The use of technology in each sport is rated from very annoying to very good.

The sight of referees reviewing incidents on pitchside monitors has become a common, joy-destroying image in football. Photo: PA/John Walton

Another chaotic week of video technology in football, now ruining matches from Fulham to France. This is an era of endless debate, painful consultations with rulebooks and disagreements between the most tiresome people in the world.

We were all excited about goal line technology. GLT had cheerful initials, like a good sandwich or a bad disc jockey. But since the first signs of promise at the 2018 World Cup, War has become about as useful to football as Jar Jar Binks was to Obi-Wan Kenobi. This is War War Binks. Burn it all.

But first, let's evaluate which sports use technology more successfully. For the purposes of this exercise, we are only looking at technologies that involve cameras and have the potential to change the sport while it is being played. So photo finishes in races, touch pads for timing swimming, and chess players clicking those little clocks despite all the fine pieces of technology being disqualified.

Given the obvious benefits of a nifty set of initials for branding, we have to agree some of these sum up each sport's technology and its ability to irritate. A very annoying Video Assistant Referee rating, or VARVAR for short. The higher the score, the more infuriating the technology is.

Football

The brilliance of football, its greatest value, the only thing that allows it to win the debate about the best sport in the world is the joy of a goal. Var screwed it up in such a way that fans are now questioning their emotions, perhaps forever. He brings logic and process to moments that should be pure feelings. Aggressive, destructive and, least of all forgivable, still often wrong.
BARBARIAN: 10/10

Rugby

A television acquaintance who specializes in game shows once told me that you always know when a new format won't work if it takes more than a minute to explain the rules. Modern rugby will require a six-hour workshop before each game and will be scrapped after the pilot. Technology only makes matters more confusing, which is why rugby is the best example of the folly of using video to interpret subjective rules. It doesn't help that there's a gray area around whether you still need to address the TMO as «sir.»
VARVAR: 9/10

New Zealand captain Sam Cane is out of the Rugby World Cup final after a TV match official upgraded his original yellow card to a red card. Photo: Getty Images/David Ramos, NFL

So, do you like video replays? WE HAVE ALL THE VIDEO REPEATS IN THE WORLD. We placed the camera in a small piece of foam in the corner of the end zone! We'll show you what you thought was a catch from 27 different angles until you stop watching sports altogether! We'll make Bill Belichick throw out the stupid flag if he wants to protest anything! Of course, everything can be reviewed, except for the two-minute warning when nothing can be reviewed because everything is automatically reviewed. Understood? A ridiculous state of affairs for a ridiculous sport.
VARVAR: 8/10

F1

Car Var fits into a sport that is already 95 percent technological. Yes, Max Verstappen can drive fast, but can he go that fast without all those wind tunnels, turbo systems and over-caffeinated spreadsheet freaks wearing polo shirts? Race stewards review incidents as they occur and render their verdicts, sometimes immediately. Some travel or time penalties apply. Everyone is happy. Well, not really, but that's what makes Drive to Survive viable.
BARBARIAN: 5/10

Cricket

Of course, it wins the award for the most charming names. Snikko and Hot Spot are part of the DRS, but may well become mascots for future world championships. Crucially, cricket leaves the use of technology to the discretion of captains and sides, with the umpire's call being the deciding factor in major decisions. So technology will help in a way and you will be out of luck if you misjudge when to use it. In other words, technology for adults that football can only dream of.
VARVAR: 4/10

Throughout his captaincy career, Ben Stokes has shown himself to be an adept judge of when to call for a review. Photo: Getty Images/ANTHONY DEVLIN Baseball

Like tennis and cricket, baseball benefits from being a sport of discrete, repetitive actions. Coaches or judges can request reconsideration of any controversial issues, and these decisions are then «sent to New York» for judgment, an even more glamorous version of «sent to Coventry». But the result is the same: the second shot!
VARVAR: 3/10

Tennis

Refreshingly simple. To score or to knock out? If you're not sure, ask the all-seeing Hawkeye. The crowd applauds, the replay plays quickly, justice is immediately served. Great news for accuracy lovers, but a huge setback for anyone dreaming of another John McEnroe or Jeff Tarango-style flop. Thank goodness Nick Kyrgios is bravely upholding the tradition.
BARBARIAN: 2/10

Golf

For the most part, he's not bothered by little things like Hawkeye, fairway monitors or something even semi-automatic. In fact, it is the only sport that refuses to use technology. In 2017, the United States Golf Association and the R&A jointly said they would no longer review “evidence” recorded on fans' phones or respond to complaints from the majority of TV viewers about rule violations. That's right, down with the dobbers.
VARVAR: 0/10

Golf trendsetters no longer review footage of alleged violations by spectators; Cell phones. Photo: Getty Images/Jared Tilton.