Paying fans are counting the cost of VAR.. for them, pleasure has become pain
SO, six months in, how has VAR impacted your matchday experience?
I’ll take a guess. Most of the time it feels like a stranger in the seat in front loudly slagging off the wrong players, or the warm bottle of Carlsberg you had to buy at half-time because there was no cold beer on sale, even though you got to the bar five minutes before the break. In other words, an unnecessary pain in the jacksie.
I’m guessing that because Yougov polled 1,396 regular Premier League matchgoers earlier this month, and 67 per cent felt matches were less enjoyable with VAR. Which feels like an underestimate.
A Wolves fan group are calling on spectators to turn their backs on the pitch whenever it intervenes. They believe the way it’s being carried out in England has destroyed the unique, instinctive pleasure of celebrating a goal.
When Premier League boss Richard Masters was told of the Yougov poll, he arrogantly replied: “I don’t think VAR has been damaging,” before vowing to discuss possible changes with clubs in April.
Not the fans, mind. Not the people who, unlike Mr Masters, pay to watch the game and have the most emotional investment in it. The ones (like the Crystal Palace supporters, above) who are saying it is damaging their 90 minutes of pleasure.
How bizarre. What other branch of entertainment would treat their customers so shabbily?
Who else would change so radically the consumer experience without getting feedback from those consumers, on the grounds they believe they’ll just take it?
After Bournemouth’s defeat at Burnley on Saturday,
Eddie Howe spoke of the psychological damage wreaked on his players after two highly-dubious VAR calls.
But what about how it messed with the heads of fans, who had made a 600-mile round trip to witness such a
painful farce? The most
important principle is being overlooked. Football is an intensely emotional, live-in-the-moment, spectator event, which relies on a trustworthy bond between the performers and audience.
To ask members of that audience to pay £40-£100 to be staring at screens that tell them nothing in the most crucial part of the game, while unknown officials draw lines, out of sight, many miles away, is an unnatural perversion of the sport.
We saw during the Champions League game at Stamford Bridge on Tuesday a slightly more palatable application. At the key VAR moment, when it was used to send off Marcos Alonso, the referee looked at the monitors and saw the red card offence (left).
But the Premier League are averse to going down that route in case it overly interferes with the flow of the game.
They’re not concerned with the effect in grounds, but on those watching the “product” on TV. It’s more about holding the attention of Sky and BT customers, so they don’t get bored and cancel their subscriptions, than giving matchgoing fans a clearer, and fairer, picture of their decision-making. But until the Premier League puts the paying fans’ matchday experience first, by involving them in its application, VAR will be viewed by most as an alien concept imposed from above.
So, before the inevitable overhaul takes place, why don’t they try to gain some rare kudos by respecting the most important people inside their grounds?
As well as talking to the chief executives, canvass the matchgoers. Every club has details of season-ticket holders and members on a database, so it wouldn’t take much effort to email them a simple survey. Or hold a meeting with representatives from every fan group. Call it a customer feedback session.
Alternatively, they can carry on ignoring them, and give further credence to the widely-held belief among fans that they’re not really customers, just scenery.