(2) Credibility and Consistency

In football, there are many arguments against the introduction of ground officials consulting footage before making a decision.  
This soccer article and also this one help to sum up some of the more common issues, in short;
1. It will undermine the referee's authority.
2. It will cause match hold-ups constantly.
3. It will kill the drama, passion and unpredictable nature of the game.
4. Just because football has enough commercial money does not mean the technology should be introduced.
5. Incorrect decisions are part of the game's spectacle, ie. fans & media post-match debate.

6. Using replays to make calls is "just not football".

 
In terms of the referee's authority this may be true but if the technology is available, the referee is able to use the tool as part of their authority, effectively making them more credible.  Arsenal Manager Arsene Wegner agrees, as someone who has been campaigning for technology on the field for many years now.  In April 2012 Wegner stated in a BBC news article "Video will help the referees, not question their authority. It will give them more credit, more authority and less mistakes. [We need] instant video replays on the demand of the referee".

The game being held up, admittedly may be a problem, however the game as it stands is always being stopped and started for various reasons.  Incorporating replays into this stoppage time may encounter teething problems at first but ultimately would become more streamlined and normalised.  AFL trails for the technology found that the average wait time for a referral was 49 seconds.

It may in fact reduce many of the game's current needless stoppages, particularly as it could potentially act as a deterrent to those players who seem to "dive" in order to gain an advantage. 
The game's credibility in non-football countries such as the United States lays in question. Dan Eckles, sports editor for the Nevada Spark's Tribune stated in a 2011 article "Considering one person can make the decision and never justify it to anyone else, there can be an appearance of impropriety".  “This is why Americans don’t watch soccer. It’s got no credibility”.

Many players dive with the smallest amount of contact, which creates a vicious cycle of cheating, so a mentality of 'they-are-cheating-so-shall-we' develops.  This amusing slideshow highlights some of the more guilty parties in football today. 

The much debated subject of a "wrongly" allowed goal giving a team a morale boost and psychological edge won't go away.  The two famous incidents mentioned in the previous post are certainly more prevalent examples at an international level, but it occurs regularly in the professional leagues.  Following Chelsea's 5-1 win over Tottenham Hotspur in the 2012 F.A. Cup semi final, Spurs striker Emmanuel Adebayor blamed the referee for "ruining Tottenham's F.A Cup dreams" and expressed his fury over the lack of goal line technology, saying it was "killing the game..".  Spurs Manager Harry Redknapp also criticised the referee for "guessing", stating his decision was a "disaster". 

Chelsea Manager Roberto di Matteo feels the current rules are contradictory, as retrospective video evidence is used to punish and fine players after a match, but not used for goals.

Football has and will continue to contain drama and passion with or without new technology and it seems unlikely that the absence of "wrong decisions" in a post-match debate will ruin the spectacle.  Football has a long history and there are a multitude of different aspects open for discussion following a match, a typical Liverpool post match discussion forum clearly shows this.  Football fans will always have heated debates, and it seems more likely that the interpretation of the replays themselves would become a post-match discussion topic.