The VAR conundrum and questioning human rationality
VAR is a phenomenon. A phenomenon that resembles the transitioning phase that the sport is experiencing. Our world today revolves around technology, and as technology becomes more common, some are more welcome to it than others. The arguments that go on for VAR are the exact same arguments for technology in society. Justice vs Emotion. The FIFA World Cup is truly the greatest sporting event in the world, with 32 teams striving to become the best team in the world. VAR has been a hot topic recently, as there’s been more penalties awarded than any other previous World Cup before, and there’s more stoppages in the games.
As with every World Cup, there has been some questionable referee decisions. Portuguese defender Cedric committed a non-intentional handball in the box and the Paraguayan referee Enrique Cáceres awarded a spot-kick for Iran. However, a day later, an almost identical action was committed by Argentine defender Marcos Rojo, yet after VAR review, Turkish referee Cüneyt Çakır decided to not give a penalty. VAR does not determine everything, the referee does. What people need to realise is that VAR is just a helping hand.
Similar to when a player referral system was implemented into tennis, it was received with controversy. However, as time passed, people started to forget about the cons and started to realise what the referral system brought tennis. This is what people need to do: give VAR time.
The argument for VAR: Justice
Justice. That’s the words that FIFA delegates have used to explain why VAR has been implemented. In 2009, VAR would’ve helped in Chelsea’s Champions League encounter with FC Barcelona. In 1986, VAR would’ve helped reverse Diego Maradona’s “hand of god” goal. In 2014, VAR would’ve helped corrected the clear error that was made by the referee when Arjen Robben dived in the box in the 90th minute against Mexico in the round of 2016. In 2018, VAR would’ve helped reverse the decision to give Spurs a second penalty against Liverpool in the dying moments of the game at Anfield. There’s a clear trend here. The game will continue to change, yet human error always remains the same, and with error comes injustice.
That’s what FIFA is trying to fight. In certain situations, the referee are solely focusing on one thing (usually where the ball is), and not on other things going on around the pitch. However, VAR provides that opportunity, this idea that fouls will be punished no matter where it is. At the time of writing, 22 penalty kicks have been awarded, the highest at any World Cup finals. And while VAR continues to be implemented in almost every game, referees will eventually start getting more decisions right.
A study by Belgian university KU Leuven into 1,000 competitive matches using VAR suggests the system is a success in its broad aims. According to its calculations, the system improves decision accuracy from 93% to 98.8%. Nine per cent of matches were shown to have had a different, and probably fairer, result than would have been the case without VAR. At the moment, VAR is achieving its sole purpose of bringing justice to game, making it more valid.
Recently, the Premier League has stated that it will NOT be using VAR for the 2018–19 season, a decision which has been met with controversy. However, while certain like the Bundesliga and La Liga will be using VAR next season, the Premier League may risk falling further behind in terms of getting decisions right and bringing justice. This could also possibly explain why there are no English referees at this year’s World Cup finals. The absence of VAR not only invites more human error into the game, but it also makes marks the Premier League’s fixedness on not sticking with the status quo until later on.
There’s really not much more to say about the advantages of VAR, apart from the fact that it brings justice and accuracy to the game. Referee decisions have always been a topic of controversy during the World Cup finals, however, such conversations will become less often as the game becomes more and more fixated on justice.
The argument against VAR
But there’s too been flaws with VAR. May’s A-League Grand Final is perhaps the one that will give World Cup organisers the most nightmares. Nine minutes into the showpiece of the Australian domestic season, Melbourne Victory’s James Donachie set up Kostas Barbarouses for the first and, it turns out, only goal of the game. However viewers at home on Fox Sports could clearly see on replays that Donachie was offside in the build-up to the goal. Why hadn’t the VAR team intervened on what seemed a “clear and obvious” error? This isn’t the only incident that VAR has misused, as throughout the World Cup, there has been matches that have sparked VAR controversy.
Group B’s matches between Iran vs Portugal, and Spain vs Morocco was a day highlighted by VAR mistakes, with uncertainty around referee decisions going on throughout the whole game, and the referees not sure when to go to VAR. In Spain’s final group match against Morocco, Gerard Pique made a lunging two-footed tackle with his studs up, yet the referee only gave a yellow card. Pique’s tackle was rough play and improper conduct and even though there was a clear error in the referee’s decision to give Pique only a yellow card, the VAR team failed to alert him of the error he made and perhaps looking at a replay. That’s when VAR is needed. The reversal of the decision could’ve single-handedly determined the outcome of the match, and the same can be said about Serbia’s encounter with Switzerland.
In Serbia’s crucial encounter against Switzerland, Serbia striker Aleksandar Mitrović was seen being grabbed by 2 Swiss defenders as they prevented him from jumping for the ball. Despite the clear rough play going on in the box and even stern recommendation from the VAR team, German referee Felix Brych failed to recognise the wrongdoings in his decision and as a result didn’t listen to the VAR team’s message. This is something that VAR can’t help as this is purely in the hands of the referee. Because Felix Brych didn’t even consider changing his decision, Serbia were robbed of a penalty shout.
This is where VAR can’t help: error of judgement. Maybe all along we thought the issue in the game was referees not having a second look, but in fact it seems that the real issue with decision-making is error of judgement. At the end of the day, everyone is human and as hard as the VAR team can try to reverse a decision, it’s purely down to the referee to make that decision.
A team referral system
In order to avoid more Felix Brych situations, perhaps a team referral system could be implemented.Hockey has a VAR system where each team gets a Video Referral Opportunity. Each team can have 2 reviews for VAR every game and if their review is successful, than they retain their review, but if it’s unsuccessful, they lose their review. This can seriously impact the way the game is played, and it’s mainly for the good.
Imagine Cristiano Ronaldo is through on goal and is tripped, yet the referee doesn’t believe it’s a red card nor a penalty. As a result, the referee can ask Ronaldo if he wants to use his review, and based on that, you would see whether Ronaldo genuinely believes it’s a penalty of not. Not only that, but it would increasing accuracy in the game, speed up the process of decisions, and give extra authority to the referee.
Should this be added, Pique could have been sent off, Cedric’s handball decision could have been reversed, and Mitrović’s foul could have been a penalty.
At the end of the day, VAR will always be a controversial topic, because it really challenges people’s perception of how football should be. However, despite the controversy, VAR has mainly worked for the good. According to BBC Sport, during this World Cup, the accuracy of decision-making by referees changed from 95% to 99.3%. While that isn’t the biggest difference in the world, what the change in accuracy has shown is that VAR is doing it’s job, even though there’s a 0.7% failure rate. As VAR is still very much new, more people will get accustomed to it and referees will become more accurate in their decision making.
“We have always said that VAR doesn’t mean perfection — there could still be the wrong interpretation or a mistake — but I think you would agree that 99.3% is very close to perfection.”- Pierluigi Collina
Don’t forget to clap!
Website: https://medium.com/football-applied
