It would kill the game. First it's penalties, then it'll be offsides, then fouls. Be stopping every 10 seconds.

How do you determine what is and isn't a penalty? There's no point when fans are arguing years later over decisions with slow motion replays from various angles

There's too many grey areas in a lot of penalty decisions, quite often a replay can make a tackle look worse than it is, or the reverse. Who decides if the contact was enough to bring down a player, or if he dived anticipating the tackle? Was it handball or ball to hand? These are only decisions you can make reading a game.

Until we have a definitive set of criteria for a penalty with no room for interpretation it wouldn't work.

As for in-game challenges..

Who decides if the contact was enough to bring down a player, or if he dived anticipating the tackle? Was it handball or ball to hand? These are only decisions you can make reading a game.
------------------------------------------------------

A panel of 3 should make the decision, simple as that. Ref's have a hard job and are damned if they do/don't in this era of the game when the players are as fast as a whippet and cameras scrutinise every aspect of the game..................... including refereeing decisions. And no, it wouldn't slow the game down anymore than the theatrics we see after any decision is made.
Don't get me wrong, i'm all for keeping the game 'pure' but as 'purity' has long since left the building, go with the flow

i think yes, quite often a pen being awarded means a red card and a potential goal so they are game changers.
one review a half would not slow things that much.

to clarify the above one review each half for each team.

A panel of three debate a dive.. for how long? No matter who you get there will be differences of opinion. You're acting as if there is a factual basis for these calls.. if we're going to listen to three guys watching a tv why not the man who's made a career of being a referee?

It'd undermine the ref, make the game boring, fix some contentious decisions but create a load more. Goal line technology establishes a fact - goal or not, besides which we already have a review system for cards after the match.

You're acting as if there is a factual basis for these calls.. if we're going to listen to three guys watching a tv why not the man who's made a career of being a referee?
----------------------------------------------
@Bale.................Firstly, no i'm not. Secondly, how many times during a season do we see 'wrong calls' either way?
The referees are the best that we have to offer BUT STILL make the odd mistake (as we all do in life), largely due to being 'mugged off' by a clever player.
What exactly do you want bud, a 'general concensus' of the incident or one man 'put on the spot' making a decision?
We live in an era of the 'camera' which has the ability to make the best ref on the planet look a fool at times from different angles etc etc etc.
That's unfortunately the era we live in so why not lessen the load?

What exactly do you want bud, a 'general concensus' of the incident or one man 'put on the spot' making a decision?

---

A referee doing his job, not a panel of clueless pundits doing it for him.

If you agree that a lot of penalty claims are open to interpretation how can you think that it's a good idea to take it out of the referee's hands? The buck has to stop somewhere.

If you agree that a lot of penalty claims are open to interpretation how can you think that it's a good idea to take it out of the referee's hands? The buck has to stop somewhere.
-----------------------------------------

Have you understood what you've just posted?

Perfectly thankyou