Little did I know when I had a whinge about VAR prior to the Freiburg game that it was possible for matters to become even worse. The idiots at PGMOL have finally lost the plot – clearly and obviously. What was originally conceived as a second pair of eyes to eliminate the most glaring of on-field refereeing errors, has turned into a system that retrospectively searches the slightest reason for a goal to be disallowed.
There is an old saying that ‘what gets measured gets done’ and this is the approach VAR has been allowed to take. Rather than using the technology to fix existing issues they have taken a solution in search of a problem that no-one knew they had. Because most refereeing decisions are subjective anyway the focus has turned to those that are more obvious – fractional offside calls and balls hitting arms – and where CSI Stockley Park will do all it can to find the evidence for you.
Someone should bang the PGMOL’s collective heads together over their interpretations of the offside and handball rules. Let’s not forget that offside was originally introduced to deter goal-hanging. A more practical definition that acknowledges that context, and either only looks at player’s feet or requires a threshold of clear daylight needs to be found.
It would be difficult to imagine that anyone could create a bigger mess with handball even if they tried. The guidance flip-flops from week to week and with different interpretations depending on whether you are attacking or defending. Most of the issues revolve around which at one point was removed as a consideration but is slowly making its way back depending on circumstances. And I have never liked the idea of rules being interpreted differently depending where on the pitch offences occur.
A pet hate of mine s to see defenders adopting the Riverdance pose rather than making an attempt to block an attacker. Of course, there are going to be cases where a defender uses arms to make themselves a bigger target but in any sporting endeavour arms are essential for power and balance. How about an Olympic 100 metre sprint where athletes must keep their hands by their sides? In the same way there have been cases of attackers deliberately playing the ball at a defender’s hands. These are the areas where officials should be directing their judgement. And sorry, but it will be subjective. To aim for objectivity by changing the rules in pursuit of an elusive aim only ends with a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Ruling a goal out just because the ball struck an arm or hand in the build up is my greatest irritant with the modern game. I’m convinced it was never a pre-VAR area of contention, but iso one that has been one invented solely for the technology. Again, there will be occasions where players intentionally seek to gain advantage by use of the hand but that is also for the officials to determine.
But above and beyond all this micro-analysis of events is the impact VAR is having on the spontaneity of the game. The attraction of football is that is a simple and fast-moving game – something VAR has made immeasurably worse. It is no longer possible to get lost in the moment celebrating a goal when you know it is being subjected to review for the slightest misdemeanour. This weekend it reached peak absurdity by taking almost six minutes to check whether a clear and obvious error had been made.
There is a case for VAR working in the background to check major incidents, but its current scope is not fit for purpose. How much more refreshing it is to watch a Championship game where it doesn’t feature. Its introduction has failed to make the match experience superior for players or supporters. In fact, it is quite the reverse.
Personally, I would like to see VAR suspended at the end of the season until a more suitable implementation and supervision can be proposed. The PGMOL have demonstrated they are not competent to be in control of VAR. Officials should not be the centre of attention in a football match but that is the situation that has been engineered.
The game itself against Aston Villa was classic David Moyes in a microcosm. In the opening half, a well executed high press against the visitor’s defence forced a series of errors that handed the advantage to the Hammers. There was an intensity that picked up from where it left off the previous Thursday. A smart cross from Vladimir Coufal and a brave header from Michail Antonio put West Ham ahead, and the only disappointment at the break was that there was still only one goal in it.
Understandably, Unai Emery made changes at half-time, but it looked like the Hammers had extended their lead early on – until VAR intervened. After that the home side slowly started to retreat and abandon further thought of scoring a second. What had been Moyes instructions during the interval? Emery made more substitutions and now had two attack minded full-backs on the pitch in Cash and Digne. How would Moyes react? Look to exploit that extra space down the flanks and kill the game off, or sit back and invite Villa to attack at will. Sitting back to protect a 1-0 lead has not worked in the past for Moyes’ team, but perhaps it will one day in the future.
We were left in no doubt as to the manager’s mindset when he replaced Antonio with Ben Johnson with the best part of 30 minutes still to play. Possibly the most inexplicable substitution ever and a sure way to undo the good work of the first half. But Moyes instinct is always caution before courage with the low block his safe place when the chips are down. Just like the salmon who has no option but to return to its breeding grounds, caution is programmed into the Moyes DNA and he will never change. That’s why he must go.
A Villa equaliser was inevitable and once they had scored the feeling was that they would go on to win the game. West Ham had little ambition for either attacking or retaining possession by then. So, the late added time flurry where James Ward-Prowse should have scored, and the second VAR incident occurred came as a huge surprise.
We should also mention the performance of shocking Australian referee, Jarred Gillett. This is the guy, remember, who when on VAR duty disallowed the Maxwell Cornet goal against Chelsea. How this drongo keeps getting return gigs shows how thinly the referee gene pool is spread. Awarding a tame foul on the keeper before the disallowed Kudus effort, booking Edson Alvarez for being a victim and no consistency in the application of the ‘delaying the restart’ diktat were the highlights of his ineptitude. Having booked Dinos mere minutes earlier for kicking the ball away, he gave Zaniolo a free pass for a similar offence as it would have meant a second yellow.
International breaks and suspensions now mean Alvarez can enjoy an extended holiday until the Wolves game on April 6. As the only defensive midfield player who actively hunts the ball down, he will be sorely missed. An opportunity for Kalvin Phillips to step up and earn his corn, perhaps. COYI!
Under The Hammers 
Hi Geoff, another thoughtful piece, but am I getting a hint of disillusionment there somewhere? Your general point that VAR is not operating as it should ( clear and obvious), but becoming another nit-picking irritant. Slowing the game down and taking much of the spontineity out of it. Add that to the never- ending play acting of some players and the delaying of free kicks by every means possible, and the game is becoming less and less spontaneous. Your mention of Phillips and the, unlikely in my view, need for him to step up, raises another point that is bugging me more and more as time goes by. Who is in charge of our transfer policy and who has the final call? Still no statement from the Board on this, and no sight of any job descriptions. I know we are mere supporters and ought to be grateful for any information we are given, but I wonder if the confusion that I’m experiencing in this area carries over to our actual identification of positions to be filled and the scouting of players to fill them? Leaving aside who gets to make the all- important final call. Of course clarity regarding the future of Moyse would be a good start, but after Freiburg I’m far from hopeful on that front. Mike.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree that there are all sorts of time wasting tactics employed and that is a separate issue that the authorities need to address. Not the half-hearted attempts to tackle simulation that start with a crackdown and are then quickly forgotten. But they are independent of VAR which has made the enjoymen t of watching a game far worse.
As far as transfers are concerned I think the only decision makers are Moyes – who has to green light any signing – and Sullivan (on behalf of the board) who handles the financials. My belief is that Moyes has that ‘final say’ as part of his contract. Anyone else is just identifying targets and making recommendations. The bottom line of that for me is that the roles and outlooks of Moyes and Steidten are imcompatible until the ‘manager’ is replaced with a ‘coach’.
LikeLike
Morning Geoff, or more likely evening! You touched on something which is annoying me more and more as I get old and cranky. Why is that neither you or I, or anyone else outside perhaps of the Board, has any real idea how the club is run? As it happens, I think your analysis is correct, but shouldn’t we know what the roles of Moyse and Steidten ( not to mention Newman and Noble) actually are? I know investors don’t always know of the companies they have shares in are run , and punters may not understand how a racehorse is trained, but WHU is supposed to be a Club and we are ( in our case lifelong) supporters. Back in the day it wasn’t an issue. We knew that Greenwood or Lyall or, God bless him, ‘ Arry, made all football-related decisions and the Board backed their judgement if and when the club could afford to. It’s more complex now ( like everything else in life!) but is that any reason we should be left in the dark the way we are? I once saw a notice ( in a car dealership I think ) that said something like “ a customer is not a hindrance to our lives, he is the reason for it”. It always stuck in my mind after that, substitute “ supporter” and you have the nub of my argument. One day when there’s no footie to write about, this whole area might make a subject for UTH? Which, by the way, I always enjoy and which stands out head and shoulders above the usual nonsense written about our great club. COYI.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Up to a point it makes little difference to me whether I know who does what when it comes to player recruitment. I’d rather that it was done as sensibly and efficiently as possibly with a clear strategy or philosophy in mind. Obviously that strategy should not have Moyesball at the end of it. I think the club is moving slowly towards a Director of Football model (Steidten) who would have prime responsibility for transfers. But a DOF only works where there is allignment with the coach. No point the DOF unearthing pearls and the coach refusing to put them in the team. I have to say I’m totally confused as to what Noble’s role as Sporting Director is supposed to be. Clarity on that would be interesting especially if it oversees the academy and training facilities. At the moment the only time you see Nobes is when he pops up at Euro draws – and they are all done now.
The relationship between fans and owners is always likely to be a tense one. For one it is a passion, for the other a business.
Cheers, Mike!
LikeLike