Thanks Gavin

This post was partly inspired by Gavin's response to the Italy penalty and also by comments I made to my wife during the Switzerland v Ukraine snorfest.

FIFA have, since the 1990 World Cup in Italy, outlawed tackling from behind, tackling from the side if it appears to be from behind, simulation, passing back to your goalkeeper, waving imaginary yellow cards, feigning injury (players must leave the field), time wasting if the ball is not in play (despite one of 5Live's commentators insisting you can be booked for wasting time when the ball is in play!) and players wearing their shirts outside their shorts. They also abolished the four step rule for goalkeepers and introduced a new six second rule which everybody, except Thierry Henry, has ignored.

But players are smart and they have adapted:

1) Gary Lineker started it in 1990 against Cameroon, the trick of 'drawing a foul' by leaving your leg trailing as you run into a prone goalkeeper.
2) Tripping yourself up, Owen v Argentina in 2002, Shevchenko v Tunisia in 2006 being good examples.
3) Blocking. It's been made illegal in Rugby Union but is practically compulsory in football, not the annoying habit of a defending player standing between ball and attacker as the ball runs over the goal line but the less subtle way of standing between the opposition runner and the ball anywhere on the pitch. In the Ghana v USA, Brian McBride was blocked off on the half way line after a long punt by Kaisey Keller. Think Champions League at Stamford Bridge two years ago, Carvallaho blocking the Barca goalkeeper for Chelsea's winner. So unconcerned are FIFA by this that Jose Mourinho even made an American Express advert where the tactic is featured!
4)Judo tackles: Remember when you were about eight or nine you would try to trip your mates up by putting your leg across the bottom of his shin, players are doing that, it's effectively a tackle from behind done from the front.
5)Greco-Roman Wrestling: You grab your opponent around the neck at a corner and run into an oncoming opponent taking two players out at once, it looks like an accident and the ref. is none the wiser.

Now, all this brings me to the bigger issue - the use of technology and helping the officials. One thing I have noticed about this debate is that all those people whose lives are directly influenced by the decisions of the referee and his assistants say we should have it. They know that a dodgy decision could result in somebody losing their job, we aren't talking about an era when £7 was the average wage and the players caught the bus to the ground with the fans, at a time when it costs £50 to watch Chelsea at home the product should be better.

All those who pimp off it (people like John Motson, Alan Green and Adrian Durham to name three high profile presenters/commentators) say no to technology. Those who fall between the two, that is the journalists who work for newspapers are generally in favour of it. The detractors say it will slow the game down but that is not the case, look at the West Ham v Middlesbrough game last season when our goal was clearly not over the line, both Alan Pardew and Steve Mclaren had seen the Sky replay on the monitor before the referee was back in the centre circle having spoken to his assistant. What the detractors won't admit is that it will take away their livelihood, it's not about commentating it's about speculation, the big decisions, the post match phone-ins, 606 and 505 - nothing to talk about if there isn't any dodgy refeering.

It doesn't undermine the referee's confidence it will enhance it. Restrict it to goal mouth incidents only to begin with and take it from there.

At present 30 seconds are allowed per substitution and per booking. Do away with the 30 seconds per sub ruling and give that time over to a fourth official getting subs on and off and allow a maximum of five minutes per game for television replays. Given that Sky have just signed the biggest ever deal for Premiership rights, don't we deserve a better service?