I'm assuming he means they SHOULD be having a rant about it, because no one in the media has been able to shut up about Henry for the past week, so in theory a worse/easier to officiate just as bad decision also ending in a goal should get more traction, but as I was pointing out with Henry, its NOT the level of cheating, or the badness of the decision, its how important people deem it to be in general.
It made entirely no difference to the final result, so no one could give a monkeys, Spurs don't care as they won anyway, Wigan don't care, they got a goal, Fifa/the press don't care because they can't rile up the fans because the fans don't care.
Henry didn't cheat worse than anyone else, just the outcome of the goal changed.
You could argue if EVERY similar decision was equally covered with an equal level of anger by the fans even if the decision didn't prove important to that particular result then Fifa/FA might introduce video replay sooner. If there was outrage over every decision that resulted in a goal, no matter its importance, there would be a weekly uproar that would be hard to ignore. As it is, the importance of such bad decisions is no where near as frequent, so it doesn't seem like such a huge deal even though really, it is.