Michel Platini is adamant it will work, David Moyes has concerns, Petr Cech thinks it a waste of time and Hugh Dallas, a member of Uefa's referee panel, says the latest attempt from European football's governing body to eradicate the crimes and misdemeanours of the penalty area will utilise the "human camera". During Fulham, Celtic and Everton's opening Uefa Europa League group games tomorrow night, for the first time in senior matches, there will be an extra man in black situated on each goalline.

This, Uefa hopes, will allow more decisions to be correctly judged, especially those in which skulduggery may be afoot. A recent illustration of what concerns Platini, the Uefa president, is the brouhaha over Eduardo da Silva's "fall" against Celtic in August during the second leg of the Champions League knockout tie. Widespread vilification of the striker was followed by a two-match Uefa ban, before the governing body's appeal panel decided, actually, that the video evidence which had condemned Eduardo was inconclusive.

Yet how much more definitive will two more pair of eyes be, even from their vantage position, patrolling the goalline from the opposite side to the current assistant referees? "Some people have said we should simply introduce goalline technology, like they have in tennis," says Dallas, who helped organise the first trials for Uefa in Under-19 European Championship qualifying ties. "However, while that works perfectly well for that sport, it wouldn't be as useful for football because the ball is in the air as often as it is on the ground when contentious issues arise.

"The referees behind the goal aren't there as a replacement for goalline technology: rather, they'll operate as a human camera. During a normal match, when a forward and a defender run into the 18-yard box together the referee will be behind them. Now he will have a colleague who can view any resulting challenge head-on. From the initial trials the presence of the extra officials also acts as a deterrent to pushing and shoving at corners and free-kicks."

Moyes, the Everton manager, believes there could be a "raft of penalties" because clubs have not been briefed as to how the new officials will be used. "We know if you pull a jersey in the box it's a risk but you might find they're giving every single thing and we've not had any directive except to say where they're going to stand and what they're going to do," Moyes said.

"We think we should have had a clear briefing but think they're not too sure how it's going to work themselves. They want to get more decisions right and this is one way of trying to do it. I'm not sure if two people behind the goal is the correct answer but we have to support it if they want to get more decisions right."

Cech has no doubt the experiment, which if successful could be introduced for the Euro 2012 qualifiers, will not work. "For me if there is a really strong shot which bounces quickly the referee can stay wherever he wants but he still has no chance to see it," the Chelsea and Czech Republic keeper says. "The human eye cannot replace technology."

Might, then, more opinions actually confuse the issue? "Yeah. And the new rule is the ball has to be 100% over the line. How can you judge that? You don't know if three millimetres of the ball or half a centimetre was not behind the goalline." Would technology be better? "Of course."

Speak to those at the highest level of Uefa, though, and there is a conviction that employing television replays would actually be detrimental. "We are firmly of the opinion that video refereeing would not make the game fairer," one executive insisted. "Our president worked for television for a long time and he knows what you see sometimes in slow motion doesn't give at all the right reproduction of reality.

"Contact may look much worse or much better than it actually was because you take out the dynamics of the action. He is of the firm opinion that video refereeing would be a regression not progress."

With the rapid change in available technology would Uefa ever consider using it? "It would be silly to say never. What happens 20, 50 years from now, who knows?" The executive gives little credence to the theory that two extra voices may confuse the referee. "No. Because that additional assistant referee won't be making decisions. He'll just be communicating with the referee through his mouth-piece. It will be up to the central referee, as always, to make the decision. He will be very well placed to see action in the goal area as he will be in front of players."

Is there a concern that extra officials creates two more people to blame when a decision, inevitably, is judged wrongly? "He'll be talking to the referee. Nobody will know who actually pointed to the problem. People see it on television from five different angles so it's a bit unfair for the referee only to see it from one."