A Bridge too VAR

So, possibly the most satisfying Chelsea result at Stamford Bridge in ages, and I’m laid up on the sofa with only one eye open, vertigo sending the room spinning somewhat, and an adjacent bucket reminding me that I might be soon relieved again of what little I’ve eaten in the last 24 hours. Sorry for that image, dear readers, but that’s where I was, yesterday lunchtime. Even in my semi-delirious state (some viral thing, thanks for asking), I was still able to both appreciate the significance of Frank Lampard’s second win over his former master, but also the absolute state of Premier League football at the magic eye of VAR.

Chelsea’s players have cut frustrating figures in recent weeks. I’ve avoided blogging about it as it really should be put into the correct perspective. At the beginning of the season few would have expected Lampard, in only his second season as a manager, in charge of a team comprising youngsters unproven at this level, alongside ageing figures and those who left fans indifferent last season, to be competing at anything above mid-level in the table. Throw in the FIFA transfer ban and the phrase “expectation management” was getting bandied about a fair bit. So, to be still clinging to fourth place and Champions League qualification for next season at this stage of the campaign could be quite rightly considered ahead of plan.

Yesterday’s win over José Mourinho’s Tottenham can be considered a major chalk mark in Lampard’s embryonic managerial career, especially as two months ago he achieved the same in the reverse fixture. Perhaps, though, he was fortunate, that Spurs were without Kane and Son, and the petulant Alli has been benched in punishment for his tantrum in midweek. But Chelsea, too, were forced into their own changes due to the curse of mid-season injuries. It happens, and Lampard, at least, managed to motivate his side to go out there and do a job. I’m not going to gloat, though. Terrific goals from Giroud and Alonso - hitherto virtually unused by Lampard but, hats off, rose to the challenge yesterday - were highlights in a game dominated by both sides losing possession too often in midfield, and the match becoming frustratingly scrappy, even with my diminished vision.

That said, with one eye open and the living room spinning somewhat, I saw Giovani lo Celso’s stamp on the prone César Azpilicueta’s calf as clear as anything, and was amazed that referee Michael Oliver did nothing more about it. The commentary that followed, as a VAR check took another look at the incident, made all the right rational observations. Viewed from most angles it was hard to detect malice. But anyone who knows football knows that these things rarely just happen. And VAR should have concluded differently at the time. For Stockley Park to later admit - admit!!! - that lo Celso probably did stamp on Azpilicueta and they got the decision wrong was an astonishing admission. Especially after Chelsea had been rightly aggrieved by two dodgy VAR decisions on Monday night against Manchester United. 

Margins being what they are in professional football, it’s easy to whinge about decisions going the wrong way, especially when things probably even out the right way as much as not. And, who knows - a red card for Maguire on Monday and the same for lo Celso yesterday might not have made the slightest bit of difference to the respective results. Red cards sometimes have little or no effect on the offending team’s ability. But, still, margins being what they are, who knows? Technology will always improve and evolve. In 1996 I was involved in the launch of the world’s first flat-panel television and it was, frankly, terrible. We still sold every single one, with record companies, advertising agencies and even Chris Evans all wanting to be first to own a TV you could hang on the wall like a painting. 24 years later, you can buy an OLED TV of unfathomable, almost unreal picture quality. It's reasonable, then, to assume that the science behind VAR will only improve, like any other technology. It’s just that currently it’s not fit for purpose. 

Yesterday was, in the words today of The Sunday Times' Jonathan Northcroft, "Another dubious day for the Video Assistant Referee." In addition to the lo Celso incident at Stamford Bridge, Manchester City's 1-0 win over Leicester at the King Power Stadium was marked by more questions over VAR's inconsistencies. Likewise in Bournemouth’s defeat at Burnley, where the south coast team's Harry Wilson appeared to have scored only for VAR to identify a debatable handball beforehand. Football has always been about referees having to make marginal calls with their own eyes. That, though, is what assistant referees, fourth and fifth officials, and eventually VAR were meant to alleviate. VAR was never meant to be a panacea, however, but in its first full season in the Premier League, there has been a tendency for it to be the default decision-making apparatus, not the man in the middle who should still be. What happened yesterday with lo Celso might aggrieve me as a Chelsea fan, but what happened later, with Stockley Park’s admission that they’d got it wrong, should aggrieve every football fan. Pundits, quite rightly, question why the referee Michael Oliver wasn’t just invited to immediately review the Azpilicueta incident on a pitchside monitor. Even that might not have resolved things to anyone’s satisfaction. At the end of the day, even if margins are so tight, and the risk to titles and the millions that can be reaped from Champions League places is so grave, we may have to accept that no technology - not even artificial intelligence - and no human eye can be guaranteed to make the right decision every time.