Post by firstname.lastname@example.org Post by Futbolmetrix
This is probably the best argument against VAR I have ever seen. One of the best moments ever in the history of the World Cup, and it would all have been for naught if VAR had existed.
So? VAR's purpose is to minimize mistakes. Isn't your argument kind of saying that officiating mistakes are acceptable if great moments are being created?
But notice that there was no refereeing mistake in the actual incident. Suarez did a DOGSO and was rightly sent off. What made the moment great was the context:
- 120th minute of a WC quarterfinal
- Ghana with the chance of becoming the first African team to make a WC semi, on their home continent (I don't know how much Ghanaians or South Africans actually cared about this: the distance between South Africa and Ghana is more than the distance from the eastern to the Western tip of China: thetruesize.com. But Europeans and all those who think that Africa is a country made a big deal out of it).
- The polarized views on Suarez's act: a dirty cheating scumbag, or a quick-thinking genius and hero who took one for the team? What's even more fascinating is the relationship between the reaction to Suarez's act and cross-country differences in the attitudes towards the rule of law. One could build a whole university-level course on philosophy, history, society and economics just around that incident.
What I'm saying is that it would have been a shame if we had lost all of that because of a technicality (a 47 cm offsides call that would have invalidated the whole play).