Fernando Niembro violently criticized the use of VAR in Argentine football.
The match between San Lorenzo and Platense, played on Saturday on New Gasometer, has reopened controversy over the use of technology in Argentine soccer. In the 42nd minute of the first half, Patricio Loustau was contacted from the VAR booth about a possible offside in the game that led to Adam Bareiro’s goal and the slight 2-0 for Ciclón.
Although the initial decision to prove intent was finally adopted, Ferdinand Niembro, commentator at one of the booths of Peter Bidegain Stadium, is critical for the consideration that in this kind of action, which is very good, the game should not stop.
“If the player isn’t enabled by a nail, go ahead. They seem to be on the same line.. He has no intention of taking advantage. It’s not about him standing around waiting with a fishing rod, it’s an action game, “the journalist commented.
And, later, he went more to the bone: “VAR is a new element, we’re all discussing it. I’m not discussing the technical element, but the training of referees. Please, let’s not stop in this situation. Let’s not fall in love with VAR “
ang
Boca and River with VAR as the protagonist
ang
‘The next day, in Bombonera, came the controversy about the end of the fight. As the result tied between Boca and Lanús, and the local team focused on the attack, a Frank Fabra center that bounced from Ángel González’s right arm generated an effusive protest from the players. Xeneize.
Did the Garnet player’s hand expand the volume of his body? If so, is the position unnatural or is it a product of your body moving to try to deflect the ball? These are the questions that, according to IFAB (International Football Association Board) regulations, Facundo Tello and the VAR referees studied to validate the initial decision not to impose a penalty.
“In playing Boca-Lanús there is a destabilizing movement from Fabra to González that makes the Lanús player have no intention of touching it with his hand. At the same time, it reaches the limit of the allowed body area, it is completely natural and casual, ”said Federico Beligoy, AFA’s national director of arbitration, which entitles field judges. and the VAR.
Boca players protested referee Facundo Tello. Photo: German Garcia Adrasti – FTP Clarin.
A few hours later, on the Banfield-River, Pablo Echavarría was left in the eye of the storm. In the 1-0 match in favor of Drill, a cross from the left, with no visible danger, touched the hand of Franco Quinteros after the defender failed in his attempt to get stuck with a header.
In this case, it was decided to change the original decision and a shot from step twelve was allowed in favor of the Millionaire. Enzo Fernández managed to convert a goal and put up slightly 1-1. Same play, different resolution.
Pablo Echavarría checked the VAR monitor and decided to collect a penalty in favor of River Plate. Photo: Marcelo Carrol – FTP Clarín.
Did the Drill player get his body to take up more space because of his arm position? Does it accompany body movements or is it unnatural?
What is clear is, as the rule implies, “not all ball contact with the hand or arm is an offense”.
In that sense, Beligoy on Monday assured that “under no point of view” the punishment allowed in favor of River must have been proven, after the alleged hand of Franco Quinteros, Banfield’s defender, who was punished after the intervention of VAR.
“We have no confusion. The VAR clearly identified a situation, wrong, (Paul) Echavarría was called to check and in our opinion he did not make a good decision. We are wrong. Because we were wrong without the VAR, we are wrong with VAR ”, Held.
Source: Clarin