There can be no doubt that VAR hasn’t been a very popular addition to the Premier League. I have yet to speak with any football lover who’s admitted they think it’s a good thing. That’s because the use of VAR and how it’s being implemented in the decision-making process leaves a lot to be desired.
I will look at how VAR has affected my club, Leeds United, but will also discuss VAR in the Prem on a slightly wider scale. Hopefully this will help you to understand what I see as the single biggest issue as to why VAR is so bad, and what can be done to improve it, because it badly needs improving.
Just looking at this season, Leeds have already suffered definite injustices at the hands of VAR. In the home game against Wolves there was the incident where the Wolves keeper, Sa, absolutely clattered Kristensen, the Leeds right back, in the Wolves box. Sa had badly misjudged a deep cross and went hurtling out of control into Kristensen who had a chance to head the ball into the unguarded goal. It wasn’t even close, a nailed-on penalty. However, to the bemusement of the Elland Road faithful and the millions watching on TV, the VAR official didn’t even deem the foul worth a second look. It was baffling.
Then, away at Brentford, there were three incidents that all went against Leeds thanks to VAR’s involvement, and lack thereof. Not one, not two, but three incidents where VAR got it wrong. Let’s revisit each incident and see how VAR influenced the game.
BRENTFORD PENALTY
When Leeds’ Sinisterra challenged Brentford’s Toney in the Leeds box and won the ball, the referee waved play on. At first viewing it didn’t seem like a penalty, just one player being stronger than the other. There was no trip, no push or barge, just a good tackle. Then VAR felt it necessary to intervene, and instructed the ref to have a second look on the monitor. Even with the slow-motion replays, it wasn’t an obvious foul, more Toney deciding to be weak in the hope of convincing the ref that he had been fouled.
This is the norm now, players going down at the slightest touch to try and win free kicks or penalties. The Prem actually said that referees were going to be stronger in this regard and allow more robust challenges to try and stop the constant falling over, because it’s nothing more than cheating. Yet VAR didn’t seem to get that memo, or not for this particular incident anyway.
As a side note, watch a women’s rugby league game to better understand what it takes to knock someone over. It’s a darn sight more than the acceptable “contact” in football, that’s for sure.
So, was it a clear and obvious error by the referee? Not at all, but with VAR chattering away in his ear, the ref decided to overturn his on-field decision and award the penalty. It was a game changing moment.
What was so frustrating at this decision was that the VAR protocol is that it has to be a clear and obvious error by the ref, which it wasn’t. There was no brute force or a deliberate attempt to foul Toney, it was simply Sinisterra being stronger and winning the ball. VAR failed miserably at this moment, but was it incompetency? More on this later.
LEEDS NO PENALTY
Then, in the second half, there was another penalty incident, this time at the Brentford end. Summerville used his pace and skill to get past Jensen out on the left and cut inside dangerously. Jensen had a tug at Summerville’s shirt just outside the box, and then proceeded to put his forearm into Summerville’s neck and violently shove him over. Inexplicably, the referee waved play on. Maybe he was applying the “more robust challenges” protocol here, or maybe he simply didn’t have a clear view. Who knows anymore?
The contact was so much more than the Toney incident, yet this time VAR chose not to review it. Clear and obvious error? You bet! Why did VAR not deem a clear foul in the box not worthy of closer inspection? Incompetency? Maybe. To rub salt in, seconds later Leeds were penalised for an invisible foul where there was no trip which resulted in Leeds’ manager, Jesse Marsch, being sent off and subsequently banned and fined.
OFFSIDE! HE’S OFFSIDE!
Now to the third incident, another baffling one. Brentford’s fourth goal came via a long ball up to Toney who glanced it into Koch, the Leeds centre back. The ball squirted infield awkwardly, catching the Leeds defence out of shape and allowing an attacker in a clear offside position a free run at goal. However, the linesman on the far side ruled it out for offside immediately. No hesitation, no hoo-hah, just a clear and confident decision. VAR obviously looked at it, as they do with all goals, and the VAR official decided that Toney had in fact not touched the ball, and therefore the linesman was wrong and the goal should stand. Clear and obvious error by the linesman? No.
There was no way at all that VAR could be absolutely certain that Toney didn’t get a touch, and even with the picture paused at “point of contact” there was no gap between Toney’s head and the ball. Also think about this. Koch’s header could have been badly misdirected because the ball had been glanced by Toney, changing the angle for Koch. You know, thinking through a footballing moment with a bit of football experience.
For VAR to rule Toney hadn’t had a touch was pure guesswork. I can only think that they went with “he probably didn’t get a touch” rather than “I can’t be certain so it has to stay with the linesman’s call”.
VAR isn’t there to make crucial decisions based on balance of probability, it’s supposed to fix clear and obvious errors. This subjective, opinion-based application of the rules is just wrong. It failed miserably to do so on three occasions in this game.
It was enlightening to hear Liam Cooper, the Leeds captain, actually speak about this incident on a recent podcast. Cooper is known for being a gentleman and a leader, and it isn’t like him to speak out about officials or VAR, but he felt he needed to make his point.
Cooper said he was on the side-line with a good view, and according to him, he clearly saw the ball deflect off Toney. His immediate instinct was “That’s offside.” For him there was no question the goal would be ruled out, yet VAR, after looking at all the angles and having no clear indication that Toney didn’t touch the ball, decided to let the goal stand. It was a shocker.
NOT JUST LEEDS
On the same day there were two ludicrous decisions at Chelsea and Toon where VAR made a complete mess of two of the easiest calls you could make. The decision at Chelsea went against West Ham and cost them the game, and Newcastle suffered the same fate. Why? Incompetency? Well, let’s look at the why, because here is where VAR is seemingly badly flawed.
I’m going to come straight out and say what I perceive to be the real problem with VAR. Bias. Yes, it’s perceived as bias, because it really can’t be anything else. Leeds fans will tell you that forever they have felt there’s an institutional bias against their club, and if you look back at decisions that have gone against Leeds, you can understand why there’s this perception.
But I don’t think the perceived bias is just against Leeds, I think it’s more than that. Now, I’m not for one minute suggesting that VAR officials are cheating, but rather there’s a subconscious bias being applied, particularly on 50/50 calls. How can I put this better?
TROUBLING CALL AT TOON
Let’s look at the first potential cause for these awful decisions being made, incompetence. That decision against Newcastle was ludicrous. It was clear that the Toon striker had been shoved in the back, causing him to clatter into the Palace ‘keeper. It wasn’t a foul by the striker, and if VAR felt the accidental coming together had impeded the ‘keeper, then the next decision should have been a penalty to the Toon. Instead, VAR seemed determined to rule against Toon and gave a foul in favour of Palace. Oh dear.
As far as levels of incompetency go, this call was right at the very top of the incompetent list. Surely the FA should demand that when an official is as incompetent as this they are removed from officiating, because they simply can’t be trusted to do the job properly. But no, of course this doesn’t happen, and so the horror show is allowed to go on.
SHAM CALL AT CHELSEA
The call that went against West Ham at Chelsea was also a shambles, a brutally incompetent call that again influenced the outcome of the game. After the public outcry and attention in the media, the higher ups decided to put out a statement that they agreed the calls in the Toon and West Ham games were clearly incorrect, and they would work harder to improve VAR. No mention of the horror-show in the Leeds game though, which meant they felt all three decisions against Leeds were correct. And there you have an example as to why there is a perception that there’s an institutional bias against Leeds.
So if it’s not incompetency, and the FA and Prem clearly don’t feel it is, because the officials making these awful calls are being allowed to carry on, what is the cause of VAR being so bad? Bias, surely it can’t be anything else.
When Toon had a perfectly good goal ruled out, and a clear penalty in the play leading up to the goal being denied them as well, the only reason I could think of was that the official was being subconsciously biased against Toon. Again, I’m not saying he blatantly tried to cheat Toon, but it may have been a subconscious decision influenced by something in his mind. Could his decision have been influenced by the fact that Toon are being bankrolled by the Saudis? It most certainly could be, we’re only human after all. The thing is, only the VAR official will be able to enlighten us on this, but nobody’s asking him.
The West Ham call, if not a case of clear incompetence, could then also only be put down to perceived bias. In this case I would have to think that the perceived bias was in favour of one of the Elite Six clubs. You know, those arrogant clubs who tried to force a breakaway European league at the expense of the game in England, and Europe. There is a perception among football fans that officials favour the Elite Six because the Prem is afraid of upsetting them. It’s just one of those things, and it’s a difficult thing to accept or change. Big club bias will always be perceived to be there, but does it have to be?
REFS CLUB?
If there is perceived bias, as I’ve hopefully shown could very possibly be the case, why is it happening? It’s potentially happening because there is no accountability for officials. And even worse, they then get backed up on Sky on a Monday morning where some retired referee tries to justify the bad calls by trying to confuse us with rubbish.
NEUTRALITY
When we saw VAR in action at the last Euros people commented as to how good it was, and how quickly decisions were made. Same with the Champions League. Why does VAR work so much better in those competitions? Neutral officials, that’s why. The officials are neutral because the competition organisers want to ensure there is no bias. Yes, FIFA and UEFA removed the chance of bias influencing decisions that change games.
IMPROVING VAR
If the Prem officials can’t be neutral, then change the way VAR is being used. If you look at rugby union as a fine example, they use their version of VAR very well, and accurately. The key difference is that the officials are wired for sound, so the audience can hear them talk through their decision-making processes. Everything is clear and concise, no grey areas. The world is listening.
This means that the TV official has to be absolutely clear as to why he recommends overturning an on-field decision, or why he agrees with the referee’s call. It allows him no wiggle room, no “in my opinion” nonsense, because the crowd will be listening in, so he has to be clear with his decision. Remember this as well, the rugby TV official is in a booth in the stadium, so he can feel the atmosphere and have a good sense as to the flow of the game.
VAR in the Prem is currently allowed to practice what is perceived as cowardice, allowing officials to hide away in a shed far away from the ground. Yes, people think it's cowardly for VAR officials to be able to make decisions without us knowing how these decisions were reached. Also, the officials aren’t wired for sound, so we have no idea what instruction the VAR official is giving to the referee. Everyone is left to guess as to how a decision was reached, and that’s why there’s so much frustration and anger at VAR. Rightly so.
The Prem can fix this with immediate effect. No trials, no waiting another season, just fix it now.
Start by moving the VAR officials into the grounds so that they are in touch with the game. It makes such a difference. There is no substitute for having a feel for the flow of a game being played in front of you.
Secondly, and this is critical, wire the officials for sound. When there’s a VAR referral, let’s hear the officials talking through their decision-making process. This will help us to understand how a decision was reached, and more importantly it will also help to educate supporters and players even more. It’s a fantastic tool for the Prem to use, and it will be a game changer in helping to get VAR accepted within the game.
Implement these two simple changes and you will see how quickly VAR improves. Then the perception of bias cannot be thrown at officials anymore, because everyone will understand why certain decisions were reached, even if they don’t like them.
Right now, in its current form, VAR is not fit for purpose. There is too much leeway for subjective decisions to be made, and this allows perceived bias to creep in. You may think I’m being a bit dramatic, but it’s human nature to allow bias to influence subjectivity. You yourself do it when an opponent is denied a blatant penalty against your team by trying to convince yourself it wasn’t a pen. In fact, if you ask Palace fans, they will try and defend that Toon VAR blunder that went in their favour.
That’s how easy it is for subconscious bias to affect decisions when there’s no explanation required from officials, or accountability.
RESPECT THE AUDIENCE
This perceived private referees’ club has to stop, because they have too much influence over games, which in turn affects the livelihoods of people and the survival of clubs. There’s too much at stake for VAR to be allowed to carry on in the dark. It needs to be brought out into the open, as they do with rugby union, to make it more acceptable and to improve its accuracy.
Implement these two simple changes, engage with the supporters, players and managers better by helping them to understand the decision-making process, and see how much VAR improves in a short space of time.
I don’t believe there is cheating by officials in the English game, I never have, but I do feel there is subconscious bias happening. This is exactly why Champions League games and international tournaments have neutral referees, because these games are deemed to be of the highest importance.
Well, Prem games are of the highest importance in England, and it’s time to show these games the respect they deserve by lifting the veil on VAR and enlightening the audience on how decisions are made. Stop protecting the referees, make them more accountable. It’s the right thing to do for the game.
Please do it now, before more games are ruined by anonymous decisions.
I will look at how VAR has affected my club, Leeds United, but will also discuss VAR in the Prem on a slightly wider scale. Hopefully this will help you to understand what I see as the single biggest issue as to why VAR is so bad, and what can be done to improve it, because it badly needs improving.
Just looking at this season, Leeds have already suffered definite injustices at the hands of VAR. In the home game against Wolves there was the incident where the Wolves keeper, Sa, absolutely clattered Kristensen, the Leeds right back, in the Wolves box. Sa had badly misjudged a deep cross and went hurtling out of control into Kristensen who had a chance to head the ball into the unguarded goal. It wasn’t even close, a nailed-on penalty. However, to the bemusement of the Elland Road faithful and the millions watching on TV, the VAR official didn’t even deem the foul worth a second look. It was baffling.
Then, away at Brentford, there were three incidents that all went against Leeds thanks to VAR’s involvement, and lack thereof. Not one, not two, but three incidents where VAR got it wrong. Let’s revisit each incident and see how VAR influenced the game.
BRENTFORD PENALTY
When Leeds’ Sinisterra challenged Brentford’s Toney in the Leeds box and won the ball, the referee waved play on. At first viewing it didn’t seem like a penalty, just one player being stronger than the other. There was no trip, no push or barge, just a good tackle. Then VAR felt it necessary to intervene, and instructed the ref to have a second look on the monitor. Even with the slow-motion replays, it wasn’t an obvious foul, more Toney deciding to be weak in the hope of convincing the ref that he had been fouled.
This is the norm now, players going down at the slightest touch to try and win free kicks or penalties. The Prem actually said that referees were going to be stronger in this regard and allow more robust challenges to try and stop the constant falling over, because it’s nothing more than cheating. Yet VAR didn’t seem to get that memo, or not for this particular incident anyway.
As a side note, watch a women’s rugby league game to better understand what it takes to knock someone over. It’s a darn sight more than the acceptable “contact” in football, that’s for sure.
So, was it a clear and obvious error by the referee? Not at all, but with VAR chattering away in his ear, the ref decided to overturn his on-field decision and award the penalty. It was a game changing moment.
What was so frustrating at this decision was that the VAR protocol is that it has to be a clear and obvious error by the ref, which it wasn’t. There was no brute force or a deliberate attempt to foul Toney, it was simply Sinisterra being stronger and winning the ball. VAR failed miserably at this moment, but was it incompetency? More on this later.
LEEDS NO PENALTY
Then, in the second half, there was another penalty incident, this time at the Brentford end. Summerville used his pace and skill to get past Jensen out on the left and cut inside dangerously. Jensen had a tug at Summerville’s shirt just outside the box, and then proceeded to put his forearm into Summerville’s neck and violently shove him over. Inexplicably, the referee waved play on. Maybe he was applying the “more robust challenges” protocol here, or maybe he simply didn’t have a clear view. Who knows anymore?
The contact was so much more than the Toney incident, yet this time VAR chose not to review it. Clear and obvious error? You bet! Why did VAR not deem a clear foul in the box not worthy of closer inspection? Incompetency? Maybe. To rub salt in, seconds later Leeds were penalised for an invisible foul where there was no trip which resulted in Leeds’ manager, Jesse Marsch, being sent off and subsequently banned and fined.
OFFSIDE! HE’S OFFSIDE!
Now to the third incident, another baffling one. Brentford’s fourth goal came via a long ball up to Toney who glanced it into Koch, the Leeds centre back. The ball squirted infield awkwardly, catching the Leeds defence out of shape and allowing an attacker in a clear offside position a free run at goal. However, the linesman on the far side ruled it out for offside immediately. No hesitation, no hoo-hah, just a clear and confident decision. VAR obviously looked at it, as they do with all goals, and the VAR official decided that Toney had in fact not touched the ball, and therefore the linesman was wrong and the goal should stand. Clear and obvious error by the linesman? No.
There was no way at all that VAR could be absolutely certain that Toney didn’t get a touch, and even with the picture paused at “point of contact” there was no gap between Toney’s head and the ball. Also think about this. Koch’s header could have been badly misdirected because the ball had been glanced by Toney, changing the angle for Koch. You know, thinking through a footballing moment with a bit of football experience.
For VAR to rule Toney hadn’t had a touch was pure guesswork. I can only think that they went with “he probably didn’t get a touch” rather than “I can’t be certain so it has to stay with the linesman’s call”.
VAR isn’t there to make crucial decisions based on balance of probability, it’s supposed to fix clear and obvious errors. This subjective, opinion-based application of the rules is just wrong. It failed miserably to do so on three occasions in this game.
It was enlightening to hear Liam Cooper, the Leeds captain, actually speak about this incident on a recent podcast. Cooper is known for being a gentleman and a leader, and it isn’t like him to speak out about officials or VAR, but he felt he needed to make his point.
Cooper said he was on the side-line with a good view, and according to him, he clearly saw the ball deflect off Toney. His immediate instinct was “That’s offside.” For him there was no question the goal would be ruled out, yet VAR, after looking at all the angles and having no clear indication that Toney didn’t touch the ball, decided to let the goal stand. It was a shocker.
NOT JUST LEEDS
On the same day there were two ludicrous decisions at Chelsea and Toon where VAR made a complete mess of two of the easiest calls you could make. The decision at Chelsea went against West Ham and cost them the game, and Newcastle suffered the same fate. Why? Incompetency? Well, let’s look at the why, because here is where VAR is seemingly badly flawed.
I’m going to come straight out and say what I perceive to be the real problem with VAR. Bias. Yes, it’s perceived as bias, because it really can’t be anything else. Leeds fans will tell you that forever they have felt there’s an institutional bias against their club, and if you look back at decisions that have gone against Leeds, you can understand why there’s this perception.
But I don’t think the perceived bias is just against Leeds, I think it’s more than that. Now, I’m not for one minute suggesting that VAR officials are cheating, but rather there’s a subconscious bias being applied, particularly on 50/50 calls. How can I put this better?
TROUBLING CALL AT TOON
Let’s look at the first potential cause for these awful decisions being made, incompetence. That decision against Newcastle was ludicrous. It was clear that the Toon striker had been shoved in the back, causing him to clatter into the Palace ‘keeper. It wasn’t a foul by the striker, and if VAR felt the accidental coming together had impeded the ‘keeper, then the next decision should have been a penalty to the Toon. Instead, VAR seemed determined to rule against Toon and gave a foul in favour of Palace. Oh dear.
As far as levels of incompetency go, this call was right at the very top of the incompetent list. Surely the FA should demand that when an official is as incompetent as this they are removed from officiating, because they simply can’t be trusted to do the job properly. But no, of course this doesn’t happen, and so the horror show is allowed to go on.
SHAM CALL AT CHELSEA
The call that went against West Ham at Chelsea was also a shambles, a brutally incompetent call that again influenced the outcome of the game. After the public outcry and attention in the media, the higher ups decided to put out a statement that they agreed the calls in the Toon and West Ham games were clearly incorrect, and they would work harder to improve VAR. No mention of the horror-show in the Leeds game though, which meant they felt all three decisions against Leeds were correct. And there you have an example as to why there is a perception that there’s an institutional bias against Leeds.
So if it’s not incompetency, and the FA and Prem clearly don’t feel it is, because the officials making these awful calls are being allowed to carry on, what is the cause of VAR being so bad? Bias, surely it can’t be anything else.
When Toon had a perfectly good goal ruled out, and a clear penalty in the play leading up to the goal being denied them as well, the only reason I could think of was that the official was being subconsciously biased against Toon. Again, I’m not saying he blatantly tried to cheat Toon, but it may have been a subconscious decision influenced by something in his mind. Could his decision have been influenced by the fact that Toon are being bankrolled by the Saudis? It most certainly could be, we’re only human after all. The thing is, only the VAR official will be able to enlighten us on this, but nobody’s asking him.
The West Ham call, if not a case of clear incompetence, could then also only be put down to perceived bias. In this case I would have to think that the perceived bias was in favour of one of the Elite Six clubs. You know, those arrogant clubs who tried to force a breakaway European league at the expense of the game in England, and Europe. There is a perception among football fans that officials favour the Elite Six because the Prem is afraid of upsetting them. It’s just one of those things, and it’s a difficult thing to accept or change. Big club bias will always be perceived to be there, but does it have to be?
REFS CLUB?
If there is perceived bias, as I’ve hopefully shown could very possibly be the case, why is it happening? It’s potentially happening because there is no accountability for officials. And even worse, they then get backed up on Sky on a Monday morning where some retired referee tries to justify the bad calls by trying to confuse us with rubbish.
NEUTRALITY
When we saw VAR in action at the last Euros people commented as to how good it was, and how quickly decisions were made. Same with the Champions League. Why does VAR work so much better in those competitions? Neutral officials, that’s why. The officials are neutral because the competition organisers want to ensure there is no bias. Yes, FIFA and UEFA removed the chance of bias influencing decisions that change games.
IMPROVING VAR
If the Prem officials can’t be neutral, then change the way VAR is being used. If you look at rugby union as a fine example, they use their version of VAR very well, and accurately. The key difference is that the officials are wired for sound, so the audience can hear them talk through their decision-making processes. Everything is clear and concise, no grey areas. The world is listening.
This means that the TV official has to be absolutely clear as to why he recommends overturning an on-field decision, or why he agrees with the referee’s call. It allows him no wiggle room, no “in my opinion” nonsense, because the crowd will be listening in, so he has to be clear with his decision. Remember this as well, the rugby TV official is in a booth in the stadium, so he can feel the atmosphere and have a good sense as to the flow of the game.
VAR in the Prem is currently allowed to practice what is perceived as cowardice, allowing officials to hide away in a shed far away from the ground. Yes, people think it's cowardly for VAR officials to be able to make decisions without us knowing how these decisions were reached. Also, the officials aren’t wired for sound, so we have no idea what instruction the VAR official is giving to the referee. Everyone is left to guess as to how a decision was reached, and that’s why there’s so much frustration and anger at VAR. Rightly so.
The Prem can fix this with immediate effect. No trials, no waiting another season, just fix it now.
Start by moving the VAR officials into the grounds so that they are in touch with the game. It makes such a difference. There is no substitute for having a feel for the flow of a game being played in front of you.
Secondly, and this is critical, wire the officials for sound. When there’s a VAR referral, let’s hear the officials talking through their decision-making process. This will help us to understand how a decision was reached, and more importantly it will also help to educate supporters and players even more. It’s a fantastic tool for the Prem to use, and it will be a game changer in helping to get VAR accepted within the game.
Implement these two simple changes and you will see how quickly VAR improves. Then the perception of bias cannot be thrown at officials anymore, because everyone will understand why certain decisions were reached, even if they don’t like them.
Right now, in its current form, VAR is not fit for purpose. There is too much leeway for subjective decisions to be made, and this allows perceived bias to creep in. You may think I’m being a bit dramatic, but it’s human nature to allow bias to influence subjectivity. You yourself do it when an opponent is denied a blatant penalty against your team by trying to convince yourself it wasn’t a pen. In fact, if you ask Palace fans, they will try and defend that Toon VAR blunder that went in their favour.
That’s how easy it is for subconscious bias to affect decisions when there’s no explanation required from officials, or accountability.
RESPECT THE AUDIENCE
This perceived private referees’ club has to stop, because they have too much influence over games, which in turn affects the livelihoods of people and the survival of clubs. There’s too much at stake for VAR to be allowed to carry on in the dark. It needs to be brought out into the open, as they do with rugby union, to make it more acceptable and to improve its accuracy.
Implement these two simple changes, engage with the supporters, players and managers better by helping them to understand the decision-making process, and see how much VAR improves in a short space of time.
I don’t believe there is cheating by officials in the English game, I never have, but I do feel there is subconscious bias happening. This is exactly why Champions League games and international tournaments have neutral referees, because these games are deemed to be of the highest importance.
Well, Prem games are of the highest importance in England, and it’s time to show these games the respect they deserve by lifting the veil on VAR and enlightening the audience on how decisions are made. Stop protecting the referees, make them more accountable. It’s the right thing to do for the game.
Please do it now, before more games are ruined by anonymous decisions.
Last edited:
the key phrase is clear and obvious error. Sinisterra incident wasnt a penalty or a clear and obvious error because it took 7 minutes with countless camera angles and slow mo and super slow motion to pick up that it could be a penalty. Thats the problem, a jobs-worth remote official decided to stop the game and find something wrong
between FC Deccan and ASC when I needed the home team to score - and they did, only for it to be chalked off 
