VAR divides opinion after penalty rulings fail to clear up controversy

As the final whistle blew, Lionel Messi angrily volleyed the ball high into the Moscow air before kneeling down in the centre-circle to be consoled by a steady succession of team-mates. They must have secretly wished that he had struck his penalty with such venom.

Argentina looked and felt for all the world like losers and, while Messi’s 64th-minute missed penalty provided just about the ultimate personal contrast to Cristiano Ronaldo’s hat-trick in Sochi against Spain, he might find consolation in his great rival’s story at Euro 2016. Portugal had also begun with a frustrating 1-1 draw against Iceland but would ultimately still leave France victorious by the end of the tournament.

It is a lesson that should provide some perspective amid the temptation to suggest that Ronaldo has already struck some kind of knockout blow in any personal World Cup duel with Messi, even if round one has belonged so emphatically to the Portuguese.

As well as the tame penalty that was saved here by Iceland goalkeeper Hannes Halldorsson, Messi also wasted a flurry of late opportunities with freekicks. Even the presence of Diego Maradona urging his team on and sucking a cigar in front of a sign reminding fans of the smoking ban could not sufficiently inspire Argentina.

It is early days, but with further tricky group matches to follow against Croatia and Nigeria, one has to wonder if the collective scars from a succession of near-misses are beginning to weigh heavily on this group. Messi also missed a penalty against Chile in the final of the 2016 Copa America and he provoked little confidence as he stood over the ball here. Halldorsson later said he was confident he knew which way Messi would shoot, even if the biggest mistake was surely in striking the ball at such a comfortable height. “It was a dream come true to save it,” said Halldorsson. “It was a situation I knew could come up. I had looked at a lot of penalties from Messi and I had a good feeling he would go that way today.”

Jorge Sampaoli, Argentina’s manager, described Messi’s penalty as “in the past” but conceded it had been an uncomfortable game for his talisman. “We should have hurt our opponent more and I don’t think our transitions were fast enough,” he said.

Messi admitted scoring “would have changed the script – obviously it hurts me to have missed the penalty. We have the bitterness of not being able to take the three points that we deserved. They did not want to play but closed well.”

Although the statistics showed that Argentina had 78 per cent of the ball and created more than three times Iceland’s attempts on goal, that still told a very skewed story. Yes, Iceland were physical and hard-working, but they also played with an attacking intent that troubled Argentina. Indeed, after two early Messi free-kicks were almost turned in by Nicolas Otamendi and then Nicolas Tagliafico, Iceland missed two wonderful opportunities.

First Alfred Finnbogason crossed for Gyfli Sigurdsson, whose effort was saved by Willy Caballero, then Birkir Bjarnason shot wide when he should have punished a poor clearance by the Chelsea goalkeeper. It appeared that Argentina’s cast of attacking talent would punish such profligacy when Sergio Aguero brilliantly controlled a powerful Marcos Rojo pass before shooting beyond Halldorsson.

It was crucial that Iceland responded quickly, and another mistake by Caballero helped them draw level within four minutes. Gylfi Sigurdsson had crossed and, with Caballero and rightback Eduardo Salvio both missing chances to clear, Finnbogason marked Iceland’s first World Cup match with a goal to enter their football folklore.

Sampaoli was happier with Argentina’s performance thereafter but, with the team so built around Messi and his radar deserting him, they rarely looked likely to fashion an equaliser. There was a hopeful penalty appeal when Salvio’s cross struck the arm of Ragnar Sigurdsson and then Messi’s penalty miss after Hordur Magnusson had bundled Aguero to the floor.

Argentina should have had another penalty when Birkir Saevarsson tripped Cristian Pavon, but referee Szymon Marciniak and his video assistant referee Mark Geiger both concluded it was not a clear-cut decision.

Pavon had just replaced Angel di Maria and Argentina were certainly more effective after that change. Yet Iceland never ceased working and deserved yet another famous result.

Questioned about celebrating a draw as if they had won, they were rightly unapologetic. “Are you Cristiano Ronaldo’s uncle?” asked Halldorsson. “We were playing against one of the best teams in the world, against the best player in the world, in our first World Cup. It was exactly the same as in the Euros. We celebrated a point against Cristiano Ronaldo as we did against Messi. We know how important every point is to get out of the group.”

Another journalist asked if the players could enjoy their direct style of football. “I think yes,” said manager Heimir Hallgrimsson. “We have to play in a special way because they have such superior skills. It is more enjoyable to play this way and achieve something than play in a different way and not achieve anything.”

The players and fans certainly looked like they were having the time of their lives, which was rather more than you could say for Messi. in Moscow

A row erupted over the first use of video technology at the World Cup last night following a string of penalty incidents at the tournament.

History was made in France’s Group B victory over Australia after it became the first competitive fixture to see a refereeing decision overturned since Video Assistant Referees became part of the Laws of the Game.

Having waved play on when Antoine Griezmann went down in the penalty area, referee Andres Cunha awarded a spot-kick after viewing a replay of Josh Risdon’s challenge on the striker. The use of VAR divided opinion on social media, with Risdon getting a touch on the ball while sliding in on Griezmann before tripping his opponent with his trailing leg after the France player had regained possession.

Australia manager Bert van Marwijk was also unhappy with the outcome, claiming Cunha had been undecided even after viewing the replay.

Christian Cueva then became the first player to miss a penalty awarded using VAR when he blazed over in Peru’s Group C game against Denmark, after a foul on him by Yussuf Poulsen was initially missed by the officials.

The Group D draw between Argentina and Iceland also witnessed a controversial penalty incident, when Cristian Pavon went down under a challenge from Birkir Saevarsson.

Referee Szymon Marciniak turned down Pavon’s appeals and the VAR did not intervene, despite replays appearing to show contact had been made. Lionel Messi had already missed a penalty for Argentina, awarded when Hordur Magnusson pushed Sergio Aguero in the back.

Van Marwijk, a VAR critic, added: “It’s very difficult, but it’s also difficult to decide when a referee, for 50,000 people on his back, must decide when he is doubting. But he’s also a human being and everybody makes mistakes.”

Didier Deschamps was sceptical about the wider use of the technology, saying decisions during Friday night’s Spain-Portugal match could have been overturned. He added: “I’m not going to complain about VAR today, because it was in our favour obviously, but the referee didn’t see that there had been a foul and he was able to correct this, so he was able to correct his mistake.

“Maybe it’s not clear. The VAR can interpret goals, the referee makes the final decision, it’s really up to him. When we ran [the technology] in closed session, we saw that it was not in our favour. It can be useful in some situations.”

Griezmann was in no doubt he had been fouled, denying having dived to win the penalty. He said: “I think it’s a penalty because he trips my left foot and then, when I get up, I feel some pain. There was no diving. It’s good that there is VAR in these situations.”

On social media, some protested that Risdon’s touch made the subsequent contact irrelevant, others claiming the officials had not made a “clear and obvious error” in not initially awarding a spot-kick. Others declared the ultimate outcome to have been the right one.

Their view was endorsed by David Elleray, the technical director of the International Football Association Board and the chief architect of VAR. He told The Sunday Telegraph: “The defender makes a challenge, gets a touch on the ball and then, as Griezmann goes forward with the ball, the defender lifts his leg and trips him. That’s effectively a second incident. That’s a clear-andobvious error not to have seen that trip.”

Elleray added that whether Risdon intended to trip Griezmann or not was “irrelevant”.

Australia went on to equalise with another penalty, before technology intervened again in France’s winning goal. This time it was goalline technology correctly adjudging Paul Pogba’s deflected finish to have crossed the line after it bounced down off the crossbar and back into play. Fifa declined requests for comment from its own referees’ chiefs on the France penalty.

On the eve of the World Cup, they declared technology would signal the end of the “scandals of the past”, but acknowledged that it was by no means a panacea. Massimo Busacca, Fifa’s director of refereeing, said: “Don’t think that it will be perfect.

“We ran fast to implement this system. We had to understand what to improve. At the beginning, it was not so clear, but we said yes to VAR because we think we are ready.”