Once again, I come back to the indisputable fact that if there was contact it did not in any way alter the trajectory of the ball. In VAR’s alternate universe that apparently counts as “playing the ball.” Intolerable decision!
"The controversy is not the offside itself. The controversy is whether or not we as football fans consented to this level of interference in our game, consented to ignoring now what our own eyes tell us and believing in a technology that we don't fully understand. Now, to put the offside to bed, Igor Matanovic came out after the game and said, honestly, I felt small contact with my hair. I asked the referee what it was. I wasn't 100% sure if I touched it. He told me they have a chip in the ball, that there was contact, and that it was offside. That's it, that's it. You just have to believe it. You have to believe that a ball that has been kicked around for 100 minutes has a sensor so accurate that it can detect a strand of hair to the nearest millisecond. That's the level of technology you have to believe in now. Doesn't matter whether or not your eyes believe it, you just have to believe it. And this determination to make an imperfect game perfect is taking us further away from the game that we fell in love with. That goal would never have been disallowed in any tournament in the history of football prior to this one. Are you telling me that that goal being disallowed is good for the game? When the ball itself, it had no impact on the ball itself. We saw the ball, it doesn't change direction, it doesn't change trajectory, and then it comes off Vega's head. And by the way, when it comes off Vega's head, there's nothing on the snickometer that shows it coming off Vega's head, but we have to believe it. And when it comes to that sensor, that sensor that can so powerfully detect a strand of hair to the nearest millisecond, what else can it detect? Ruben Diaz is going for that header, right? What if a bead of sweat comes off his head, is in the air, and it touches the ball? Surely if it detects a strand of hair, it would detect a bead of sweat in the air. Who knows? I don't know. What I do know is, that was never what the offside law was introduced to stop. The offside law was introduced to stop brazing goal-hanging. Now, it is stopping a goal like that. VAR was introduced to stop clear and obvious errors. That's not clear and obvious error. I don't know, this is what I'm saying. It's not made the game better. You cannot tell me, you cannot convince me that this is good for the game. That goal should stand. And I just think we're getting further and further away from an enjoyable product."
💬 Discussion
Once again, I come back to the indisputable fact that if there was contact it did not in any way alter the trajectory of the ball. In VAR’s alternate universe that apparently counts as “playing the ball.” Intolerable decision!