Billinge_Lump wrote:That's why I think the NFL way is the best way to introduce it. Give each manager a set amount of challenges, if they are right they keep them, if they are wrong and use it frivolously they lose one. That would allow contentious decisions to be looked at but should prevent requests for everything to be looked at.
In the NFL they are penalised for making an incorrect challenge in that they lose a time out, which has some value to a coach. Not sure what the equivalent would be in football, a substitution?
I think they should introduce technology but do it gradually and incrementally. Start with goal line decisions, sort out any teething problems (which there will be) then move onto to say offsides.
if they try to bring it in for everything at once it will be chaos. They need to think through all the different potential outcomes and how they will deal with them. Take offside. Clearly technology would have helped rule out Tevez's "goal" on sunday but what do you do when the situation is reversed? When a linesman flags when a player is 2 yards onside and the player sticks the ball in the net? Do you literally play to the whistle and ignore the linesman's flag, or only use the technology to rule out rather than rule in goals? It all needs to be thought through and they are unlikely to get it right first time.
They also need to think through how video technology will affect how the game is officiated. In cricket, test umpires hardly ever give stumpings or run outs these days. Unless the batsman is stranded half way down the pitch they pass the decision on to the video ref. They'd rather be criticised for not making a decision than making the wrong one.
Could the same happen in football, with linesmen simply keeping their flags down for tight offside decisions?
