You could make the review really restrictive. There's nothing lost from making it automatic every time the referee stops play by blowing the whistle. This includes goals, penalties and free kicks. I am at a loss trying to find instances where a team could ask for play to be stopped for review.
Thinking about offside again, play should generally continue. If the offside play results in possession for the defending team, nothing is gained by stopping. If it results in a corner, possession can be granted to the defending team if there was off-side (again, ample time for the 4th referee to decide this while the corner is set up (after all, it requires a blow of the whistle to resume play). If it results in a goal, there should be an automatic review and there is again ample time.
The only case I can think of not covered by this is off-side not called resulting in a side throw (not a corner) for the attacking team.
There's the issue of reviewing when play is stopped for a minor foul which doesn't grant a direct free kick. This should happen very seldom and I don't like it when the attacking team executes this in haste to catch the defenders flat-footed anyway. En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
What is sometimes forgotten is that there may only be one camera angle that clearly resolves the issue, and it is conceivable that the TV company might not make that angle available for viewing - it puts the TV company in a quasi-judicial position.
In soccer - where diving is rampant - it could also be used to adjudicate on penalty decisions - as that is almost tantamount to awarding a goal, and hopefully it would reduce the incidence of diving.
Extending it to offside could become intrusive, as offside calls are made on a regular basis - although admittedly the offside rule is so difficult to referee that mistakes happen almost every match. notes from no w here
However TV coverage is becoming more pervasive - sometimes with only one or two cameras at the lower levels. There is also a lot of skill and technology involved in the camera work - moving cameras along the touch line, overhead cameras, close-ups at the right time etc. It is a very skilled task for a cameraman to follow the action accurately.
However I don't think it would be beyond the ability of Fifa to draft a regulation as to require the availability of footage from every TV camera at the ground - they're all linked to one editing suite in any case - and usually all belong to one sports/news organisation/channel. notes from no w here
Don't forget that soccer is played at all levels and age groups and it would only be viable to have "official" cameras at the top level.
I've only occasionally had a neutral referee, and I played at a decent level as a keeper or -indeed- left-footed striker. It's clear that the FIFA argument is spurious. Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi
Why? *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
In other words, if the call doesn't result in a change in possession or a free kick, don't review it. En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
There's nothing lost from making it automatic every time the referee stops play by blowing the whistle.
Except every stop would be lengthened by several seconds, especially free kicks far from the goal. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
As this interrupts an ongoing attack in the defending team's pitch, the attacking team would want a review and should be granted one. How many seconds are we talking about here? En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
