If the populous has its way the AFL is about to plunge headlong into the use of video technology.

Advocates demand this begin as soon as Grand Final day meaning the main event of the season would be played under different conditions to all that preceded it.

But the cry is: “Let’s get it 100% right.”

Herein lays the delusion. The false worship at the altar of television. The contradiction that a two-dimensional image can unravel the mysteries of the three-dimensional world.

It’s as if those prosecuting the case have never watched the high farce that is repeated replays of disputed catches in cricket which are never resolved satisfactorily.

Or any NRL match where the video referee applies subjective judgement to the pictorial evidence to come up with a verdict diametrically opposed to the commentary team viewing the identical information.

The NFL succeeds as often as it fails. The projection of the line is never quite as distinct as it appears. When does the knee first come in contact with the grass?

Soccer resists the use of technology not to be quaint but to be practical. This is a game where the scoring of a single goal determines the happiness of entire countries.

But if you correct the goal-line decision that would award England a World Cup goal against Germany do you then correct the blatant handball of Thierry Henry that sinks Ireland’s qualifying hopes?

And what of the bewildering moment when an Equatorial Guinea defender caught the ball in the Women’s World Cup against the Matildas? As clear-cut examples go this is beyond peer yet the referee never blew the whistle.

The argument for AFL is that every time the society of umpires - field, boundary and goal - gather to debate a tight call, television can reveal the truth before that summit breaks. If ever there was a selective premise this is it.

Of course a video replay would’ve spared blushes around Tom Hawkins popping that goal in “off the cushion” in the 2009 Grand Final.

This was the classic Henny Penny “the sky is falling” moment. It did happen with the Grand Final on the line. It was unsatisfactory and irksome. Yet the world didn’t end. There is no asterisk in the history books disclaiming the winner.

“Posters” aren’t the only moments on contention. What of the ball touched right on the line or just beyond? Television has no prospect of determining whether all of the ball has crossed all of the line. That would require human interpretation.

These disputes, or assumed errors, are far more prevalent than deviations of the post.

Somehow or other the use of video technology excites the pundits. Smitten with the buzz of centre court at the Tennis majors they imagine some hologram to deliver a result. As if the famed signals of the goal umpire themselves is no longer enough.

In sport you have to live with blown calls. Josh Kennedy swings the ball out over the boundary. It’s inexplicable that it can be missed. But with perspective comes the realisation it isn’t the ruination of the game. Errors are the price of doing business.

Look for bias. Look for poor coaching. Look for unqualified personnel. Don’t make fundamental changes on the most extreme example. Don’t legislate for idiocy rather than the common denominator.

The guiding principle should be: where it can be right it should be right. The game fails on this count having not done all it can to prevent human error.

Every sport with upright posts and no catchment has an official planted at each post. The logic is inescapable. Watch the posts not the opening. Minimise the movement of the official. Remove the choice between manning the line or the post.

While we rejoice in what makes the indigenous game unique, and should compromise with extreme caution, every other sport can’t be wrong.

Video technology is a cheap trick as likely to be more infuriating more often than a handful of mistakes used to stack up a rampant agenda.

Gerard Whateley will lead the Grandstand AFL call of Geelong v Sydney Swans on ABC Radio