to making a controversial decision.

It was a clear goal. It was also a clear reminder of the 1966 World Cup final when a Russian assistant referee with a large moustache gave England the decisive goal when the ball had clearly not crossed the line.

Did England really need this sort of cruel revenge? Did FIFA, the myopic, creepy organization that controls world football, need this sort of controversy?

They have electronic line technology at Wimbledon, for goodness sake. They've had it for years.

And Wimbledon is one of the founding fathers of Planet Retrograde.

Sepp Blatter, FIFA's President, claims he won't approve goal-line technology because it wouldn't be used at all levels of the game. The ignorant pomposity of his words would shame even a rural politician who would like to ban cars for the sake of the local horse industry.

Do high school baseball games employ video technology to judge home runs? Does the NFL's video challenge system get used on every high school field in Texas on a Friday night?

Does the snooty country club of which Blatter might, perhaps, be a member have beeping signals that call serves out, while elderly ladies in their pure white dresses sip their Pimms and ogle their tennis coaches rather than their husbands?

You wouldn't even need video.

You could simply have a noise and a flashing light that transmitted to the fourth official or to the assistant referee. You could simply light the goalposts up with a fluorescent display every time a ball crossed the line.

Hey, it could even have an ad for the International Courts of Justice on it.

Even a Neanderthal sport like hockey has worked that one out.

Still, the goal-line non-decision infected the game like a human tooth a fine diner might find in his halibut.

In the second half, Lampard hit the crossbar with a laser, as so many Englishmen hit the bar for a chaser.

England drove forward, still naively, still crudely, still second-best. Until a simple German move found Muller on the right. His shot hit James' left arm and bounced into the goal.

England was spent.

Defeat was complete when the brilliant Ozil sauntered down the left, leaving Barry looking like a trotting horse that had stumbled upon the Kentucky Derby. His simple cross found Muller. Muller found the English heart and stabbed.

If the game had gone to 2-2, as it should have, would things have turned out differently? Perhaps. The momentum of a game can change with just one whispered pass, one hammered shot.

However, England was outclassed to the point of embarrassment. They were exposed to the point of nudity.

How long will it take before the English concede that the players they revere — Wayne Rooney, Steven Gerrard, Frank Lampard — are to football what Lady Gaga is to music?

You've all heard of them. You feel you know them. But the music they play on the football pitch is merely the same quality of music you hear in the gym.

The inquests will now be entertaining. Blatter will say that the non-decision didn't affect the result. Which, perhaps, will show just how much he knows about football.

Yet England can have no complaints. Well, except for that one.

Chris Matyszczyk is an award-winning creative director who advises major corporations on content creation and marketing, and an avid sports fan. He is also the author of the popular CNET blog Technically Incorrect.

See also: