Cricket points the way for football’s future as Spain see off France

It is rare for international friendlies to produce any talking points of particular note, yet France’s clash with Spain is one that is likely to play a significant part in shaping the way football is enjoyed in years to come.

For the first time in France, video technology was trialled. Of course, such experiments have been ongoing in various competitions, most notably in the KNVB Beker, the Netherlands’ premier knockout tournament. It was also used when Les Bleus met Italy in a September 2016 friendly, which ended 3-1 in the favour of Didier Deschamps’ side.

Rarely, though, has it had the impact that it did at the Stade de France, where Spain came out deservedly on top 2-0.

After 45 rather uneventful minutes, the hosts thought they had taken the lead when Antoine Griezmann headed the ball past David de Gea from close range. There was, however, an ominous pause while the majority of the crowd in the Parisian stadium celebrated, and after a delay of almost a minute the goal was chopped off as Layvin Kurzawa, who set up the striker, had strayed offside. Confusion reigned as they sought to work out what exactly had happened.

David Silva's opener from the penalty spot was not nearly so controversial, but the other major Video Assistant Referee (VAR) call arrived soon afterwards when Gerrard Deulofeu added the guests’ second after a fine sweeping move. Initially, the goal was ruled out for offside, but a review from the video ref showed that he was, marginally, onside.

Gerrard Deulofeu’s goal was initially ruled for offside but overturned after video referral

While both decisions were correct – and many will argue that is ultimately the benchmark upon which the system should be judged – they served to kill the drama and emotion of two critical moments.

It is inevitable that the future of the game will involve a video official, for there is simply too much at stake in too many matches for a backup to be overlooked. How these decisions are implemented, however, must be refined to retain the passion and thrill of a game that requires such moments more than any other sport.

Given the fluid nature of football, no system is going to be perfect, yet football would do well to look at the manner in which tennis and cricket have implemented challenge systems to complement rather than override the on-field officials.

At the Stade de France, the referees were rendered virtually useless as the voice from above ultimately had the say on all the critical decisions in the game. What, exactly, was the purpose of them being there at all?

Cricket, it seems, has struck the perfect balance. Captains have a set number of challenges that they have at their disposal (this varies due to the form of the game) and can appeal against decisions that they feel were erroneous. Unless a clear mistake has been made by the on-field officials, the original call stands.

Cricket has incorporated video technology smoothly in all forms of the game

It may sound counterintuitive, but it is these tight calls that provide football with drama that is arguably unparalleled in the sporting world. These talking points form part of the lifeblood of the game. As a low-scoring sport, one goal can make all the difference, and a challenge system would allow managers the opportunity to nullify clear errors against their side while also retaining much of the instananeous, which was sadly lost in Paris.

Furthermore, going down this route would allow coaches and teams to question all decisions on the field. With margins in games often incredibly fine, even an incorrect decision to award a throw in for one team could ultimately prove critical. The current system does not allow for this, whereas a challenge-based approach would.

(Video Courtesy: Major League Soccer)

Of course, there are problems with this. Games would be in danger of becoming bogged down by television decisions, so challenges would have to be seriously limited - perhaps three per game - so that managers could only contest decisions that were either clearly wrong or would have a dramatic bearing on the outcome of the match.

Moreover, in a fluid sport like football, unlike cricket, there is also no regular and natural break of play. The ball may not go dead for many seconds after an incident, which poses a further challenge to rule makers, but it should not be seen as insurmountable. If the clock can be put back in competitions like the NFL and NBA, surely football can find a solution?

Video Assistant Referee (VAR) was used in this season’s Club World Cup

In both systems, however, steps have to be taken to ensure that the passion of key moments is not lost. Of course, this will be difficult to achieve, but video calls must be made swiftly and decisively: if there is no clear mistake on the part of the on-field officials, their call must stand.

Additionally, it should be made clear that the VAR is being used. In Paris, that was not made clear to crowd, who were temporarily alienated from the game they were watching - another black mark against the current system.

FIFA, the game’s governing body, are at least seeking to tweak their ideas to get things right, and of course, there will never be a complete consensus on how the game should be officiated in the years ahead. Getting the correct decision is important, but retaining the drama and passion of the game should be their primary objective. After all, what is the game without supporters?

Some football fans might argue that this is just not cricket – but with video decisions, it certainly should be.