Other competitions have a lower bar for VAR, and the video officials get involved more often.<\/p>\n
That creates a cloak of consistency, because people expect interventions, but it does not necessarily mean VAR is being used as originally intended, for the real howlers.<\/p>\n
Take the Champions League as a comparison. At 0.47 interventions a game and 0.36 monitor visits a match the VAR is far more likely to get involved.<\/p>\n
Handball is a prime example, with Uefa applying a strict interpretation – less room for subjectivity, fewer reasons for the VAR to leave it alone. If the ball hits the arm a defender is in trouble.<\/p>\n
So, what has happened this week to cause such a fuss?<\/p>\n
On Tuesday, Ghana coach Carlo Queiroz said that “VAR went for a coffee”<\/a> after his side were not given a penalty against England for Ezri Konsa’s challenge on Prince Kwabena Adu.<\/p>\n It was a clumsy tackle and a real surprise that there was no intervention in a game which finished 0-0<\/a>.<\/p>\n Then on Wednesday, Brazil had a goal ruled out in their 3-0 win<\/a> against Scotland for a foul by Vinicius Jr on Jack Hendry. <\/p>\n This time the high bar had been lowered. It seemed Hendry had kicked the Real Madrid forward, rather than there being a clear and obvious foul.<\/p>\n “I think Scotland are a little fortunate to be honest,” former World Cup assistant referee Darren Cann said on MOTD.<\/p>\n “There is a little contact before the ball is played but I don’t really feel that it’s a foul.”<\/p>\n