VAR has never been a good fit for English football. The Premier League was the last of Europe’s major leagues to adopt it in 2019-20, and it has yet to be accepted. It hasn’t decided what it wants VAR to be, so we’re left with a hybrid model that no one can agree on.
On Wednesday, Wolverhampton Wanderers became the first club to publicly advocate for the removal of VAR from the upcoming season.
Premier League clubs will vote on the motion during their annual general meeting in Harrogate on June 6. Although Wolves’ resolution is unlikely to pass with 14 votes, Nottingham Forest may support it given their recent outbursts. This will provide an opportunity for reflection and reset.
Clubs that compete in European competition on a regular basis are unlikely to deviate from the norm. Despite earlier season complaints, Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta has expressed a desire to work with Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL). ESPN is aware of at least two other clubs outside of the Big Six that will not vote in favor.
The clubs invested heavily in implementing semi-automated offside (SAOT) VAR for the upcoming season, which was only approved last month. However, this would also need to be scrapped. In addition, they have invested heavily in the VAR hub in Stockley Park. Money should not be the only reason VAR stays, but this investment was clearly made for more than one season, particularly SAOT, which includes a contract with a new technology partner. Clubs cannot drop VAR while still implementing SAOT.
Wolves have a net score of minus-17 over the five seasons of VAR (15 decisions for, 32 against). Arsenal has the second-worst score, at minus-7. Only two of the 13 clubs that have played in the top flight during that time span have a negative VAR score: Tottenham (minus-3) and West Ham (minus-5).
This is not intended to disparage Wolves’ stance, but it does explain why they, of all clubs, would make this decision.
The Independent Key Match Incidents Panel has logged three VAR errors against Wolves this season, but that only scratches the surface of their frustration. The club has disagreed with several decisions, including a handball penalty awarded to Luton Town and a late equalizer disallowed by VAR for offside against West Ham United, which were both correct.
Following the goal against West Ham, manager Gary O’Neil confronted referee Tony Harrington, resulting in a Football Association charge and a one-match touchline ban. In the days that followed, Wolves chairman Jeff Shi released a statement that hinted at what was to come.
When a goal is scored and no one inside the stadium questions its validity, including both sets of players, coaches, fans, and even the match officials themselves, it’s time to consider whether someone remotely disallowing that goal is truly what football wants or needs,” Shi said. “It is our sincere hope that the Premier League and PGMOL recognise the importance of addressing these concerns to uphold the integrity of the competition and demonstrate why the Premier League is regarded as the best in the world.”
Shi’s words will ring true with many fans. The refusal of FIFA and the International Football Association Board to allow VAR to develop naturally has resulted in stagnation and frustration, exacerbating every issue it faces in its efforts to gain acceptance in football. Meanwhile, the Premier League is so determined to protect its own product that it implemented a VAR system that has caused more harm than good.
Few will argue with Wolves’ statement. That’s especially true for match-going fans, and if the clubs polled their season-ticket holders, VAR would almost certainly be eliminated. Although the statistics show that decisions are now 96% correct, up from 82%, fans believe that some of those 14% are incorrect.
How the supporter experience hasn’t improved in the seven years since VAR was implemented is a remarkable display of stubbornness from those at the top. Wolves’ proposal comes at a time when changes are underway that could improve the situation. However, allowing referees to announce VAR decisions to crowds only goes so far.
The Premier League, which is staunchly opposed to Wolves’ proposal, has its own set of questions. It was so afraid of destroying the game’s fast-paced, physical nature that it designed a VAR system that is neither one thing nor the other.
The PGMOL has received the majority of the criticism for this (and the responsibility for refereeing standards lies with them). However, the Premier League decides how the game should be played, including voting on whether to use VAR, SAOT, and how games should be refereed. The PGMOL is effectively the service provider, while the Premier League sets the parameters.
The Premier League is desperate to ensure that VAR does not become overly involved, for fear of undermining its winning model. The hands-off approach creates the impression that controversial decisions are not even considered. It invites the injustice that Wolves experience. The statistics may show that VAR errors have decreased by 23.68% year on year, but this is meaningless if fans and clubs believe the opposite.
Wolves complained about the “overreach of VAR’s original purpose to correct clear and obvious mistakes,” but at least in the Premier League, there is a push to return VAR to that ethos. It’s simply being done in the wrong way.
Of the 29 VAR errors recorded this season, 24 are missed interventions. Referees are hamstrung by an instruction to only send referees to the monitor if they meet the high bar, an intervention point that cannot be measured and is inherently subjective. It creates the impression that VARs are avoiding sending referees to the monitor on purpose. When they do, you can almost guarantee that the decision will be altered.
To improve perceptions of VAR, the Premier League must embrace how it was intended to work. Referees need to have more control and make more decisions on the most contentious decisions, which means sending more referees to the screen and, at times, sticking with their initial view. Would Liverpool fans accept the decision not to award a penalty for Jérémy Doku’s challenge on Alexis MacAllister if referee Michael Oliver confirmed his on-field call on the monitor?
The Premier League board may not like hearing it, but it is a major reason why trust, as Wolves put it, has eroded. We’re not talking about a large number of extra stoppages; rather, the majority of those 24 errors could be avoided with a more relaxed approach, and supporters and clubs might be more accepting if the referee rubber-stamps a few controversial decisions.
Indeed, the worst decisions against Wolves this season occurred because the VAR did not intervene (remember, disallowing that goal against West Ham was the correct decision).
Wolves missed a penalty against Manchester United on the first weekend of the season, but VAR ruled in favor of the officials.Newcastle United and Sheffield United received erroneous penalties on the field. These are implementation issues, not VAR itself.
That is not to say that this will resolve all of VAR’s issues. That is impossible with this system. FIFA’s tunnel vision regarding the protocol it first started putting together ten years ago has stifled any progress, leaving us in a fog of “clear and obvious” where every goal could be disallowed.
However, if the Premier League began to operate VAR in a manner similar to other leagues, rather than attempting to reinvent the monitor’s intention, things might begin to improve.
Wolves might have started the conversation.
GET MORE NEWS HERE