Four eyes may be better than two but decision-making is still crucial

Today's UEFA Europa Cup football match between Fulham and AS Roma has raised an intriguing issue regarding the current trial of extra officials. The trial system itself involves an extra two refereeing officials being introduced, one standing next to each goal. The idea itself appears positive; another pair of eyes, possibly closer to the goalmouth action than the referee, and perhaps more importantly, another angle from which to analyse the situation. It is also hoped that these extra officials would have a close view of the goal line and thus would be able to provide a decision over whether a ball crossed the line or not. Essentially, the officials would be able to allow or reject debatable goals, like the 'hand of god' Maradona incident or Geoff Hurst's World Cup Final strike against Germany.

Unfortunately, an incident this evening has suggested that this novel approach may provide more problems than solutions. A penalty was awarded by Paul Allaerts of Belgium for a foul on AS Roma player John Arne Riise. The referee then proceeded to show a red card to Fulham's Brede Hangeland, claiming that the goal-line official had named him the culprit for the foul. However, replays showed that actually it was Stephen Kelly who had allegedly brought down Riise. Although the referee eventually changed his mind and sent off the right player, after, it seems, Kelly admitted to having been the offending party, the situation highlights a potential flaw in the concept of extra officials.

An extra pair of eyes is a brilliant idea. After all, the more points of view available, the more information ready to make an informed decision. It seems though that there is an issue over responsibility and accountability. It is all well the goal-line official seeing an offence but ultimately, the decision rests with the referee. If they have not seen the incident in question, how can they be completely sure that the decision they are making is the correct one? Trust is vital, though the incident today could be taken as a reason to doubt the relationship between the goal-line official and the referee. As Roy Hodgson commented post-match; Kelly was not last man (Hangeland was 'sent off' despite being in front of Riise when he fell) so surely the goal-line official's job is to inform the referee that it was not a sending off offence.

With decision-making like this, it is difficult to see how the extra officials are helping the game. Rather, they seem to be complicating it further and if anything, creating new targets for blame when poor decisions are made. The new officials were supposed to reduce controversy. Instead, on tonight's evidence, they are only serving to increase it.