The last time the football fraternity was divided on a technicality as big as this was during the brief run of the Golden Goal rule. The extra-time feature, which was used only in two FIFA World Cups—1998 and 2002—was scrapped after it failed to inspire attacking play. The abolition came as a relief for players, who had to play under immense pressure to ensure the opposition didn't come close to the goal.
Ahead of the 2018 FIFA World Cup, which starts on June 14, video assistant referees (VARs) are proving to be as controversial as the 'sudden death' rule that sealed the fate of several big games. FIFA's insistence to use the review system at the World Cup added fuel to the ongoing debate, for which those involved in the game reserve their strongest opinions.
In the information age, as technology continues to have a growing influence in sports, the role of match officials, who function as arbitrators, continues to decline. While cricket and tennis give players the option of challenging the umpire's call, albeit with a fixed number of appeals, in football the new review system is left to the match officials to decide whether a decision should be given a second look.
How VAR works
A VAR can intervene only in situations that involve goals, penalties, red cards and mistaken identities. The VAR, who is either a former or current referee, sits in a video operation room and watches replays of crucial incidents during the game, assisted by two others. If there is a decision taken by the on-field referee that involves any of the aforementioned incidents, and it is felt that it may need to be reviewed, play is stopped immediately and the review is done.
The decision to review the original call lies with the main referee. He can either request for further introspection himself, if he is unsure of the right move, or the VAR can interrupt and recommend that the decision be reviewed, speaking to the ref in his earpiece. The VAR has until the restart of the next play to intervene.
When the field referee decides to review his decision, he draws a rectangle in the air with his hands, just like when a cricket umpire indicates the men upstairs to take the final call. Players and managers are not allowed to coerce the ref to seek the VAR's help. The referee can take appropriate action against them.
Once the VAR process is initiated, the referee either waits to receive the opinion of the VAR or he can go to a television that is installed on the side of the pitch to make the final call himself. In either case, FIFA's rule says that the original decision should be overturned only in the event of a “clear and obvious error,” allowing the field ref to have the final say.
Pros and cons
The biggest advantage of VAR is that it brings transparency to the game. Though, to what degree it does so is debatable. Referees are often soft targets for managers and players who blame the officials for poor decisions in the event of a loss. VAR helps minimise the onus on the referee by giving him the choice of verifying his first call.
It also makes the game fairer for the side that deserved to have advantage in the particular situation. And, since the four instances where VAR is applicable are crucial ones, it could prove to be game-changing. VAR certainly is for a noble cause, but as things stand, it seems like the negatives far outweigh the positives.
For one, the long-drawn process takes an average of 2.5 minutes, but there are instances where play has been held up for more than five minutes. This stoppage in play is the biggest issue for opposers of VAR. A scenario where a team has scored a goal and is forced to wait at least two minutes before they can celebrate would certainly be a major turnoff.
“They need to make sure they don't change the dynamic of the game too much, the emotion of the game too much—people waiting a couple of minutes to know if they can jump (and celebrate) because it was a goal,” Manchester United manager Jose Mourinho had said about the use of VAR.
It is argued that not only does VAR kill the game's momentum, but it complicates matters for one of the simplest sports in the world—notwithstanding the offside rule. And, since there is no ceiling on the number of times a referee reviews a decision, multiple stoppages would cease to justify football's 'beautiful game' moniker.
Referees left red-faced
The system is far from foolproof. Referees can still be accused of being biased if they decide not to consult the VAR. Case in point is the FA Cup third round game between Chelsea and Norwich City, in which the referee flashed Chelsea's Willian a yellow card for simulation in the penalty box. Replays showed that Willian was clearly tripped by the Norwich defender.
But, perhaps the biggest storm created by the VAR system was during Australia's A-League Grand Final, in which Melbourne Victory's title-winning goal come off an offside position. VAR was enabled for the tournament, but the video ref did not intervene, despite there being three players in obvious offside positions in the build up to the game's solitary goal.
The Melbourne team had clinched the title at the expense of the Newcastle Jets. Tournament officials later blamed it on a technical glitch and the system is under review for the next edition of the tournament. More than helping the referees it seemed like it would only embarrass them further.
Too much too soon?
A relatively new addition to the game, VAR has a long way to go for it to be controversy-free. One repeated suggestion by many ex-players was to give the head coaches or the captains a certain number of appeals per game, like in other sports. This would bring in proper transparency to the process and let the ref off the hook for good.
Another aspect that has to be addressed is the manner of communicating the proceedings to the spectators in the stadium, who are in most cases left in the dark throughout the process. The time factor, as mentioned before, also should be considered and the process needs to be quickened.
VAR had been used for the first time in a major FIFA tournament at the Confederations Cup in 2017, after which it was decided that it would be used at the Russia World Cup as well. The 2017-18 European football season saw the Serie A, Bundesliga and the English FA Cup all use VAR, attracting both praise and criticism, but mostly the latter.
With so many glitches and unaddressed issues, was it really worth the risk for FIFA to bring VAR to the sport's biggest stage, in such a hurry? FIFA could have learnt from the English Premier League, which held a vote among the teams. It was decided that VAR would not be used until at least 2019, as the teams were not convinced with the concept. For a World Cup that is already struggling with controversies off the pitch, bringing a half-baked system that is almost sure to attract further furore could turn out to be yet another bad decision by FIFA.