No, you were right the first time, Spurf. Carry on the game and go back if an incorrect decision was given. If someone scores in the time that's being played, then you could either scrub the goal or play an advantage and allow it, depending on who the original decision favoured. If a team commits a foul and then goes on to score as the decision's being checked, then it's perfectly reasonable to chalk their goal off, in my opinion. These things should only be used in limited circumstances, though. They don't need to be implemented for every foul.
There are two separate issues: Mistakes and cheating. I've got no issue with technology to help reducing mistakes: I'd rather the technology didn't delay the game but it's no big deal if the odd one takes a little while to sort out. Cheating could easily be stamped out if the authorities had the guts to do it. You just make the penalty a lot worse than the benefit. I've suggested before that the ref should be allowed to ask the players questions and it should be compulsory to give an honest answer. Where video evidence proved beyond reasonable doubt that the answer was a lie, then the penalty would be retrospective loss of the match and a ten game ban. That would help a lot as it would make players behave better. Other simple things like really stopping dissent would help too. Some things really annoy me about the game now: eg when at free kicks a player stands over the ball or the players in the wall gradually inch forward - both are obvious and repeated every game yet the refs do nothing. If the ref booked every player he came across when he paced out the ten yards and the whole wall if it inched forward - it would be stopped. The problem is that the first one to do it would be accused of being petty and spoiling the game!
The moving wall thing found an easy solution in the Copa America. They gave the ref a spray can with which he could just draw the line in a vanishing spray. No more cheating, no more fuss, it's cheap and easy to implement and would actually save time. Do we use it? Of course not.
It would be better than nothing but is a really good example of something which addresses the symptoms, not the cause. When a foul is committed the attacking side should be able to take the kick whenever they like, not have to wait for the offending side to comply with the rules, or for the referee to paint a line on the ground. The issue is not that the players don't know where ten yards is - it's that the culture is that standing closer is somehow OK
Knowing that a ref can communicate with a 4th official who is monitoring TV cameras and act swiftly on any incidents he may draw to the ref's attention will surely make even the most stupid footballers think twice. No Luke, stupid footballers don't think once never mind twice. Anyway the fact that they are on camera watched by millions does not stop them now does it. Terry?
Might just cause a smidgen of crowd trouble when an allowed goal is then disallowed, minutes later after the game has restarted!
