Two penalties that (were obvious, but) were not attributed "mark" so far at the refereeing level of the 19th game of the CYTA championship. These mistakes weigh more on the scales, because they were made in matches in which VAR technology was present.
On Saturday, in the match Ethnikos Achnas-Apollon (1-4), Loukas Sotiriou refused the penalty delays to the guests, although he was notified by the Video Assistant Referee Kyriakos Christodoulou and went to see Papunashvili's overthrow again on the field monitor.
On Sunday, in the match AEK-ENP (1-2), Kyriakos Christodoulou did not charge the 45 + 1 'penalty in favor of the guests, although he was warned by the Video Assistant Referee Giannis Anastasiou, because the latter decided that the phase is clear and not called him to re-evaluate it on the field monitor.
That Loukas Sotiriou and Giannis Anastasiou misjudged the phases is as obvious as the violations that took place. These errors, however, undermine neither the utility nor the value of technology. The VAR system is the medium and as such did - in both cases - did an excellent job: from the repeated projections it became clear what exactly happened.
That the penalties were not given does not undermine the credibility of the medium. Technology is not exposed through its misuse, it only exposes - in the eyes of the whole world - those who, despite the convenience it offers, end up or insist on making the wrong decisions.
The credibility of the VAR can be affected in the eyes of the public only in one way: the non-punishment of those who use it in the wrong way.