So, exactly how should football be referee'd?

[Olly]

There's plenty of negative criticism about (obviously justified sometimes), so how should it be improved? More linesman? Complete video technology? Stop the game every foul, offside or goal to check for accuracy? Less players, smaller pitch, no offside? What's the answer?

[paulmason]

With technology to help correct the joke decisions they make, because refts are incompetent.

[BUSHRANGER1982]

Technology would be handy.
And this "interpretation" nonsense taken away from refs. I wouldn't trust most refs today to be able to translate a "Peter and Jane" book from English, into English.
If they had to apply the laws of the game, to every club, in every match, you couldn't get much fairer than that.

[80sCasual]

Stop football, let's all go shopping on a saturday with the missus, no hang on you don't get to make the decisions there either.

[Olly]

With technology to help correct the joke decisions they make, because refts are incompetent.

A bit tricky? Should every tackle be checked in case someone gets away with one?

[Factamondo]

goal line technology for disputed 'did the ball cross the line' a must at the very least imho...........if we go down by one point..how much did the bolton'no goal' cost the club????

[Olly]

But what about SWP's goal, should goals from 'offside' be checked too?

[swede]

Video only be used at games ifor "did the ball cross the line" situations. Use video after games to give, or take back, yellow or straight reds. Rate the referee and linesmen and count the right and wrong decisions they make. Give them points and compare them. The more "right" decisions - higher bonus/income togehter with a greater chance to represent England in the Champ L + Euros/WC. Less points - lower income and the possibility to get "relegated".

[80sCasual]

How would goal line technology have helped us yesterday, exactly, it's gotta be either everything or nothing in my view.

[paulmason]

A bit tricky? Should every tackle be checked in case someone gets away with one?

Thats the simpletons approach and one trotted out to counter the technology debate. But only the ones that have a major impact on the game, like a sending off or a penalty, yesterday's was a perfect example. Tennis players can ask 3 times for points to be looked at, football managers should have the same.

How can an incompetent idiot be soley responsible for costing a club £90,000,000 on a decision that is wrong and at the end of the day, all football fans want are correct decisions.

[Olly]

Sometimes players get sent off later, after a first yellow that wasn't.

[Stanley]

a) The introduction of retrospective bans for cheating/diving/simulation/gamesmanship (whichever word you want to give it). That deterrent would soon put a stop to it all.

b) The introduction of video technology for major game changing decisions to assist the refs (just like they now have in tennis, rugby and cricket). It's been proven now that it doesn't significantly slow down the game's flow because it's so instant.

[Olly]

Who should get penalised if two players grab each other at the same time inside the box?

[DeepcutHoop]

How would goal line technology have helped us yesterday, exactly, it's gotta be either everything or nothing in my view.

I'd much prefer to leave it as it is, than have the game constantly interrupted by challenges to every niggly little decision.

Goal line technology, perhaps even something for off sides might work. Straightforward rules, nothing to be added by a human interpretation. Like it or not, a red card worthy tackle is also judged by intent, and there's no way to really judge that using technology (at least not unless the game is stopped and multiple replays are pored over, and interpreted.

More retrospective action should be taken, like for Mario Balotelli's appalling challenge on Song yesterday, perhaps even Rooney should get yellow awarded for the hack on Diakite.

Would make things messy, and lead to far more suspensions, but would mean that the FA couldn't hide behind the 'ref saw it, so decision can't be changed' nonsense that happens.

[DeepcutHoop]

a) The introduction of retrospective bans for cheating/diving/simulation/gamesmanship (whichever word you want to give it). That deterrent would soon put a stop to it all.

b) The introduction of video technology for major game changing decisions to assist the refs (just like they now have in tennis, rugby and cricket). It's been proven now that it doesn't significantly slow down the game's flow because it's so instant.

Tennis and cricket have far more interruptions to play than football, so it has less impact. It's only used for tries in rugby isn't it?