The amount of irrational talk this thing brings out of people is amazing. The pundits and the expert all agree that it’s a penalty by the letter of the law, but then they say “it should be refereed in the context of the game”; as if there were some context in which a penalty isn’t a penalty because of what, other decisions that went before that, one team dominating, protests from players?
You could imagine all these things influencing decisions previously, but Shirley - these are the things that we want out of the game.
Right now it’s just people bending over backwards to criticise VAR under any excuse. Trite like ‘This wouldn’t have been given in my day’ will suffice as analysis.
I was thinking of the whole chicken and the egg thing about media and public opinion, because there was a very vocal minority against it before a ball was even kicked, so the pundits and presenters could have just picked it up. Regardless of who influenced whom first though, there’s a very cynical agenda at work, because this stuff really riles some folk up, and you don’t mind riling people up as a tv presenter. Controversy is great for viewership, get some more outrage from the audience, talking points never dry up. You don’t want some sensible person explaining that there’s nothing to get outraged about and ruining it for everybody.
It’s also funny how the ‘no technology’ people forgot all about one of their previously most dearly held views - that they are against it because “it would kill the discussion down at the pub” and we just can’t have that. Well, on current evidence, they should be chuffed, it has all turned out for the best.