Same pundits were against the vanishing spray, as it ruined the pitch and stopped players making their own "10 yard" wall. Nobody bats an eyelid at it now.
Same pundits were against goalline technology, as it would be "unreliable". Nobody bats an eyelid at it now.
Most of them are against VAR, as it stops players getting away with the dark arts, they always advocated as "streetwise".
We will get decisions against us, but only when it's the correct decision. The vast majority of decisions will stand as is. The gap between free kicks is an average of 8 minutes per game, all 6 substitutions per game take a minimum of 3 minutes to make. So we can take a bit of time as needed, to get the right decision from a VAR.
It doesn't matter how easily a player goes down. All that matters is if it's a foul or not. If it is, it's a penalty. Which it is, in the latest case. If it takes 3 or 4 penalties awarded, for the message that a defender cannot foul a forward in the box to be understood, then so be it.
"Clear and obvious" errors was, and is, just a formula of words, to justify everything be checked, so that no player/team gains an advantage that they shouldn't. The dark arts are on the way out.
Logged