OPPONENTS to introducing video technology to help football referees had their major argument blown away at Fulham.

The anti-tech brigade has always said making crucial decisions on the basis of television replays would slow the game down too much.

But the penalty incident involving Andy Cole in the Premiership match against Arsenal suggested technology would actually speed the game up.

When Cole went down inside the box, referee Mark Halsey originally gave a penalty.

Cole's ground-thumping reaction and Arsenal's protests convinced the ref to consult his linesman, and Halsey then changed his mind.

The situation took a minute or two to sort out. Had there been a ref in the stand with access to a video replay of the tackle on Cole, it could have been sorted out far quicker.

At Bolton, Sam Allardyce has access to video coverage during the match, and can see a replay of a key incident within eight seconds.

So the technology is already there for a Premiership manager to scrutinise a controversial incident within seconds.

This puts them in a better position to see what happened than the referee, who could be 20 yards away with a ruck of bodies blocking his view.

It is ridiculous that referees cannot get the benefit of this technology.

And it is also daft that the Fulham-Arsenal game had to be stopped for a couple of minutes, when the decision could have been made in 10 seconds had there been an official in the stand with video access.