THERE are split-second incidents in a football match which reinforces my belief that anyone who wants to be a referee must have a couple of slates loose.

I am thinking now of last Sundayés match between Spurs and Portsmouth and the penalty awarded to the Londoners by referee Chris Foy after Pedro Mendes had upended Didier Zokora in the box.

As I watched that incident live there was no doubt in my mind that referee Foy had made the right decision. Even when I watched the replay I would have wagered my mortgage that Mendes had whipped away the legs of the Pompey striker.

Chance

Only when the challenge was shown again in super-slow motion did I realise I had been wrong all along. There was no contact between the two players. Zokora had conned the referee. But could Mr Foy have spotted that? Not a chance in a million.

Predictably, after watching the replays, themselves, the Pompey boss Harry Redknapp and his assistant Tony Adams were not best pleased. Both demanded that TV replays should be used to decide borderline incidents.

Harry and Tony are not the first to present the case for TV replays and most certainly they wonét be the last. And on the evidence of last Sunday,és match at White Hart Lane their argument is difficult to refute.

But I would beg the shakers and movers of English football to turn a deaf ear to any plea for the introduction of TV replays. Because decisions taken by camera would be the ruination of the game as we know it.

The current duration of a football match is 90 minutes plus a few minutes of added time for fouls and time-wasting. Bring TV replays into the equation and you would have to take your lunch, dinner and an evening snack to a match, because it would last longer than a multi-transplant operation.

Let me take you back all those years to when TV replays first became a decision-making tool in the world of professional cricket.

Those replays had one purpose only. They were to be viewed by a third umpire only to decide hairline run-outs. And a wonderful innovation those replays were.

Watching in normal time you would swear that a batsman had made his ground. Only when you watched the replay did you spot that his bat was inches outside the crease when the bails came off. So, yes, replays used solely to decide run-outs were a boon to umpires and a blessing for the game of cricket.

But do you know what the trouble is about new technology? Once youéve got it you want more of it. Thatés human nature at work. And so it was with cricket. Before long TV replays werenét used solely to settle run-out decisions. Now they were used to see if that snick had carried to second-slip. Was that a straightforward catch or was it a ébumpé ball?

Had the ball bounced before it crossed the ropes or had it gone for six. In fact about the only thing not decided by TV replays in cricket today is whether a batsman is out bowled or lbw. And mark my words, it wonét be long before dismissals like that are decided by that little screen up in the pavilion.

And as it is with cricket so will it be with football if TV replays are introduced.

Incidents

Of course they will come in with everyoneés good intentions. Donét worry. They will only be used to decide goal-line incidents and penalties. They wonét interfere with the running of a game.

Codswallop. Introduce TV replays into a football match and by the time you leave the ground your hair will have grown two feet and youéll have a beard stretching down to your belly-button. And that applies to both sexes. Let me tell you how it will work. The replays have been a success in deciding whether that ball had crossed the line or whether Wayne Rooney had tripped himself up when claiming a penalty.

So we will take the system a little bit further. Letés use replays to decide whether that was a foul or not é wherever the tackle had taken place.

Corner kicks. A lot of goals are scored from corners. So we need to get that right. Letés hold play up while we look at our little screen to see if it really was a corner or had the last touch come off the attacking player?

And on and on it would go. Throw-ins. Foul throws. Handballs. Was that an intentional spit? Every time an appeal is made the game will ground to a halt while the replay is viewed.

It would be like watching Cornonation Street with an advert every other minute. Whatés that you say? Watching Coronation Street IS like that. Sorry, my mistake.

So leave TV replays for the pundits to have fun with because there is no place for them in football.
So the referee will sometimes get it wrong. Who cares? gives a monkeyés? An occasional blunder by the man in black adds to the enjoyment.

Gives you something to argue about in the pub later. I would rather watch a referee making a cock-up than sit there for three hours watching a match extended by Tv replays. I love my football, folks é but not THAT much.

TV replays, good or bad? Have your say.

Tweet