A little more than a year ago the Video Assistan Referee (VAR) technology was first introduced in football, being used for the first time in the controversial FIFA Club World Cup 2016. Since its implementation, it has completely divided the opinion of the football world family, being more its detractors than those who support it. Why does the use of technology in football generate so much controversy?

First explain how the VAR works: If the referee in the field has doubts about any of the plays contemplated for the activation of the VAR (goals, expulsions, penalties, offsides), he may request the review of the play. Then the video judges observe the repetition and inform the referee of what happened through his headset; after this the central referee has the power to accept the criteria of the video judges, or go to one side of the court and review the repetition of the play himself to make a decision. Sounds simple, is not it? Although it seems, these three simple steps have generated in 2017 and so far in 2018 a number of arbitral disputes, where many times instead of clarifying the play, end up taking the most unusual and wrong decisions that make one wonder if they They are seeing the same thing as millions of fans through their TVs. Here the doubts begin Does the VAR help football or, on the contrary, does it harm it?

FIFA has been the promoter of this technology, defending it at the expense of its detractors. It has already been implemented in the leagues of Italy, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Poland, United States, Australia, Czech Republic, Brazil, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Spain. In addition to these leagues, it has also been used in the Club World Cup, Libertadores Cup and the 2018 World Cup in Russia. However, journalists and football fans in general are still not convinced and ask for its elimination, claiming that it denatures the game and slows down the action of it. More than once the narrators of the World Cup were left with the cry of goal in the throat for a minute until the decision was made. In this aspect, soccer has been the sport that has taken the longest time to apply technology, but it is because of the most important, it is perhaps the most subjective with respect to its interpretation, which is many times more personal than part of the referee who attached to the regulation, which leaves certain gaps. This gives rise to the fact that even with the help of instant replay, penalties are awarded when there are any, stop whistling when they are obvious, or stop expelling a player when he deserves it.

The real problem is not the technology, it's perfect (if not ask the Hawk's Eye); The problem is the level of arbitration in general and the criteria that vary from one country to another. It is not possible for an involuntary hand inside the area to be called as a penalty in South America, while in Europe the referee lets follow the action. And it does not matter where the world is, the level of the referees is terrible. There are few referees really good. And because of this low level of arbitration, mistakes are made even with the use of technology.

Then is VAR good for football? Absolutely. I think that the 2018 World Cup Russia was a perfect example of how the VAR makes football more and more fair, because it was used properly and really many referee errors were avoided thanks to its use. It makes me sick to hear people (especially narrators and commentators) say that the VAR denaturalizes football and that they must eliminate it. Do you like injustices? Not many of these in the world of football can be avoided with me and with the VAR. What is not perfect? It is true, even with the repetition the arbitrators are wrong, but let's put the following situation: an arbitrator is wrong in 75% of their arbitration decisions without the use of technology. Suppose that with the use of the VAR, the arbitrator accedes 50% of the actions involved. Even with that high percentage of error, you won 50% success with which you did not count before. Result: the VAR helps football. And the statistics confirm this, in the words of FIFA President Gianni Infantino: "Without the VAR, one referee commits an important error every 3 games, and with the VAR, the referee commits an important error every 19 matches, those are The percentage of success of the referees today is without the VAR 93%, which is already excellent, and with the VAR is 99% ".

The best thing is that they get used to it, because the Video-arbitration is here to stay. What should be polished details? It is true, its use can be improved and are things that are going to be arranged on the fly, no start is perfect. But sooner or later everyone will thank the technology and regret the lost time and the injustices that could have been avoided, changing the course of matches, eliminatory and even world cups.

And you? Do you agree with the VAR? Comment, debate and if you liked it, vote and follow me