Why VAR won’t work and how it could

Football has finally embraced video technology into the sport after years of waiting. Having been trickled in since 2016, starting in the MLS, it has been embraced as a useful tool that people have been crying out for since Lampard cannoned a ball off the cross bar and over the line in 2010.

Eight years later VAR has reached these green and pleasant lands. Kelechi Iheanacho becoming the answer to pub quiz questions across the country, having his goal given after VAR intervention earlier this week. However, the complexities of the system reared its ugly head as many saw a clear penalty not reviewed in Chelsea’s FA Cup win over Norwich.

Iheanacho has his goal reviewed by VAR after being initially given offside.

Video technology is not new in sport of course. Rugby, cricket, tennis and American football all have used video technology in some form to varying degrees of success. Overall it would seem that is has reduced the number of officiating errors across all sports. However, it may not fit into football as well as people may have hoped.

In some areas of sport VAR is perfect, quick and simple. If there is a need to monitor binary and factual decisions, video technology is a must-have. Whether it be a run out in cricket, whether a try is scored in rugby or whether Iheanacho was in front of, or behind the last defender.

In other areas things are not so clear cut. One of the beauties of sport, and the reasons for phone-ins and school ground arguments, are the more grey opinion-based decisions that crop up week in week out. Was it a dangerous tackle? Was it a foul? Was it a penalty? Should it be a red card?

VAR did not overturn the decision to book Willian for diving, when
most pundits believe a penalty should have been give.

Here is where the system falls down, and where football hasn’t learnt from the other sports. In the NFL reviewable decisions are limited to those that are more binary; you cannot challenge or review a pass interference decision. In rugby the laws are becoming far more defined, for good or worse; you cannot make contact with a players head if you want to stay on the field. Football is seeking to have its cake and eat it too.

The most popular sport in the world doesn’t want to sacrifice the tempo of the game, something that stands it out from its nearest rivals in rugby. Nor does it want to take away the autonomy of the referee and weaken his authority of a game with multiple officials. Yet, it does want to make sure it gets right all the controversial decisions in the game and protect officials from making mistakes.

If we want video technology in football, football will have to change in one of two ways. Either we have a slower game, a more fragmented game, but where there is time for the referee to check dubious and difficult decisions, not just clear and obvious mistakes. Or we limit the use to those clear cut decisions, like offside or mistaken identity and continue to let Gary Lineker and co continue to debate penalties on Match of the Day.

Ultimately it will come down to the fans reaction. If the powers at be seeing people being turned off the beautiful game because it becomes slower and less exciting then don’t expect to see technology around for long. We all love a bit of controversy anyway.