" Video referees - will they make any difference? "

Just saw a clip on social media of a video referee's decision in the France v England game.

Looks like the referee gave a penalty, then referred it to his video referee who then suggested a penalty and a red card for Varane - the French defender.

Seems to me having video referees won't change an awful lot, and we'll still have plenty of debates about the decisions.

Just saw a clip on social media of a video referee's decision in the France v England game.

Looks like the referee gave a penalty, then referred it to his video referee who then suggested a penalty and a red card for Varane - the French defender.

Seems to me having video referees won't change an awful lot, and we'll still have plenty of debates about the decisions.

they will make a difference main one probably decisions will be more acceptable to players so taking steam out of inccident, but it will be certainly be better than a 5th official who are next to usless!

First time I've seen this being used and they still got the decision wrong!

as ive said on another thread. you get differing opinions in TV studios from pundits who have viewed contentous decisions many times from many angles and occasionally refs will join the debate on either side in the next days press.

yes it will make a difference..games will be longer.

First time I've seen this being used and they still got the decision wrong!

The French player certainly touched him with his leg wether it was intentional or not is open to debate but it's a pen and as it's stopped goalscoring opportunity as to be red card! Didn't see any of players disputing decision either .

First time I've seen this being used and they still got the decision wrong!

The French player certainly touched him with his leg wether it was intentional or not is open to debate but it's a pen and as it's stopped goalscoring opportunity as to be red card! Didn't see any of players disputing decision either .

The rules were changed this season for the double punishment of a penalty and red card to be wiped out if it's not a professional foul. It should have just been a penalty.

The 'decision' was whether the offending player was "interfering with play" and not the actual penalty itself!

First time I've seen this being used and they still got the decision wrong!

The French player certainly touched him with his leg wether it was intentional or not is open to debate but it's a pen and as it's stopped goalscoring opportunity as to be red card! Didn't see any of players disputing decision either .

The rules were changed this season for the double punishment of a penalty and red card to be wiped out if it's not a professional foul. It should have just been a penalty.

No attempt to play the ball......

First time I've seen this being used and they still got the decision wrong!

The French player certainly touched him with his leg wether it was intentional or not is open to debate but it's a pen and as it's stopped goalscoring opportunity as to be red card! Didn't see any of players disputing decision either .

The rules were changed this season for the double punishment of a penalty and red card to be wiped out if it's not a professional foul. It should have just been a penalty.

I thought that when Connolly was sent off last season, can't remember who against but if there's no attempt to play the ball then it can still be a red

NO NO NO. The only use of video should be goal-line technology. Look at the mess rugby and cricket are in with TMOs they can take anything up to 5-6 minutes to make a decision, it would ruin the flow of a fast moving game that football is. lets stay with the referee doing the job

NO NO NO. The only use of video should be goal-line technology. Look at the mess rugby and cricket are in with TMOs they can take anything up to 5-6 minutes to make a decision, it would ruin the flow of a fast moving game that football is. lets stay with the referee doing the job