bmb may be right, but it is interesting that in Italy there have been more arguments over the use of VAR this season than last. In my view the debate over the use of VAR is complicated by two widespread fallacies:
1. That technology produces better decisions merely by the fact of being technology. But with cricket and rugby union it is becoming clear that technology introduces distortions of its own, and it is likely to be same with football, especially when incidents are reviewed in slow motion.
2. That for every incident there is one correct response. Yet five minutes on this forum will reveal that qualified and well-informed observers can reach diametrically opposed conclusions even after reviewing an incident more often and in a more relaxed environment than is ever going to be possible during a high-profile football match.
If used properly, VAR should correct a few egregious errors and resolve some borderline off-sides, but it would be unwise to expect more than that. It certainly won't put an end to controversies, but instead will shift the focus onto the use of the system itself, as is also becoming clear on this forum. And why should it be otherwise? I somehow can't imagine the day when a pundit turns up in the TV studio and says: 'Right, Gary, nothing to talk about today: VAR has resolved everything.'
Errors don't get any more egregious than that one at Fulham and that was not corrected, therefore it follows that it was not being used properly. It clearly needs better people reviewing it, not the mates of those causing the egregiousness.
Home
Forum
Search
Contact
Login
Register
