Instead we have VAR, football’s equivalent of Brexit, self-inflicted damage that becomes more ludicrous and intrusive every week, with no one willing to stand up and say this is not at all what was envisaged. Perhaps it is not exactly an emergency if a sport wants to make a fool of itself in such a way, though the game in England is a market-leading product and it is supposed to be part of the entertainment industry, not a subdivision of the earth-measuring fraternity.
Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester and an Everton fan, was bang on when he described VAR as a nitpicker’s charter. The whole principle, that every goal must be retrospectively examined to check whether there is any reason to disallow it, seems wrong, anti-sport, cart before horse. Who decided it was a good idea to give referees so much input, especially ones not even at the game? Who decided football was missing out on line decisions and needed to be brought in line with cricket and tennis?
To those who maintain it is important to be correct whatever the length of time it takes or that offside is a black-and-white issue whereby half an inch is just as culpable as half a yard, I would put the following points. Is a player offside by an armpit or a big toe cheating? Are they seeking or obtaining an unfair advantage? And given the distances are so small and players will not always know the exact moment when the ball is played, are they likely to have any idea of whether they are offside or not?
If the answer to all three questions is no, as is frequently the case, do we really need the game to be endlessly stopped in a pointless quest for the absolute truth? Some good-looking goals, as well as some crucial ones, have been chalked off because of trifling and unintentional transgressions that no one in the stadium can see.
After three decades reporting on the game for the Observer and Guardian, I’m bowing out. Here’s a parting shot, along with a few cherished memories
www.theguardian.com