Football's lawmakers have delayed live trials of video technology at matches for at least 12 months.
The Dutch FA had wanted to use its system in the Dutch Cup next season, but the International FA Board (IFAB) meeting in Belfast wants more information before giving the green light.
Football Association chairman Greg Dyke had been keen to push forward live trials but other delegates were more cautious, which means it will be at least another year before the go-ahead can be given.
Meanwhile a move to change the 'triple punishment' has been agreed in principle, so that a player who is sent off for a straight red card for denying a goal-scoring chance when conceding a penalty is no longer suspended for the following match.
Irish FA chief executive Patrick Nelson told a news conference: "IFAB did agree that this punishment is too harsh and that we must find a solution to the matter. IFAB has tasked FIFA to look into the feasibility of implementing this on a global level."
Proposals to allow a fourth substitute in extra-time, which had been put forward by FIFA, were rejected.
"IFAB remains of the view that three substitutions is adequate," said Nelson, but the issue has been referred back to its technical panels for further analysis.
FIFA secretary-general Jerome Valcke said caution was needed as the implications of the rule change were so vast.
He said: "I think it needs a lot of discussion -- if the referee just relies on information that he is getting [from the video official] is there a risk he becomes not as strong and always asks for confirmation?
"It's the biggest decision which will come out of IFAB ever. It's not a question of years, it's making the biggest decision ever in the way football is played.''
FA chairman Greg Dyke said he was disappointed at the delay and that the game needed to take action to avoid another Frank Lampard moment -- it was his disallowed goal in the 2010 World Cup which led to goal-line technology being introduced.
Dyke said: "I'm a great fan of video technology. I was a bit disappointed that we hadn't got it further than we have done. If there are means of helping referees, we should think about them, try them in trials and, if they work, adopt them.
"Instead of waiting until you get a 'Frank Lampard' to change the rules, as with goal-line technology, we should go on the front foot. Clearly it's going a bit slower than some of us would have liked.
"I think we're going to look back in 20 years time and say 'wasn't it quaint?' that we didn't use video technology when it was available to help referees.''