It’s been a good summer of football with the Women’s World Cup reaching delightful heights of quality and tension, the Copa America being as unpredictable and bad tempered as usual, and the CONACAF matches reminding me of the enormous potential in Haiti and Jamaica. The latter even brought new information when I realised that Curacao was not just the liqueur fuelling the Big Easy Blue Punch cocktail, but was also a part of the Netherlands in the south Caribbean. With a viewing drought of 30 days until the Premier League kicks off it’s a good moment to reflect on the game and its future.
Watching football (and I will stay with that rather than soccer) in a land where there was no professional league until 1995 is not quite the same as being in England. The American experience does not yet have the sense of the shared history, rivalry and folklore which can be part of any pub conversation in the UK. And it’s particularly difficult to find anyone to reminisce with about the way the game is changing.
Having said that I recently mentioned the might Ron Yeats, in the context of a discussion about the value of Virgil Van Dyck to Liverpool FC, and was appalled to find that an English-born supporter of the Anfield team didn’t know the name. It was difficult to accept that the man Shankly called a ‘Colossus’ has been forgotten by a fan, even when big Ron’s last game was before the supporter was born. There is something very wrong, but mildly ironical, about a world where a Manchester United fan is giving history lessons about Liverpool to a scouser.
Some change in the game is for the better and the rise in popularity and coverage of women’s football is one example. The USL W-League was formed in 1995 and became the first national football league in the US providing an outlet for professional players. It beat the start of the US men’s league by a year so all hail to Long Island Lady Riders, the first champions. And all respect to the American women’s national team who became four-time World Cup winners at the end of a thrilling and brilliant competition.
The only downside of watching on this side of the Atlantic is that US commentators and pundits still need to up their game in commentary. When I hear someone is ‘on the dribble’ I assume they are two years old and teething, and ‘service’ is something that I get at restaurants not when the ball is passed, crossed or played. It’s jarring to listen to, as is the incessant chatter when I am perfectly able to watch the pictures.
Even worse though is the way that Video Assistant Refereeing (VAR) has become a point of contention and frustration. Allied to the constant tinkering with the rules by FIFA and the current debacle around what constitutes handball, it has ruined several matches. All of this has contributed to a rising penalty count which is distorting games and undermining the authority of the referee.
The statistics tell a grim story – the introduction of VAR for the men’s World Cup in Russia 2018 contributed to an increase to 29 penalties after only 13 in Brazil 2014. When the count is done for the Women’s World Cup we should also include the retaken penalties as goalkeepers came off their line a split-second before the kick was taken. The real problem is that in a game where scores tend to be low the award of a penalty (with about an 80% chance of scoring) has a disproportionate impact on play and outcomes.
Another problem with VAR is that it brings a serious dislocation from the game that is played by millions around the world. Without instant replays and super, high-definition slow motion there is little choice but to live with the decisions of the referee. It is character forming and gives great lessons about the unfairness of life, the wonder of a bit of luck and proof that the universe really does not care.
For well over a century football has remained deeply familiar and played to the same rules and in the same way all around the world. Pitches that resembled mud-baths have been replaced by billiard table smoothness, legalised (and roundly applauded) violence in the tackle is now outlawed and vigorously punished, whlle character, paunch and a pint (or two) on the morning of the match have been forgotten for 7% body fat, anodyne interviews and designer water. But the greatest point of connection is that the game played in a park on a Sunday is, at a fundamental level, governed the same way as the Champions League final.
It seems to me that this is a good principle and that if we are to have assistant refereeing by video it should be limited to matters of fact. I am in favour of VAR for offside and for digital proof that a ball has or has not crossed the goal-line. That’s as long as the decision is made quickly and signalled clearly to the watching spectators.
But hand-ball, particularly when there is no blatant movement of the arm or unreasonable attempt to block the ball, will almost always be a matter of opinion. Similarly, ‘dangerous play’ incidents, like the penalty given against the Dutch in the Women’s World Cup final, should be left to the referee with only serious and evident foul play being subject to VAR when officials miss them. These decisions are part of the game and fans will always argue about them whether or not VAR intervenes with an equally ambiguous view.
Image by Jonny Lindner from Pixabay