Tiago Silva blasts referee and VAR after Porto vs Arouca clash | OneFootball

The noise has settled in once again as FC Porto finds itself at the center of the decisive play. Curious, isn't it? A penalty in favor of the Dragons, in a debatable play like so many others in football, was enough to rekindle a debate that, more than seeking clarity, often seems to thrive on constant upheaval.

Tiago Silva summed up the contradiction with a harsh statement: “The Refereeing Council is bad for football.” It is a political accusation against the functioning of the structure, not the game itself, and deserves attention. Because the essential point is not just in the play between Fofana and Arouca. It’s in the criteria. Or, more precisely, the lack of it.

The comment hits the core of the issue when it recalls the case of an “alleged ‘CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR’ that no one (I repeat, no one) could see.” The phrase is strong precisely because it exposes a feeling that many fans know: when the concept of a clear and obvious error stretches or shrinks according to the context, the problem ceases to be a play and becomes the system. And if the system cannot explain itself coherently, how can it ask for trust from those who observe it?

Then comes the contrast. In the penalty play favorable to FC Porto against Arouca, Tiago Silva writes: “a debatable play that divides commentators and the football community itself.” Well, if it divides commentators, if it divides fans, if it divides interpretations, then we are precisely in the realm of interpretation. And when a play is interpretative, why does the temptation to turn it into a scandal immediately arise when it benefits FC Porto? Isn't that also a too convenient narrative?

Further on, the criticism becomes even more incisive: “This is not criteria. It is institutionalized confusion.” The wording may be harsh, but the reasoning is simple. If in one situation the VAR intervenes and receives top marks despite the controversy, and in another it does not intervene and receives negative marks precisely because the play is debatable, where is the line? Where is the uniformity? And above all: who explains to the common fan what changes from case to case?

It is important not to lose sight of the essential amid the noise. FC Porto did what it had to do, gained the advantage near the end, and closed the match with a 3-1. The rest was the usual amplification of an episode that, while debatable, was quickly used to fuel selective suspicions and indignations. When doubt favors others, it is called interpretation. When it falls on Porto's side, a public trial is demanded. Coincidence?

Tiago Silva closes with another idea that deserves reflection: “when those who lead refereeing become a factor of confusion, the one who always loses is the same: football.” And here it is hard to disagree. FC Porto does not need noise to gain relevance. It needs, indeed, to compete, to be respected, and to see the game analyzed with the same standard for everyone. The rest is the usual: a lot of noise around a club that continues to stir everything and everyone, because the weight of the Dragon never goes unnoticed.

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇵🇹 here.