Article hijacks match report to argue against VAR expansion, using the Carlos Vicente diving incident as a springboard for extended editorial commentary. While the anti-VAR argument may have merit, the framing subordinates the actual match action to the author's preferred narrative about officiating technology. Match details are presented fairly but clearly serve as supporting evidence for the broader VAR thesis.
“This was a day to remember that plenty of officials can make correct decisions without needing to be hooked up to their mates in a TV booth 100 miles away.”
“Just because a referee has a poor game, it does not mean that VAR is unequivocally 'a good thing'.”


