Sometime in the next few weeks there will be an announcement by the Scottish Professional Football League about the long-awaited start of the Video Assistant Referee system, most probably after the FIFA World Cup’s conclusion in December.

All I can say to the round ball community is good luck with that.

You only have to look at English football’s experience with VAR to conclude that there will be numerous initial problems with the system as it comes into the Scottish game. One of them will be the insistence that referees will have to use pitch-side monitors to review decisions rather than the big screens which would allow every fan to see the judgement process. Some stadia do not have such big screens but where they exist they should be used so that everyone – refs, players, coaches and fans – can see what is being reviewed.

Rugby Union had similar problems with the introduction of VAR, which dates back to 1999 believe it or not, but the introduction of a fourth referee, the Television Match Official, in 2001 considerably enhanced the whole review system. The TMO is the difference between rugby and football, as a TMO can intervene when he or she spots foul play taking place which the referee has not seen.

I had my doubts about the introduction of VAR and TMOs because I considered that it was driving a further wedge between the elite level of the sport and the grassroots, but in the professional era there can be no doubt that TMOs are necessary because so much money often rests on refereeing decisions and it is the sport’s duty to make sure that decisions can be checked and altered if necessary.

Not every decision can be checked using the TMO, but the most important ones are subject to review if there is a ‘clear and obvious’ situation regarding the scoring of a try or foul play. Given the huge concerns within the sport over such issues as high tackles, the TMO’s ability to bring instances of foul play to the referee’s attention is undoubtedly a good thing.

It may be just my opinion with no statistical evidence to back it up, but I genuinely feel that players are now well aware that in a televised match they will not get away with dangerous play anywhere on the pitch, and instances of punches being thrown or heads being targeted are reducing.

The referee is still the master or mistress of the laws, so that’s why I have been disappointed to read so many criticisms of international match referees in recent times.

The latest came at the weekend when Argentina’s coach Michael Cheika let rip about the Australian referee Damon Murphy’s performance in the Pumas’ match against South Africa in Durban.

Argentina conceded 22 penalties in the 21-38 loss to the Boks, but more pertinently they had four yellow cards against them and referee Murphy awarded South Africa two penalty tries in the second half when the Pumas interfered with driving mauls that would definitely have resulted in tries. With the help of his TMO, Murphy got all the major decisions correct, especially the yellow cards – including Eden Etzebeth being sin-binned for pushing an Argentinian player - and Cheika was out of order in slating him, not least because Cheika had said the previous week that he had promised his mother not to talk about referees any more “and I cannot lie to my mother!” He broke that promise and I wonder what pelters his mammy gave him afterwards.

Argentina, may I say, are probably the most improved side in world rugby at the moment, but they do have a problem with discipline at times which hopefully they can solve so that we get a good clean flowing game when they come to Murrayfield on November 19.

Even with TMOs and television cameras covering every angle, referees still get things wrong and while I thought Murphy got most of his penalty decisions correct, there were some penalties which on reflection he might not have awarded. And there’s the rub – when you have a kicker like Frans Steyn in your team, penalties are often just a gift of three points, as Steyn showed when kicking a penalty from his own half.

I am not advocating that the TMO be called on to review every penalty, as there’s enough interruptions already, but why not allow a cricket style review system with each side’s captain having three chances per match to call a review of a decision, losing a review every time the decision stands.

Yes it would mean more interventions in matches, but it would also allow referees to review their decisions, especially when a penalty is awarded in clear and obvious scoring range.

If only Craig Joubert had been able to view the replay of his wrong decision that cost Scotland a place in the 2015 World Cup semi-finals…but let’s not go there again.