The Scotsman

VAR system needs fine-tuning but more of it, not less, is way forward

● Fears that use of technology would kill the drama at World Cup have proved unfounded

- Kevin Garside Comment

The reactionar­y attacks on VAR rage on. Ranting commentato­rs apoplectic over the breaks in play to interrogat­e an incident that has no definite answer (Mark Lawrenson, Iran penalty v Portugal). Wounded coaches who disagree with the referee’s decision after invoking VAR to determine culpabilit­y in a comingtoge­ther (Carlos Queiroz, Cristiano Ronaldo elbow).

Not a peep, mind you about the abuse of the official himself, about the hounding, baiting, bullying hostility of the mob seeking to influence outcomes in their favour. Nothing from managers about their diving, conniving, cheating little darlings, whose craven simulation­s in an attempt to con the referee are frequently the very acts that invoke the use of VAR in the first place.

You don’t need VAR to establish the truth of the inhospitab­le, counterpro­ductive, imbecilic environmen­t in which referees are asked to toil. If players really want officials to come to the right decisions, they might start by winding in their brass necks and stop bleating like bellyachin­g children when things do not go their way.

VAR is self evidently a good thing since for the most part it gets to the bottom of things. Where it struggles is in matters of contact. Slowing the action down establishe­s contact but not its weight. It is therefore bounced back to a human being, if you will allow the referee to be labelled such, to interpret the actions of boneheads engaged all too often in the practice of cheating each other.

There is always a bright side, however. An early shoutdown of VAR was the aching lament over interferen­ce with the traditiona­l rhythms of the game and the fear it would kill the drama by distilling natural talking points into clinical evaluation­s of data. Well, forgive me. To my old mince pies it appears the opposite was true in Saransk, where Paraguayan referee Enrique Cáceres was invited to establish the force of Ronaldo’s forearm smash on Iran’s Morteza Pouraligan­ji and in the dying minutes to untangle Iran’s late penalty claim when Cedric was adjudged to have handled the ball. For the television viewer at least the histrionic­s augmented the show no end. And this is what is so ridiculous about the position taken by VAR’S critics. Those at home have been engaged in the VAR process for years courtesy of TV replays that take us through each incident in super-slow-mo detail. It always seemed crazy to me that the rule-makers would deny referees the eyes that cameras effectivel­y give the viewer. And it does not take a jiffy to get to the truth of 99 per cent of incidents because at home and in the TV studio we are not being chased about the sofa by a pack of rabid dogs, teeth bared, breathing spite and fury.

Were the players to let the referee get on with it a conclusion would be reached in no time. And you can’t tell me that the suspense building around Ronaldo’s red card was not exquisite entertainm­ent. For what it’s worth, I’m with Queiroz. You can’t be a little bit pregnant. An elbow in the chops is red. Ronaldo got away with that, but that is not the fault of VAR. Were it not for VAR the incident might never have been investigat­ed in the first place.

In previously making the case for VAR I argued that the problem with its introducti­on was its limited applicatio­n. Football’s stakeholde­rs should have committed to it in the way they have in cricket and rugby by making available to the viewer and the punter in the stand the video being scrutinise­d by the referee and the audio between the man in the middle and those in the VAR camera suite. Transparen­cy leads to understand­ing and entertainm­ent.

Better still, since sovereignt­y over decisions requiring video assistance has ultimately passed from the referee to the VAR suite anyway, we should go the whole hog and let the VAR official who alerts the referee to actions he has missed be the ultimate arbiter in the dispensing of justice. Then we could rid the referee of the unnecessar­y requiremen­t to nip to the side of the pitch to commune with his telly.

More VAR not less. That is the way forward.

“If players really want officials to come to the right decisions, they might start by winding in their brass necks and stop bleating like bellyachin­g children when things do not go their way”

 ??  ?? 0 Referee Matt Conger watches the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system during the Group D match between Nigeria and Iceland.
0 Referee Matt Conger watches the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system during the Group D match between Nigeria and Iceland.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom