15-09-2014, 18:21
I know the technology is there and I have no problem using it if its right for the game. Goal line technology is fine as its an instant decision and the act of scoring a goal stops the game anyway. I think even if you put in strict guidelines as to how it should be used, it would only be a matter of time before its expanded.
What would you propose it be used for? Which decisions would be reviewable? For me it can only be decisions where the game has already stopped and not a case of stopping the game to review something. If there is a penalty appeal but the ref does not think its a penalty, that should not be reviewed imo, as that would require the game to stop or be brought back. Imagine a situation where a defender challenges in the box, ref doesn't give the pen, defender clears the ball up field and the striker gets clean through and scores, all in the space of 30 seconds, how would you review that?? I would also be totally against all 50/50 decisions being reviewed, the game would be too stop-start, refs need to call the game as they see it and I would prefer to see an extra on field ref rather than video review.
What would you propose it be used for? Which decisions would be reviewable? For me it can only be decisions where the game has already stopped and not a case of stopping the game to review something. If there is a penalty appeal but the ref does not think its a penalty, that should not be reviewed imo, as that would require the game to stop or be brought back. Imagine a situation where a defender challenges in the box, ref doesn't give the pen, defender clears the ball up field and the striker gets clean through and scores, all in the space of 30 seconds, how would you review that?? I would also be totally against all 50/50 decisions being reviewed, the game would be too stop-start, refs need to call the game as they see it and I would prefer to see an extra on field ref rather than video review.