If you are going to use replays to check if the penalty given is valid and to check if the goal given is valid.

There is no stoppages and there is no waste of time.

THe referee does what he does normally the video referee will intervene if there is any mistake during the break in play.

Really the time it takes for the video referees to watch the penalty shouldn’t be much longer then the time it takes for the referee to calm things down and set up the penalty kick.

Same things with goals, again no one is going to concede a goal as a time wasting tactic. It’s a natural break in flow. THere is more then ample enough time to check the goal for offside and any fouls. There was ample time when Henry scored that goal and then the kickoff where the goal could have been rescinded.

Now thinking even more about it, red cards are a natural break in flow of game as well. If someone dived in the box, the referee gives a red card. There is time for that to be rescinded and have the video ref examines and then call a penalty if there really was contact.

So I think you clearly exaggerate the effects of interrupting the game.

Your other idea is good idea however, I let you write the article for that law change cause I remember it was your idea didn’t want to steal it from you.

In any case that will become unnecessary if there is used in video evidence.

For starters, I’d wager that 20% of players that are booked for diving didn’t actually dive (Darren Fletcher recently springs to mind) and video evidence frees them of guilt, as such you’d be wrongly red-carding 20% more players than now.

Secondly, interrupting the flow of the game, even for “90 seconds” is totally impractical. Not only are replays very often inconclusive but they can take time to be made available, further, only a coach getting hammered would want to break up the flow of the game, “resting while in possession” is an art-form specific to football, giving the players a breather everytime a decision is 50/50 would not only destroy the flow of the game but it would more than likely extend a match period over 2 hours which would affect TV.

Hence, any break in the game to view a video is simply not realistic in football. We just have to accept that referees get it wrong sometimes rather than hoping that video technology will increase the odds of correct decisions at the expense of the game.

If you want to eliminate diving, get rid of the rule that a foul inside the 18 yard box is automatically a penalty. N’Gog for example, he was on the byline, 3 players around him, where was he going to go? Nowhere, a penalty is a ridiculous result from there, there was no scoring opportunity, IF there was contact there should have been a free kick.

Same goes for fouls outside the box. Professional fouls that result in a free kick (and not always a red card) are way better to concede than a penalty, hence defenders will bring players down before they can enter the box.

If a referee can decide when a clear scoring opportunity has been affected by a foul then we will see less diving, there wont be penalties for fouls on the byline or when a player is hopelessly outnumbered but charges into the box ala C. Ronaldo hoping to get clipped, like everything else, it should be a judgement call.

He was talking about using more video evidence in the game.

Now before you accuse of ripping off. I did take his idea of using video referees for penalty decision but I expanded on that aspect and brought up its implication in cracking down diving.