Sorry I've only just come in from 5-a-side and seen this.

If it helps I wrote a passionate argument on this that was 'stolen'(let's say) by a particular journo that now works for MCFC!

Anyhoo...

My point was rather than simply using the Rugby method(where the game can stop repeatedly) use it in a tennis type method, where 2 'challenges' per team was allowed. Either Captain or manager could use it and if they were wrong, they would lose a 'challenge'. My thinking was that so many incidents happen they would have to be careful what they chose to use a 'challenge' for. If both teams ran out, then the ref ran the game to his discretion.

In reality, incidents like Adebayor's clash with van Persie would be inconclusive(also note the game had to be stopped, therefore allowing opportunity for the incident to be looked at) BUT would force the ref and 4th Official to make a decision there and then, avoiding the cop out with Clattenburg did with the FA. We would have had the decision in front of everyone, instead of the subsequent trial by media and no 'retrospective' video decisions by the FA.

As Sgoater says you could highlight certain incidents using this method and the ref can make the correct call, instead of fans feeling injustice at games all the time. It won't take away the feeling at times, but it would be much less than it is without video replay. I also wrote as Sgoater does about the clubs' future that hinges on silly unfathomable decisions that can ultimately send a club down. It's careers, income and history that can be affected.

It's not to the say the system wouldn't have initial teething problems, but that's why they are tried and tested in other 'less' important games of football, i.e., U-19/ Women's football etc.

Anyway, Sgoater beats me to my own thesis, but I was just relaying what I wrote about 18 months back.

Joseph S Blatter ‏@SeppBlatter
After last night’s match #GLT is no longer an alternative but a necessity.

“Please do not insist on the technology, the day that the referee takes 2 captains aside to study monitors and see if something is inside the box or outside is the day the spectators will say no, we are not coming to the game.”

When England lose to dodgy decision, Blatter is not in favour of change, says he doesnt want goalline technology.
When England win from dodgy decision, Blatter is in favour of change, says he wants goalline technology.

Says all we already knew about this individual,

Would there be any viability in reviewing during substitutions? I cannot see how play would be stopped in the middle of the match whilst during the run of play.

I was just thinking this ! How ironic

Would it be at all possible to have a buzzer system like Ice Hockey where if the ball goes over the line it sounds off loudly. Though as I typed this i already thought of two problems, one the extra weight of a ball potentially carrying sensors (or if a defender/goalkeeper goes across the line at all if no sensors) and that someone would certainly get something into the ground which made the same noise.

The more I think about it the more I understand why the technology isn't being used.

When England lose to dodgy decision, Blatter is not in favour of change, says he doesnt want goalline technology.
When England win from dodgy decision, Blatter is in favour of change, says he wants goalline technology.

Says all we already knew about this individual,