A Final Marred Before the Whistle
Before the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) even entered the conversation, the game’s first pivotal moment was steeped in controversy. In the 18th minute, French star Antoine Griezmann tumbled to the ground 30 yards from goal. Argentine referee Néstor Pitana
awarded a free-kick, despite replays suggesting Griezmann initiated the fall with little to no contact. The resulting set piece was whipped into the box, where Croatian striker Mario Mandžukić, in a cruel twist of fate, headed it into his own net—the first-ever own goal in a World Cup final. For Croatia, a team that had battled through three consecutive extra-time games to reach the final, it was the worst possible start, born from a decision many fans and pundits immediately labeled a dive. The debate had begun before VAR’s introduction was even necessary.
The Handball Heard 'Round the World
Croatia fought back, equalizing ten minutes later with a brilliant strike from Ivan Perišić. But Perišić would go from hero to the center of the storm shortly before halftime. Following a French corner, the ball struck his hand. The initial appeals from French players were waved away by Pitana. Then came the signal that would define the match: the alert from the VAR room. For several minutes, the world watched as Pitana stood pitch-side, staring at a monitor. The Laws of the Game at the time stated a handball must be a “deliberate act.” Perišić’s arm was down, the ball came from a short distance off a deflected header, and his movement seemed natural. Yet, after a long review, Pitana pointed to the spot. Griezmann converted the penalty, giving France a 2-1 lead they would never relinquish. In the first World Cup final to feature VAR, the technology had delivered its most significant and divisive verdict.
Why the Decision Still Stings
The penalty decision fundamentally altered the trajectory of the final. It wasn't just that it gave France the lead; it was the sense of injustice that lingered. Croatia, which had been the better side for large stretches of the first half, was now chasing the game based on what many felt was an incorrect interpretation of the rules, magnified by a technology meant to eliminate “clear and obvious errors.” Pundits were immediately critical, with many arguing that the lengthy review time itself proved the error was not clear and obvious. Croatia’s coach, Zlatko Dalić, said after the match, “in a World Cup final you do not give such a penalty.” The call didn't just feel wrong to Croatia; it felt like a violation of the spirit of the game, where technology created an infraction rather than correcting a blatant one.
The Ghost of 2018 in Modern VAR Debates
In the years since that final in Moscow, VAR has become a fixture in top leagues worldwide, yet the debates have only intensified. The France-Croatia match remains Exhibit A. For proponents, it was a rocky but necessary step toward accuracy; FIFA itself boasted a 99.3% success rate for VAR during the tournament. For critics, it was the moment VAR’s flaws were laid bare on the biggest stage possible: its inability to remove subjectivity, its disruption of the game's flow, and its potential to punish ambiguous situations with game-altering consequences. Every time a controversial handball or offside decision is debated today, the ghost of Perišić’s penalty and Griezmann’s free-kick re-emerges. The 2018 final proved that while technology can see everything, it can’t always provide an answer that everyone agrees with, ensuring its legacy remains as contested as the calls that decided the game.
