Thanks to Spain, Manuel Neuer, the goalkeeper of the German national team, will not get the chance to hold the World Cup this evening. During this year's edition of the World Cup, he gained notoriety following the disallowed goal in the game against England.

The whole world saw England's Frank Lampard scoring a beautiful goal. But the people who counted - the referee and the assistant referees - did not see it. The goal was not given.

The reaction to this incident proves the validity of my article 'A technology for every ill' in this column two weeks ago.

Immediately after the incident, everyone sought salvation in technology. Technology could have saved the day, everyone said. Even Fifa president Sepp Blatter, who has been foolishly resisting the use of technology, had to concede that enough is enough and that something should now be done.

But in the worldwide discussion, the most essential point of the action was lost amid the din of vuvuzelas. The goal was disallowed not only because there was no goal- line technology, nor because the officials did not see the ball crossing the line.

The goal was disallowed because Neuer cheated. He saw the ball crossing the line but quickly carried on as if nothing had happened and managed to fool the referee. Had he behaved ethically and honestly it would have been a totally different story. Not only did he cheat during the game, he bragged about it afterwards.

The discussion should not have been about technology but about ethics. Are there areas of human behaviour where cheating should be allowed, rewarded and considered to be the object of praise? Is a success based on cheating acceptable?

Some accept cheating in financial matters and call it 'business'. The world is in a sorry state of affairs because of this attitude. Others justify cheating at one's place of work, saying that they are 'Earning something extra for the family'. The result is inefficiency, and places of work are threatened.

Some justify cheating on one's marital partner, saying one should not discard an occasional 'golden opportunity'. Families are regularly broken as a result. The list can go on.

What happened during the England vs Germany game showed that cheating is socially acceptable if it leads to success, which is considered by many as the ultimate criterion of what is right or wrong.

The story of football is peppered with such incidents. Diego Maradona and Thierry Henry are two clamorous examples.

Supporters tend to accept cheating when it favours their side but condemn it strongly when their side is the victim.

These football examples are symptomatic of a society where living double lives is justified.

Peter Singer, in an interesting article which inspired me to write this article, wrote that good examples of ethical behaviour abound in cricket. But he found just one example of a footballer telling the referee that the penalty which was to be awarded to his team was not a penalty.

I know of another example. Christina, a 10-year-old girl, is a goalkeeper with a football nursery team. If she touches the ball before it goes over the goal-line she points to the corner flag even if the referee would have awarded her team a goal kick. She is criticised by her friends for doing so.

It is not easy to behave ethically when the fruits of success are easily available if one cheats. This is why ethics is more important than technology for people to live happily, though technology can help by forcing us to act ethically.

joseph.borg@um.edu.mt