Refereeing conspiracy theories are nonsense but stem from valid fears | Jonathan Wilson

ALast weekend there was another series of tiring discussions about VAR and referees. In Bournemouth, Arsenal fans called referee Robert Jones “an impostor” and chanted that the Premier League was “corrupt”. The outrage was even greater on social media. Fans have always complained about referees, of course, but traditionally they called them ‘blind’ and dismissed them as ‘wankers’ or ‘bastards’. Then came the song ‘You’re not fit to referee’; however, the cries of systemic corruption are relatively new.

Maybe this is just the world we live in, a world of distortions and paranoia, shaped by a wide range of populist cynics, from José Mourinho to Donald Trump, with social media nurturing conspiracy theories emerging from the fertile soil left behind when Covid receded . Or maybe there’s something more complex going on.

But before we get to that, it’s worth emphasizing that none of the key decisions in the matches involving last weekend’s major title contenders were in any way terrible or inexplicable. William Saliba was rightly sent off after Arsenal’s defeat at Bournemouth; he deliberately pulled Evanilson back when the Brazilian was favorite to hold Leandro Trossard’s cut pass, with Ben White about 30 yards away and unlikely to recover. Was the mistake clear enough for VAR to intervene? Yes, clearly.

While the foul itself was not much different from Tosin Adarabioyo’s on Diogo Jota in Chelsea’s defeat at Liverpool, the context was very different. The ball Jota was chasing moved much faster and arced to the right; Levi Colwill, who was standing about five meters away, was favorite to come first. So Evanilson didn’t get a scoring opportunity; Jota was not.

Bournemouth’s penalty was clear, as David Raya tripped Evanilson. Even Mikel Arteta, whose constant complaints about referees have contributed much to Arsenal fans’ persecution complex, was not about to complain, even if he did not go so far as to openly accept that the decisions were correct.

The conspiracy theory favored by Arsenal fans seemed to be that the VAR official Jarred Gillett, an Australian, was a boyhood Liverpool fan, which is why he has never refereed a Liverpool match in the Premier League . Saliba will now be suspended for Arsenal’s match against Liverpool. But even if we set aside the frankly childish idea that professional officials cannot be objective, the fundamental point remains that the decision made was the right one.

While Saliba’s red card went indirectly to Liverpool, the two big VAR calls at Anfield both went against them: not only the non-sack of Adarabioyo, but also the overturning of a penalty when Robert Sánchez was deemed to have had enough received. on the ball before Curtis Jones went over him as it was not a foul. The event appeared to be on the edge and Sánchez was probably saved by the fact that his forward momentum had diminished at the moment of impact. Whether VAR should have been involved is questionable, but the call was subjective; Whether it is a punishment or not, it would be difficult to say that it was definitively wrong.

Manchester City’s last-minute winner against Wolves falls into a similar category. You could argue that Bernardo Silva was close enough to Wolves keeper José Sa when John Stones headed the ball towards goal to get in his way. After all, he was close enough to collide with Sa when the corner was taken (while not offside), and if Stones’ header had been aimed towards Sa’s right post, it would have passed very close to Silva. But Silva was not in his field of vision and the header went straight into the goal. When Wolves had a goal disallowed against West Ham in similar circumstances last season, their manager Gary O’Neil called it “one of the worst decisions I’ve ever seen”; his opinion was noticeably different this time. Which is to say that while I personally think this sort of thing should be offside, I understand why the goal could have been given and I don’t think it’s outrageous that it was.

But from the hyper-partisan point of view of the modern fan, there is no room for such gray areas, little room even for incompetence. Everything has to be part of a grand plot. Why that shouldn’t become the standard is impossible to say for sure, but here’s a theory. Fans know the game is in grave danger; that mega-rich owners, far richer than any previous owners, have the potential to bankrupt entire leagues through repeated legal actions of questionable merit. They also know that the new breed of owners doesn’t care about the traditions of the game, and that they disdain regular fans for occasional visitors who treat a match as a day out and indulge in merchandise and overpriced stadium food.

Owners are stripping the sport of fans and reshaping it, pulling it away from the communities that have kept it alive – and been kept alive by it – for a century and a half. But that is too painful to accept. Against their will, the average fan is helpless and so, in a classic case of discomfort and displacement, perhaps blinded by bias, they turn against the familiar enemy: the referees.

• This is an excerpt from Soccer with Jonathan Wilson, the Guardian US’s weekly look at the game in Europe and beyond. Subscribe for free here. Do you have a question for Jonathan? Email footballwithjw@theguardian.com and he will provide the best answer in a future edition