Notes From The Week #25

What’s good my people? I trust we’re all doing well. It’s been a good end to the week for me. For those of you who remembered my introduction to last week’s notes you’ll remember my resurgent hope in Manchester United. After a great derby win against Manchester City I’m proud to say that I’m fully aligned with the plans of Erik Ten Hag. It’s going to be a great second half to the season!

This week I thought it would be interesting to look at the impact of VAR and to share some context on an anniversary that is quite close to my heart.

Ozoemena

The Biafran war was a civil war fought between Nigeria and the Republic of Biafra, a secessionist state which had declared its independence from Nigeria in 1967. The conflict resulted from political, economic, ethnic, cultural and religious tensions which preceded the United Kingdom's formal decolonisation of Nigeria from 1960 to 1963.

My mother lived through the Nigerian-Biafran civil war. During the war she was a young girl who at a point had Kwashiorkor1 as a result of the blockade on the Eastern region. As a child born and raised in the U.K. I was always interested in learning more about her experience. While over the years she has become more vocal about the experience she still remained relatively tight-lipped about that time of her life. I imagine, in a war where it is believed that every household lost at least one relation to the war, those are moments she would rather not want to revisit.

However, one thing she would say time and time again as she recounted the war would be ozoemena. Ozoemena is an igbo word which in english translates to: “another event shall not repeat itself / May it never happen again.” On January 15th 1970—the Biafran war officially ended. May we always remember and never allow a second event of that kind to repeat itself. Ozoemena.

VAR - Boon or Nuisance?

When Manchester City visited Manchester United at Old Trafford on January 14th a controversial moment came in the 78th minute. Casemiro had played a pass forward that initially looked intended for Marcus Rashford. Rashford was clearly in an offside2 position and so would not have been able to receive the ball. While the ball was in his vicinity he did not touch the ball and so allowed Bruno Fernandes who was in an onside position to play the ball ultimately scoring and equalising.

I'd like to think I'm a fair person and when I saw the passage of play I was surprised the goal was given because Rashford was clearly offside and in my view seemed to interfere with play by virtue of his presence. The VAR conclusion thought otherwise and awarded the goal. Fine by me. But I could see why any Manchester City fan would feel hard done by. Watching the game it was another example of how the presence of VAR has split opinions for football fans—some saying it’s a great addition to the game allowing accurate results whilst others claim it’s an annoying introduction of technology that takes away from the real-time subjectivity of sports.

VAR stands for video assistant referee. Instead of just one person, a team of three people work together to review decisions made by the main referee. They do this by watching video footage of the relevant occurrences. The team is made up of the main video assistant referee, who is typically a current or former referee, his assistant, and a replay operator. They are located in a video operation room that contains various monitors showing different camera angles.

There are four situations in which video assistant referees can be used during the course of a football match. The VAR may assist the referee only when a clear and obvious error or serious missed incident occurs in relation to the following:

• Goal/no goal

• Penalty/no penalty

• Direct red card (not a second yellow or caution)

• Cases of mistaken identity (when the referee sends off the wrong player)

Essentially, any potential fouls outside of the penalty box will not be reviewed unless they are in the build-up to a goal or penalty decision or are worthy of a red card.

HOW DOES IT WORK?

• Step One – Incident Occurs: When an incident occurs, the referee either informs the VAR or the VAR recommends to the referee that the incident should be reviewed.

• Step Two – Review and Advice by the VAR: The video is then studied by the VAR, who notifies the main referee via headset what the footage shows.

• Step Three – Decision or Action is Taken: Before making a decision, the referee can review the video footage on the side of the pitch. Alternatively, he can go with the advice of the VAR and take the appropriate action.

The jury is still out on VAR and like most forms of new technology—it will always need some time for us to become truly acquainted with. I see both sides of the debate on VAR but for this week after it’s done my beloved Manchester United a great service against our local rivals; I’m all for it.

Until next week. Peace.