Another huge game, another wrong decision. There is no doubt that Thierry Henry handled the ball before crossing for William Gallas to score the goal that sent France to the World Cup and left Ireland's dream in tatters.

But to label Henry a 'cheat' is wrong. Everyone who has played football will know that when the ball comes up at your side, your arm can come out instinctively. We have all done things in football matches in the heat of the moment that we have regretted later. The referee has to spot these things; it goes back to what I mentioned last week about the need to get the big decisions right.

The World Cup play-offs are so important - that decision could have cost the Irish economy millions of euros, as well as costing the Irish people the chance to support their team in a World Cup. When so much depends on one game, we need to give serious consideration to using video technology to get the big decisions correct.

When there is a contentious goal, bad foul or penalty incident then the game is stopped for a period of time anyway, so a video replay could be looked at. I said a few weeks ago that video technology has helped rugby and cricket; it is inevitable that it will be introduced in football one day.

The big problem is whether it could be used in all divisions or just in the top leagues and internationals. There is camera exposure at all the big grounds but not in the lower leagues, and supporters of lower league teams will say that their games are equally important. But the massive games can have such an effect on people's lives - and in Ireland's case the whole country has been affected - that everything possible must be done to ensure the big decisions are correct.

Ireland were fantastic and very unlucky, but that's football and I'm afraid that calls for the game to be replayed are ridiculous and it would never happen. People could argue for every game to be replayed because of a wrong decision.

In terms of France, it's always great to have the big nations at a World Cup, although it would have been great to have the Irish as well because they have amazing supporters and they did really well. But the World Cup only comes around every four years so many want to see the best nations in world football going for it.

England off the pace

England's 1-0 defeat to Brazil showed that they are still a little behind the world's best. England are probably not in the top three or four teams who are favourites for the World Cup, but I would say they are one of the next three or four teams that could potentially win it if they keep all their players fit, have a bit of luck and play at their maximum level.

What we saw against Brazil was that when quite a few big players are missing, England don't have enough strength in depth in terms of quality. I think England can beat anyone when all their best players are fit and firing, but to repeat it every few days in a World Cup atmosphere is difficult.

Although we now know all the qualifiers, it's absolutely impossible to say at this stage who will win the World Cup. However, I think the Spanish team look really good, Brazil generally always perform in World Cups and Argentina will do well. Then there is always a surprise team, so let's hope it is England.

Some of the African teams have a chance of doing well with the tournament being played on that continent, and some games will be at an altitude which may benefit them. The African teams have flair, strength and technique, but I'm not entirely sure that any of them are organised enough to win it. Yet one of them may surprise.

Mollycoddled players

In a speech at the League Manager's Association dinner last Wednesday, Sir Alex Ferguson said that many modern players are cocooned by their agents and less willing to take responsibility for themselves.

I completely agree with his sentiments. It is one of my pet hates when I see players who have agents that do everything for them. They don't know how to set up their own bank account, they don't know what they're spending their money on and they can't make their own decisions. Not every player is like that, but some are now totally dependent on agents and advisers.

For me, life is an education and you learn things as you go through it. I think a footballer should sit down and negotiate with a club, even if his agent is sitting with him. It is in a player's best interests to be there and see what is going on.

The idea of allowing someone to look after your financial and professional existence is something I cannot agree with. There are some agents who do a good job looking after players, but there are others who stifle and mollycoddle players. Some agents will come into a player's life when he is 20, leave his life at 34 and never want to know that player again.

Every footballer needs an adviser at some point. But a player doesn't need to pay between five and 15 per cent of his wages to a guy to set up a bank account, buy him a new fridge, or ask his club's chief executive for a pay rise.

Over to you

Did you speak to any of the academy players who came to Malta for a training camp? If so, what did they say about their experience? John Calleja

The young players get lots of trips abroad to expose them to different countries and different types of football and conditions while bonding as a team. Those kinds of trips were among my greatest experiences as a youngster at United. I've spoken to a few of the lads who went and they really enjoyed it.

Send your questions to Gary Neville to sunday@timesofmalta.com.