The dust has settled on the week-end, referees, what do you think should happen.

[The Rock]

It seems very reasonable to me to incorporate 2 rules (and perhaps it's from being a Yank where American sports get 3 timeouts and unlimited video replays etc)

1. Goal line technology. This is a no brainer.

2. One appeal per team per game to appeal against or argue for a penalty decision with video replay. This would keep managers from appealing every decision, but bringing an element of fairness to the game.

[BalDrick]

It seems very reasonable to me to incorporate 2 rules (and perhaps it's from being a Yank where American sports get 3 timeouts and unlimited video replays etc)

1. Goal line technology. This is a no brainer.

2. One appeal per team per game to appeal against or argue for a penalty decision with video replay. This would keep managers from appealing every decision, but bringing an element of fairness to the game.

No need for an appeal system though - play on and the 4th official can review it, radio the ref and say 'go back, that was a pen'.

It's all the other layers people try to bring to this debate that obfuscate the issue IMO.

[The Rock]

Well agreed to keep it as simple as possible. It will probably never happen. I'd think at least goal line tech has a chance. Maybe. Some day.

[BalDrick]

Well agreed to keep it as simple as possible. It will probably never happen. I'd think at least goal line tech has a chance. Maybe. Some day.

Hopefully, no real reason not to. Trouble is, the authorities don't care if it *only* happens to Fulham, Wigan, Rangers. Watch them go into meltdown when Everton do their neighbours in the semi and cheating racist scumbag Suarez has a bad call though.

[MJG]

It seems very reasonable to me to incorporate 2 rules (and perhaps it's from being a Yank where American sports get 3 timeouts and unlimited video replays etc)

1. Goal line technology. This is a no brainer.

2. One appeal per team per game to appeal against or argue for a penalty decision with video replay. This would keep managers from appealing every decision, but bringing an element of fairness to the game.

No need for an appeal system though - play on and the 4th official can review it, radio the ref and say 'go back, that was a pen'.

It's all the other layers people try to bring to this debate that obfuscate the issue IMO.

What if the ball stays in play and goes upfield and a goal is scored and then the 4th official says it was a penalty at the other end?  ;-)

[Sheepskin Junior]

What I think that, if technology was introduced, each game would take at least 15 more minutes to complete because of endless replays, is it this, is it that etc.
I am one of the people that say that goal-line technology would ruin football because if decisions were made based on replays, there is no need for a referee.
Decisions are made on the viewpoint of the referee and his assistants. Clattenburg saw Kalou fall over and saw Kelly's leg in front of him and therefore gave the penalty. I have no problem with that.
As for the goals Chelsea scored against Wigan, they are inexcusable

[TonyGilroy]

Really all that's necessary is for the ref to be able to consult the technology when he wants or when advised to by the 4th official.

Obviously sometimes that will be when the players kick up a fuss but ultimately I would assume that the officials will want to get things right.

Technology should be available to correct obvious injustices not in an impossible attempt to get every decision 100% right.

[BalDrick]

It seems very reasonable to me to incorporate 2 rules (and perhaps it's from being a Yank where American sports get 3 timeouts and unlimited video replays etc)

1. Goal line technology. This is a no brainer.

2. One appeal per team per game to appeal against or argue for a penalty decision with video replay. This would keep managers from appealing every decision, but bringing an element of fairness to the game.

No need for an appeal system though - play on and the 4th official can review it, radio the ref and say 'go back, that was a pen'.

It's all the other layers people try to bring to this debate that obfuscate the issue IMO.

What if the ball stays in play and goes upfield and a goal is scored and then the 4th official says it was a penalty at the other end?  ;-)

Play is called back, what else could happen? The bigger picture is the level playing field surely isn't it?

[jarv]

It will never be 100% but what is needed, as Mr. Baldrick says, is an even playing field. Let's look at 2 examples.
Manu against qpr. Player is offside, scramble results in penalty so game is stopped. 4th official syays "offside" decision made faster than I can type this.
Fulham last night. A more difficult decision to make. Ref blows "penalty"
4th official says "what for" (maybe thinking it was Murphys lunge).
ref says "kelly"
4ht official "no penalty" within seconds.
restart with old fashioned contested drop ball.
OK, this one is a bit more complicated and if no conclusion drawn....4th official, looks at monitor once, just says no conclusion and ref's decision stands.
Again, this would take seconds to decide.
It need not be over complicated but will definitely help eradicate many errors.

[HatterDon]

I like goal-line technology for the "was it in or did he keep it out" moments that pop up once or twice a year. I DON'T like constant overruling of close decisions by the camera -- especially because they break the flow of the game and make it overlong.

There were about 18-20 players last night who made more mistakes than Clattenburg. It's a game played by humans and officiated by humans, and none of us is perfect ... although I do come damn close.

[Mr_Moon]

I do like how people say it will slow the game down, when actually in a match the ball is only in play for about 60 minutes.

[MJG]

It seems very reasonable to me to incorporate 2 rules (and perhaps it's from being a Yank where American sports get 3 timeouts and unlimited video replays etc)

1. Goal line technology. This is a no brainer.

2. One appeal per team per game to appeal against or argue for a penalty decision with video replay. This would keep managers from appealing every decision, but bringing an element of fairness to the game.

No need for an appeal system though - play on and the 4th official can review it, radio the ref and say 'go back, that was a pen'.

It's all the other layers people try to bring to this debate that obfuscate the issue IMO.

What if the ball stays in play and goes upfield and a goal is scored and then the 4th official says it was a penalty at the other end?  ;-)

Play is called back, what else could happen? The bigger picture is the level playing field surely isn't it?

I know what your saying and agree to a point, but it opens up so many other issues. For matters of FACT then yes, but interpretation its a no from me.

[MJG]

I do like how people say it will slow the game down, when actually in a match the ball is only in play for about 60 minutes.

First five minutes of the game the ball did not go out or get stopped for a foul or anything.

It would slow the game down as you would stop the clock for a review...or would you?

[Mr_Moon]

First five minutes of the game the ball did not go out or get stopped for a foul or anything.

It would slow the game down as you would stop the clock for a review...or would you?

What would you review?

[BalDrick]

I do like how people say it will slow the game down, when actually in a match the ball is only in play for about 60 minutes.

First five minutes of the game the ball did not go out or get stopped for a foul or anything.

It would slow the game down as you would stop the clock for a review...or would you?

No! A 4th official is sat in a little room - with nobody from either team allowed in - watching the game on a monitor (allows for someone to watch the ref's performance too). Something on a pre-determined list comes up, he watches it, meanwhile downstairs the game continues. If the attacking team who want a pen end up scoring anyway, just give the goal, if they don't but it transpires they 'was robbed', then let the ref know, pen is given etc. There's no need to hold up play like they do in cricket - in cases where the evidence is inconclusive in 30 seconds (or whatever), the ref's decision stands.