It’s unquestionable that refereeing is a difficult job. But not as difficult as being a linesman (or assistant referee), which is actually impossible…
Assistant referees (we’ll call them linesman for nostalgic and ease-of-typing reasons) have to alert the referee to ‘offsides’. That is, a player not having two players between himself and the goal when the ball is played (unless he’s in his own half or it’s a goal kick or throw in).
‘When the ball is played’ – often a split second decision. A split second decision that requires simultaneous awareness of the ball, and of the attacker. This is a physical impossibility – you cannot look in two places at once, at both the ball and at the attacker (or the defensive line). So, by definition, the offside rule cannot be properly enforced by a human being.
Yes, it’s difficult for refs to spot fouls, manage players, deal with dissent… but spare a though for their assistants, who have the impossible job of enforcing a rule that it is not actually possible to monitor correctly. They will get lots of decisions right, but there will always be human error there, because of physical limitations.
It is not feasible to have an automated referee to manage games – you need a human presence on the pitch. It would be, however, feasible to have automated assistants – a robot camera on rails, that stayed level with the penultimate defensive player. Then, if the attacker was in front, they raise a flag (or alert the ref in some way).
Considering the futility of humans’ attempts to be the perfect linesman, and the possible total eradication of error by introducing robot replacements, is it anything but a no-brainer to trial them at least?
emm… interesting