Videoarbitraje (VAR) improves decisions in football. Do not happy everyone and sometimes anyone, but helps the game be fairer. It is possible that it is necessary to reformulate the powers, but what is also questionable is that it is the referees who direct the parties that in the end judge their peers from the table of Var. No suspicion, but human nature is what it is. It is difficult for someone to disappoint a collegiate and then touch him to judge him. It is even understandable that they do not want to harm, but it would be more impartial than a block of professional ex -articists, who ended up being specialists in VAR, without having anything to do with those who whistle.
When everything looks, the distance seems better than proximity. Before everything fell to the decision of a collegiate (supported by the line judges who were at their orders) and the Monday’s movement indicated whether there was error or success. And there were still discussions. Now everything is immediate. Life is online and football, too. And everything looks. There is almost nothing that does not reach the eye around the world seconds after it occurs.
The Soto grade collegiate reviews an action in the VAR during the Madrid derby, a few weeks ago
The video barbitraje room must be for remote ex -articles instead of those who are active
There are those who distrust everything. Since the frame (frame) has taken thousandths of second before or after hitting the ball, until the lines have been put with maximum technology or have been thrown by hand. Should we limit the VAR or have it to be opened more? It must be for the decisive, for which a result can change, for manifest injustices, not for each of the actions that occur in the encounters. That would kill football. It must be for the fat man and the professionals who judge the actions is better that they do not have to be tried later by the colleges themselves.
The VAR arrived so that there were no brutal injustices, such as qualifying for a selection for the World Cup thanks to a goal with the hand. The technology allows, with the hawk eye, to know perfectly if the ball has overcome the goal line or not and there are still many decisions, however, that are of interpretation, but the VAR allows a few more seconds to make the decision with the Help of more eyes.
Read too
They are also wrong. It is also human. But football improves when everything looks. There are clubs that prefer the past times in which a single referee decided, but that today is anachronistic. The VAR must also participate in the cycles of continuous improvement, in powers and in the professionals that must handle it. There were those who said that the referees would have less pressure with video barbitraje. It is possible, but they have many more absurd communications.
#Santi #Nolla
