The referee is at once asked to be better at his job, while being denied every opportunity to do so. Why is the linesman allowed to flag for a foul? It's a suggestion. No reason why a "video assistant" can't be introduced. It wouldn't affect the flow any more than a linesman waving his flag and the ref waving "play on" because he's having none of it, or pulling it back because he wasn't in a position to see the incident and trusts his assistant.
Goal line technology is whatever. You don't even really need it if you have a video camera. If the viewers on the other side of the tele know something the ref doesn't, then the game is broken. Severely broken.
Dunno who is suggesting "in game video reviews". Who said there has to be a review by the ref on the pitch? What "ceremony" is necessary? It'd be the same as a linesman...or should we get rid of those, too?
Post-match review of an event should not even be necessary, because the decisions shouldn't be wrong 40% of the time in the first place. Of course, in special circumstances, it could be useful, and should of course be used if it would help in any appeal process.
@ flo, It would be pretty simple to review straight red cards and penalty incidents if the club at the short end of the stick appeals the decision. Just keep the old "frivolous appeal" rule and it'll be kept to only the ones that are truly worthy of review. Ban the cheater for cheating, rescind the card, or what-have-you. Certainly don't change the result of the match. If they were using video during the match anyway, though, this would be very, very rare.
