My Thoughts On VAR

So, we've reached that point here on Denied By The Flag where we're going to have to touch on a controversial topic. Yep that's right we're going to have to talk about VAR...yay.

Now there are a couple of reasons why I've held my tongue, at least on here, about the controversial introduction of Video Assistant Referees to football. The first being that I don't support a club that plays in a league that it operates in, that in itself is something I'll touch upon. Also I think given the amount of different things that come under VAR's watchful eye it was only fair to take a step back and allow it time to try and get things right. Unfortunately that hasn't happened.

So what is wrong with it?

Now I'll start off by saying that I was initially in favour of introducing video technology to football. I still am to be fair to an extent, we all want correct decisions don't we? I think that's a given. However at what cost? Do we want correct decisions to the exact point that takes away from the flow of the game? No I don't think we do. That is where VAR for me falls down. Take Saturday's game at the New White Hart Lane, Sheffield United were denied a goal which by the letter of the law was correct but it took four minutes to decide this. It was a adjudged that United midfielder John Lundstram was offside when his cross went into the box that then lead to David McGoldrick slotting home. As a football fan that wants the best for the game that goal should stand. If you need four minutes to decide if someone is offside or not then the goal should be given. CLEAR AND OBVIOUS mistakes, that is what VAR was brought into football for. I appreciate that the clear and obvious phrase doesn't come into offside decisions but isn't that part of the problem? Yes there is a it is or it isn't factor but it still isn't what the system was brought in for. Tight calls have always been in football, it's an attacking game the aim is to attack the oppositions defence. You're going to get tights calls.

Another issue is timing generally, if you're having to stop the game 5 or 6 times in a 90 minute period that's going to do several things, one, it stops the flow of the game making it much more frustrating to watch. The great thing about football for me is that it was a quick game that was enjoyable to watch. The reason I could never enjoy something like Rugby was that it was too stop/start and ultimately not as enjoyable to watch. VAR stops that. Also from a fitness point of view if you're having to stop the game for a few minutes to check decisions surely there is a high risk of muscle injuries? I'm no expert but the idea of stopping and having to restart 4/5 minutes after doesn't sound ideal for quick athletes trying to avoid hamstring/groin/calf injuries.

Handball is another big issue, in the summer the rule was changed so that any goal that has been scored where the ball has touched any part of an attacking player's hand be it accidental or not will be ruled out. Now in theory that's fair enough only in the reality of football that's nonsense really. Even if you go with that rule why is it not the same for a defender? Why can a ball strike the arm of a defender and it not automatically be a penalty? How is an attacking player touching it accidentally worse than a defending player doing it? Take Sunday's game with Liverpool and Man City. Trent Alexander-Arnold clearly handballed it, whether you think he did it deliberately or not is largely irrelevant, my personal view is he did know what he was doing, his arm was still in an unnatural position. Yet rewind all the way back to the start of the season how can you rule out Wolves' goal at Leicester where the ball hit Willy Bolly on the back of the arm? He isn't even looking at it. The rule is broken and doesn't work. It was brought in to make it easier for VAR, surely VAR should have come in and worked with the rules that were already there in place? It's once again not using common sense.

As for the officials that are operating VAR, it's another worry that these are the same officials that were making blatant errors on the pitch. We have the likes of Neil Swabrick telling us how we're getting more decisions right than ever before yet failing to address the fact the Premier League have said there have been mistakes. Why have we have pitch side monitors which we all saw were a success at the 2018 World Cup yet we haven't used them? What is the point of the on field referee? You've got VAR calling the play back and reviewing it for incidents, surely it has to be the on field officials say? Help him yes but don't take over. This leads to another point, why call it VAR? Surely the VT for Video Technology or the OS for Officiating Screen would be better or at least more in tune with what it was supposed to be brought in to do?

Another big issue with VAR is that it's taking away from celebrating goals, that fans now aren't celebrating goals properly as they know it'll be checked by VAR, a defence of this has often been “well you can celebrate them twice then”, this in my opinion is the biggest load of nonsense I've ever heard. The euphoric feeling of your team scoring can't be split up and taken separately. The idea you'd celebrate confirmation of a goal being given as much as the actual moment is ridiculous. Again, it's another example of the theory behind VAR being fine but in reality it doesn't work. Also if a goal is ruled off after a few minutes of deliberation that also feel like you've been cheated and this is something I can talk about. Cast your mind back to May 2016, Friday 13^th Sheffield Wednesday V Brighton in the first leg of the Championship Play Off Semi Final. Wednesday score what looks at first glance to be a fairly legitimate goal through Fernando Forestieri and Hillsborough erupted. Never have I ever seen anything quite like it. It was glorious and as the players rush off to celebrate the replay is flashed up on the big screen where the linesman spots the that Gary Hooper might not have touched the ball thus making Fernando Forestieri offside thus the goal was ruled out. Now if you watch it back it's hard to tell now 3&1/2 years later thus it doesn't in my opinion fall into the clear and obvious section for me but the point I'm making is the decision was made off a replay and the goal was ruled off. Nothing was communicated to us in the stands obviously and like I said before, you feel cheated when something like that happens.

What should happen from here?

So what should happen from this point on? For me VAR in it's current guise doesn't work, it's proving to be more inconsistent than the referees were before. It doesn't take into account all the little nuances that come with football. We're now ruling goals off for kneecaps and a armpits being offside and that feels wrong. It doesn't feel like we've taken a step forward but a major one backwards. Football at the top level is being ruined by VAR not improved. I'm not saying the technology should be scrapped completely but in it's current format it doesn't work. It's fine to say well more decisions are right now than ever before, but what have we lost in doing that? It's all very well having a good ratio of correct decisions but if people aren't interested in what is going on, what is the point?

Again I'll make the point, I was thoroughly for VAR being introduced, I feel glad at least it's been tried but I was wrong and the people who said it wouldn't work were correct. Obviously they can't remove it from the Premier League at the moment as the integrity of the competition would come into question but they need to start letting the referees use the monitors, they need to be consistent on what they deem a foul/offside etc. In the summer I would get rid of it, as much as the referees need help and aren't up to the task I would rather human error than this. At least that feels natural, this doesn't.

So there we go, my thoughts on the controversial VAR. I can't see it going anywhere, too much has been invested in it and as we all know in football money seems to talk.

Thanks for reading

Tom