Neville's Breakfast
Well-known member
There was a big debate after VAR was introduced about its role. In the early days it was used to effectively re-referee the game which created a lot of controversy over subjective decision making. That is why lighter touch VAR is now the methodology. That is the reason we have what we have. It is not a politicization or the referees union defending their own. Rather it is acceptance that VAR was only ever intended to correct perceived big on-field mistakes. I think we now have the better version of the two but neither is an improvement on no VAR. Defenders of the technology usually blame the people working it but they never come up with suggestions as to who should do so and the reason is that it is not possible to referee a game without someone taking a view. Tampering with that concept has created the shitshow we have today where a lower league non VAR game is actually a better day out than one at the top level.Mitoma penalty.
Every pundit and commentator called it live with the same access to replays that VAR had.
Even they knew it was a penalty, but with the ridiculous politicisation (clear and obvious) of defending their own it exposes VAR to be the sham that it is.
How on earth the technology is being used (even in part) to defend the reputation of referees rather than simply being an extension of the referee is beyond comprehension.