VAR: Football’s Greatest Divide

When Video Assistant Refereeing (VAR) was introduced into the Premier League in the 2019/20 season, its aim was to eliminate controversy and enhance decision-making. However, the irony is that it has become one of the sport’s biggest controversies, with fans, players, and managers accusing VAR of big-club bias, match-fixing, home-match advantage, and inconsistent refereeing.

While some advocate for the reform of VAR, such as an appeal-based system, others, including Premier League club Wolves, have pushed for its complete removal. So, does VAR enhance the beautiful game, or has it created more problems than it solves?

One of the common conspiracies is that VAR benefits the biggest clubs at the expense of smaller teams, reinforcing their dominance. While this conspiracy predates VAR, data suggests that its introduction has not eliminated this trend.

In VAR’s second season, the Premier League’s ‘Big Six’ teams were allowed, on average, to commit 2.29 more fouls before seeing a card against a ‘non-Big Six’ opponent. While this isn’t a direct flaw of VAR itself, the system promised to remove unfair advantages — but may have only masked them.

A niche conspiracy is that the VAR-induced stoppages are contributing to injuries. Long stoppages allow muscles to cool down, making players more susceptible to injury when the game resumes.

This season, Arsenal men's team injury crisis has seen Havertz, Martinelli, and Saka all suffer hamstring injuries. While increased fixture congestion contributes to this, Arsenal provides elite physiotherapy and injury-prevention programs to all their players. This raises the question: Is VAR’s stop-start nature harming player welfare?

Another huge frustration with VAR is its inconsistency — why are some incidents analysed in detail while others are completely ignored?

The Nottingham Forest vs. Everton match (April 2024) was a prime example. Three penalty appeals involving Ashley Young were dismissed, with VAR refusing to intervene.

A post-match review by the Key Match Incidents Panel found that at least one of the incidents was a clear penalty, and VAR should have stepped in. The panel unanimously voted 5-0 in favour of VAR intervening, yet in the match, it remained silent.

VAR was also meant to remove crowd pressure from refereeing decisions, yet evidence suggests that the home team still benefits disproportionally.

For example, in the Bundesliga, Bayern Munich has repeatedly been awarded controversial penalties at home. Even in MLS, data suggests that 50/50 VAR decisions still favour home teams, reinforcing that even remote officials subconsciously favour larger crowds.

There is lots of noise surrounding the current state of VAR, with prominent figures calling for radical change or total removal.

Gary Lineker suggests an on-field appeal system, similar to tennis, where captains get a limited number of challenges to review decisions.

At the end of last season, Wolves’ Executive Chairman, Jeff Shi, formally petitioned to abolish VAR, citing an “erosion of trust”. However, at the Annual General Meeting, the proposal was rejected 19-1, with Wolves being the only club in favour.

Perhaps the biggest irony in the VAR debate is the stark dichotomy between men’s and women’s football when it comes to the VAR conversation and the implications that it has. While men’s leagues debate whether to scrap VAR, the women’s game is calling for its introduction.

Following Arsenal women’s 1-0 defeat to Chelsea in January, decided by a contentious late penalty, head coach Sledgers came out after the game to emphasise the growing stakes of the WSL and the necessity of the implementation of VAR, stating: “The stakes are getting higher in women’s football; I think we should have it.” (VAR)

This highlights a broader technological and investment gap. The WSL doesn’t even have goal-line technology, a system in use in the Premier League since 2013-14. Many WSL stadiums lack the infrastructure required to support VAR and GLT, further delaying their implementation and widening the gap between the men’s and women’s game.

With the men’s game turning against VAR and the women’s game longing for the investment, the future of VAR in football remains deeply uncertain. Should it be reformed, reduced to an appeal system, or removed entirely? As long as VAR remains in the game in its current form, so will the divide between fairness and frustration — but whether football chooses to fix it or abandon it remains the biggest decision yet.

Image from Wikimedia Commons