Didier Drogba rages at the referee.

It’s been a night of high emotions at Stamford Bridge, where Bracelona scraped through to the Champions League Final on away goals.

I really feel for the Chelsea players and fans, because it is such a frustrating way to go out of the competition. Despite dominating the tie they failed to kill the game off, and Barcelona scored with their only shot on goal (albeit a pretty spectacular one).

Rather then the two exceptional goals that were scored, what will be remembered from this game, are the ugly scenes that followed the final whistle, with Didier Drogba and Michael Ballack leading the Chelsea players in a verbal attack on referee Tom Ovrebo. Whilst such behavior is unprofessional and will warrant deserved punishment from UEFA, you can’t help but feel for them.

Tom Ovrebo turned down 4 good appeals for a penalty. 2 of which were iron-clad. The first, when Malouda was hauled down by Daniel Alves, was awarded a free kick, yet you can clearly see that the offense occurred a good 2 yards inside the penalty area. You could argue that Malouda made the most of the situation, yet if the referee can see that it’s an offense, why can’t he see that it occurred inside the penalty area? I mean, it wasn’t even close! The second was a clear hand ball by Pique. 2 others were turned down and may have been 50/50 (Drogba was pulled down when through on goal, and another handball after Barca had scored), I have, however, seen lesser offenses punished by penalties.

The whole situation leaves a very sour taste in the mouth from the injustice of the result and the reaction of the players at the final whistle. Yet one must wonder how we can avoid such scenes in the future. I get the sense that some referees these days are terrified of making mistakes, so rather then risk awarding a penalty incorrectly, they might decide to turn down all but the most obvious of penalty shouts. The fallout of incorrect penalties being converted lesser then that of clear penalties not given.

Is technology the answer? A few sports have satisfied the hordes of terrified referees by assisting them with technology (rugby and now cricket for example). But can such a solution work with football? If it was done correctly, I think there may be some benefit. A 4th official with instant access to television replays could help the referee with penalty decisions, goal line issues and even offsides, but such a solution may slow the game down and result in even more uncertainty being heaped on the referees, resulting in more and more mundane incidents being referred upstairs (as has happened with rugby).

The solution I like best is to have 2 referees, in addition to the 2 linesman. A number of sports run with multiple ‘on-pitch’ officials (Australian Rules, American Football, Lacrosse etc) and I think it has a number of benefits. The game won’t be slowed down as much, and the confidence of these officials won’t be compromised. Instead you have an extra pair of eyes at a different angle.

It is worth remembering though, that football sometimes needs controversies such as these. Imagine how much more dull football would be if we hadn’t had “The Hand of God” or That Goal in ’66 (was it over the line or wasn’t it?) It is these incidents that shape football and make it the game we love today. So whilst last nights game was heart-breaking for Chelsea fans, take comfort that you aren’t the first set of fans to feel like this, and nor will you be the last.