"I definitely believe that we failed in the use of technology," Marcelo Gallardo declared to partially explain the incredible comeback suffered by his River Plate at the hands of Lanus. The reigning champion of the Libertadores had a 3-0 advantage overall - having won 1-0 in the first leg at the Monumental - and the 'granate' in the final of the Copa seemed impossible. However, neither River's elimination nor Lanus' great qualification could overshadow the VAR, which stole the show in its debut in South America.

The use of Video Assistant Referee, enabled in the first leg in Nunez, triggered criticism and doubts. The majority of complaints came from the 'millonario' side, who felt affected by referee Wilmar Roldan's decisions in the use of technology.

In the final moments of the first half, with River leading 2-0, Marcone blocked Ignacio Scocco's advance with his hand, which the visitors quickly claimed as a penalty. Roldan let play continue without using the technology, convinced that there was nothing. In contrast, the Colombian decided to rely on technology in two key actions of the match: in Jose Sand's 2-2 equalizer, to see if the forward was offside, and in the build-up to Lanus' fourth goal, the winning goal. With the help of VAR, a penalty was awarded to the home team.

As soon as the first semifinal of the Copa Libertadores was completed, the analysis of the game was set aside to discuss whether the use of technology was necessary after what had been seen at La Fortaleza. To be objective, the only mistake was not awarding a penalty for River because all the other decisions were correct. But in South America, that is not enough, while in the Bundesliga, they don't make a fuss and in Spain, they call for the arrival of VAR, hoping that this system will put an end to errors in favor of Real Madrid and Barcelona. Even Piqué once called for it.

And if we want, VAR is a clear example of the cultural difference between one continent and another. In Europe, it is understood that this system, just like any mistake in the game itself, can either favor or harm you. Nothing more. In contrast, in South America, it serves as an excuse for defeat. Without going too far, in the Confederations Cup in Russia, played between June and July, Chile always had an objection to the use of technology. 'La Roja' played and complained, unlike Germany, which simply focused on doing what it knows and ended up lifting the trophy.

VAR was added taking inspiration from other sports and, faced with so much criticism, it should continue down that path of development. In tennis, there is the famous 'Hawk-Eye', with which each player has a certain number of challenges. If they succeed in requesting a review of a play, they keep their chances. If they fail, they lose them gradually. Perhaps by limitedly allowing clubs the option to use technology, complaints will be reduced, responsibilities will be assumed, and more will be talked about football.