VAR becomes protagonist and target of complaints in Qatar Cup

Controversial since its implementation in football, in 2018, VAR was one of the protagonists in Qatar, in the second World Cup in which it was used. But unlike Russia four years ago, this time it was announced with more technology, but the questions were the same.

Ironically, the first goal of the World Cup was disallowed by VAR. In the game between Ecuador and Qatar, at 3 minutes of the first half, Enner Valencia took the rebound in a free kick and headed the ball towards the goal, which would open the scoring of the World Cup.

Italian referee Daniele Orsato confirmed the goal, but later there was a review by VAR, commanded by fellow Italian Massimiliano Irrati, who pointed out that Estrada was offside, who was in the play. Ecuador won the game 2-0, but left complaining about the disallowed goal.

Several other teams complained about moments in which VAR interpretations would have altered the progress of the game or even its result, such as the 1-0 defeat by France to Tunisia, on November 30, at the Cidade da Educação stadium, for the last round of the group stage. Luckily for the French, the selection was already qualified for the round of 16.

In the 52nd minute of the second half, after a cross ball in the area, the Tunisian defender Talbi deflected with his head and it went to the feet of Griezmann, who hit the back of the net. The VAR activated the New Zealand referee Mark Conger, who went back and annulled the goal, noting the Frenchman’s offside.

“For many, it’s a second move, so there’s no offside. In this World Cup, they interpreted that second move as an offside because of an orientation given by the referees. The defender headed it wrong, it was a second move. guidance overrides the law of the game,” says former referee Arnaldo Cezar Coelho, who refereed the 1982 World Cup final.

In this World Cup, FIFA’s bet as a new technology was the semi-automatic offside. The promise was that the bids would be resolved more quickly, which did not happen in the first intervention, since there was a two-minute delay in analyzing the goal annulled by Ecuador.

“It’s a software with countless cameras on the field. But it has a flaw, which is when it sees the move. It doesn’t explain didactically, it doesn’t have an image of the side of the whole field. It shows whether or not the player is offside or not”, says Arnold.

In semi-automatic offside, the balls have a sensor installed in their center, which allows checking at what moment the player made contact with the ball. The stadium has at least 12 cameras connected to the system. They track the position of each player on the field and 29 possible points of contact between the athlete’s body and the ball.

If there is an irregularity in the bid, the VAR room is activated and an assistant checks the bid. After the check, the VAR communicates the referee.

For Arnaldo, the way the software was developed ends up with the “same line” in offside bids.

“The rule says that the same line is not offside. But the software line is one or two centimeters wide. put a line of one centimeter? It will never have the same line.”

In the game between Argentina and Saudi Arabia, where the biggest upset of the Cup took place, with a 2-1 Saudi victory, the Argentines had three goals disallowed in the first half. “To this day I haven’t convinced myself of one of them. The image is not enlightening”, says the former referee.

The ball sensor was also crucial in the most controversial move of the Cup, Japan’s second goal in the 2-1 victory over Spain. Although FIFA released images to prove that the ball was not completely out of bounds when Mitomo crossed for Nakata to touch the goal, the images are not very convincing.

FIFA’s explanation was that the ball’s sensor did not indicate that it had gone out before Mitomo touched it, so it was a legal move.

Another point criticized was Fifa’s lack of common sense in the scale of referees. In Portugal’s elimination against Morocco in the quarterfinals, for example, the Portuguese players left the field complaining about the Argentine referee Facundo Tello.

For Arnaldo, the entity should have been a little more careful. “You cannot appoint an Argentine judge in the round of 16 with Argentina playing in the round of 16. You cannot appoint a Brazilian judge to referee England and France with Brazil in the quarterfinals”.

“They say ‘this proves suitability’. No, it’s just that they are not in the judge’s shoes. The judge feels, the subconscious acts on the conscious, he is human. This is an invisible pressure. What did they do with these referees and with the Brazilian was a cowardice”, adds Arnaldo.

And, according to the former referee, this pressure influenced the performance of Wilton Pereira Sampaio in the match between the English and the French – the Brazilian was criticized by both teams. “His performance in the England v France game was not as good as the first three.”

The Qatar World Cup also marked the debut of a female referee in a men’s World Cup. Frenchwoman Stéphanie Frappart refereed the game between Germany and Costa Rica, with Mexican Karen Díaz and Brazilian Neuza Back as assistants. It was the only match with the trio.

“They could have given them more space. If the girl [Stéphanie] went to the Cup, it’s because it’s good. the brazilian flag [Neuza Back] it’s better than many that are there”, says Coelho.