No lo se Rick, parece falso (SPA-ENG)

I don't know Rick, it seems fake

One of the most popular and entertaining memes since its explosive emergence, accompanied by the equally powerful surge in popularity on social media, is the one in which the character Chumlee expresses the title phrase to another of the stars of the reality show "Pawn Stars," referring to something that looks suspicious or fake.

The use of the meme refers to the falsity of a fact, object, or even an argument, and it is precisely here that I use it to emphasize my disagreement with many controversial situations that arise in soccer matches, where the famous VAR is requested, or not. Controversy also arises when the refereeing team does not invoke it, or, what amounts to more or less the same thing, the very people in charge of the command room of this resource, which has been given the bombastic name of "video replay referee assistance," do not call the person in charge of administering justice on the field in the event of a specific incident that merits it.

And I'm going to use as an example what happened a few days ago in the game between Atlético de Madrid and Real Madrid, for a place in the Champions League quarterfinals. An unexpected situation led to a review by the device in question during the penalty taken by Atlético striker Julián Álvarez.

While this was happening, and the striker himself was unsure whether or not he had touched the ball with both feet when he slipped and lost his footing, the VAR took a long time to review the play from countless cameras, all at different angles and with different playback speeds. Meanwhile, Real Madrid players claimed there was a double touch, with their privileged view from 50 meters away.

And the decision came: double touch and the goal is disallowed. All members of the VAR technical team and the refereeing team agree that there appears to be a double touch.

And that's a huge problem, because "it seems." No one can say with complete certainty that the ball has been touched twice. But that's not all. Article 14 of the football rules, referring to the penalty kick, states, "The ball is in play when it moves clearly." The VAR contradicts the rule. There's no other explanation. It could be that there was a touch with the supporting foot before hitting the ball with the right foot. But was there a clear movement of the ball? certainly not, because in that case there would not be the slightest suspicion.

And I'll add something of my own: Was there an intention to touch the ball twice on the part of the Atlético player? Because that must also be taken into consideration. The rules were written by some people, and they were interpreted by others. The rules aren't rigid, and they can't be, especially in a sport as dynamic as football. They are legislated in general, following an idea, the spirit of the game. That's something no VAR can understand, at least for now. They measure whether a knee or shoulder is in front of the defender to determine an offside position. My grandmother had one of her famous sayings for this: "They're more papist than the Pope."

Whether Atlético would have won that game is a different story, invoking once again a popular adage. It doesn't matter and it's not possible to know. The fact is that an injustice was committed in the attempt to dispense justice, and that's at least suspicious, false if you ask me.

As Chumlee told Rick in an episode of the famous show, the phrase fits here, and a review of what was done must be conducted. Action is already being taken on the matter, and there's talk of the "Julian Law" to avoid situations like this in the future. The offside position will also have its share of developments and controversy, of course, but as it continues to improve, the suspicious and false will tend to disappear.