May be even if they didn’t, depending on the VAR team.
I see at least two:
- No matter how often a field player is fouled he may not score with his hand. Resorting to this argument is a non sequitur.
- If a field player holds the record for being the most fouled, the second most fouled, and the third most fouled player in the history of World Championships (cite?), then only because those fouls were indicated by the referee. Otherwise they would not count for your statistics. What are you complaining about?
I would note that in the worst of those years, 1986, he was fouled 3.3 times/90 minutes. Now, I think Frodo is also arguing that standards were tougher back then, and that by current standards more would have been called, but…those standards didn’t apply, and people will try to do what they can get away with, so I think they would have adjusted to whatever the current refereeing was. In other words, they smacked into him a lot because they could get away with it.
I’m not sure drugs testing was as sophisticated as it is today either… Just sayin’…
That is why I would be interested in his cite. What does being the most fouled player in a tournament mean? Receiving the most fouls in total? Or the most fouls per game? If the former, longer tournaments with more matches would undercount Pelé. If the latter, being injured in a game so that your oponents can not foul you anymore could undercount Pelé too. So Frodo could be technically correct and still wrong.
ETA: Also, not all fouls are equal (link to YouTube Goikoetxea foul against Maradona).
I see I’m not making a clear argument, let me try again:
- I’m not saying that the Hand of God would be by any mortal rule be valid, it belongs to a different sphere.
- My point is that, ok: VAR gets the Hand of God, robbing the world of a work of art, but from an Argentinian perspective, while successfully cheating against the English was (very) important, it was more important to win the game.
- Which, given the way Maradona was fouled would be way easier if VAR and current rules applied.
- Because if brutally hacking Him did not prevent Him from dribbling past their entire team (and the goalkeeper!), what do you think would’ve happened against a non-brutally fouled Maradona? see: Messi, Lionel Andrés.
- So they would’ve had a choice to make, foul Him constantly and end up with 9 players or less, or not foul Him and get (more) humiliated.
If you are trying to argue that VAR is a good idea you are making a very clear argument: Maradona would have played even better, Argentina’s triumph would be even more glorious.
So let us argue how VAR could be improved so that it works as intended.
That’s the problem, it can’t, there’s still subjective humans in the other end, it only adds more time before a decision that’s still debatable.
The constant fouling problem was solved without VAR, VAR is unneeded.
Or, in another way of speaking, the way to improve VAR is to remove the humans from it, let it just buzz when the ball goes out of bounds or (a different buzz) when a team scores. No more, no less.
Also, from our perspective there was no way to make that result more glorious, not against England, not at that date. Because, beyond the rights or wrongs of each country’s position re: the Falklands/Malvinas (which we shouldn’t discuss here) we had been humiliated in the war, that game healed a wound in the national psyche.
If you want to know more (A LOT more, at length) you can watch this video made from an Eduardo Sacheri story, it even has english subtitles.
Another non sequitur: the constant fouling problem was solved* by showing more cards. VAR is still needed for other situations.
Those situations, btw, sometimes include red card decisions.
*more or less, but it’s getting better.
I see we are not going to agree about the non-sequitur issue 
, nevermind.
But this
Is the main point of disagreement, I don’t think VAR is needed for the other kind of decisions.
To summarize, this discussion is, as many others, impossible to settle because it rests on a subjective proposition:
To me, and others, the problems with VAR exceed the benefits, to you and others they don’t.
Of course we will agree to disagree in the end. What else can you do when the counterpart, usually a sensible person, is wrong and becomes obstinate? Recalcitrante. Tozudo. Testarudo.
We might as well do it now and call it a day.
Terco. Empecinado. Cerril. Cabezota. Contumaz. Porfiado.
Nice video up there, but does it not end abruptly and too soon? I’ll search in the web for better quality images too. I can’t see the ball half of the time!
Nice accent too.
Doesn’t seem to, it ends with Victor Hugo Morales reciting the Scriptures, but the point is the story told before that.
And by the same count, the quality of the image is of no account, listen to what Sacheri wrote and Alejandro Apo recites, that explains everything about Maradona and Argentina.
Ok ok! It was kinda non-sequitur! Happy now? Cabeza dura
Spoken like a gentleman. Bueno, casi. Of course I was referring to myself. Cough!
I found a better copy of your video, I don’t know why the version here stopped too soon for me, the length of both versions is almost the same. Nice story, and Alejandro Apo has a beautiful speaking voice.
I thought about using the version with better video, but it didn’t had English subtitles and it seemed best to use one with subtitles in case the rest of the board wanted to see it.
That he does.
Good varguments!
Hearts lose out 3-1, after needing a draw to secure a first Scottish title in 66 years, in a final day decider at Celtic, who win their 14th title in 15 years (yes, really). The main talking point prior to the match being the extremely dodgy penalty Celtic were awarded midweek that meant a simple win today would be good enough to overtake Hearts rather than a 3 goal winning margin. So the romantic story of Celtic winning comes true. Ahem. This is of course provided there are no points sanctions after a sizeable contingent of Celtic fans ran onto the pitch before full time, with some appearing to assault Hearts players. I guess they couldn’t contain their joy after winning such an unexpected title.
(Before any Celtic fans take issue, I would be just as bitter as a neutral fan if Rangers were in the same position as Celtic!)
Heartbreaking as the lifelong wait for me continues.
Heartbreak turns to joy as Arsenal have won the Premier League after 22 years!
Woah