It almost seems inevitable that with every new game week of Premier League football, there will be fresh problems, novel controversy, and a conversation around VAR that, while having new origins, will go over and over that singular, repetitive question – what needs to change?
Countless hosts ask countless pundits for their reactions, and radio telephone lines are jammed with callers all willing to share their hatred of the review system. At times it seems that the whole footballing discussion is reduced to it. This past weekend saw no divergence from this VAR trend – more controversy, more decisions, more of that same query and yet, for how bored of it I am, I don’t blame anyone for asking it.
The more the question is asked, by fans or figures, the greater the issue becomes. By now it is something of a colossus towering ominously over PGMOL (the group in charge of Premier League-refereeing), casting a darkening shadow over the group’s decision-making, organisation, and credibility. The bigger this problem becomes, the more the question is asked, and the bigger the blow the refereeing group receives. In a single season, the collective reputation of Premier League referees seems to have nose-dived from somewhere around ‘generally reliable and consistent’ to ‘couldn’t organise a five-year-old’s football-themed birthday party.
Now, while I do think Mike Dean could probably do a decent job at blowing up balloons and Martin Atkinson would probably be great at mixing up some Thomas-the-tank-engine tunes on the decks, it is clear that PGMOL have struggled with the implementation of VAR.
Their defiant stance in sticking to their guns over its competency despite fans’ unhappiness with the system, when placed alongside the constant reoccurrence of incorrect, messy, or just poorly received decisions, has undermined much of the authority and respect the group once had; along with the trust between them and the general public who no longer believe they will get it right by themselves.
This has all led to where we are now. The questions, suggestions and ridicule are all part of a mass reaction to VAR, a huge metaphorical banner painted with the words ‘change is needed’ pointed directly at PGMOL and its chief Neil Swarbrick. The questions he now has to answer are – what are the problems? And what changes are needed to solve these problems?
Let us place ourselves in Neil Swarbrick’s chair and consider both of these questions. The problems themselves can be nicely summarised into a few categories, all of which were repeated this past weekend, and can be viewed through some of the decisions we saw then. Think of this as a VAR check…of VAR (without the controversy, hopefully).
Wrong decisions continue to be made
The first category we come to almost seems like a joke. How can VAR, a system for reviewing incorrect decisions, get things wrong? Surely, when watching back in slow motion and not within the fast pace of the game, it should be all but too clear what the right decision is. But it is an all too common occurrence and something we saw once, if not twice, during Chelsea vs Manchester United on Monday.
When Harry Maguire and Michy Batshuayi collided in trying to win the ball and fell over each other, Maguire’s foot impacted directly into his opponent’s crotch in a very similar situation to the one that saw Son Heung-min sent off for violent conduct in December.
In the process of falling over, both Son and Maguire directed their upturned foot (and studs) towards the opponent and both incidents were reviewed by VAR – with contrasting results. Son received a straight red, and Maguire received nothing. Frank Lampard was joined by Roy Keane, Gary Neville, and numerous former players and officials in complaining that Maguire should have received a red, a clear consensus that is should have been given, which begs the question as to how this was deemed to not be violent conduct in the review.
Similarly, Kurt Zouma saw his goal ruled out when VAR decided that Cesar Azpilicueta had fouled Fred during the build-up – yet neglected to account for the fact he had been pushed into Fred himself. It was another mistake, in my opinion, a clear one at that, yet despite the numerous re-runs of the clip by VAR it was either not spotted or simply ignored. As to how either of those things could have happened, especially with professional referees at the helm, seems baffling.
Fortunately for Swarbrick, these sorts of ‘mistaken’ decisions have pretty clear solutions. Training that enforces consistency in punishments for such offences and helps referees to spot and act on what is happening is one step that can be taken – but one that may not even be needed. There is a clearer solution, one that referees are already trained to do, that would not cost anything to implement. That solution is pitch-side monitors.
Present at every single one of the 260 Premier League games played this season, pitch-side monitors first became a joke but have now become all but forgotten. Michael Oliver’s unexpected use of one in an FA Cup game in January reminded us all that they existed and simultaneously tricked everyone into thinking their use would become more consistent. Turning this from trick into reality may just be the solution to such mistakes, as the on-field referee can involve themselves in the process with the added input of what they saw on the pitch. Considering the framework for this already exists, it should be as easy as asking officials to do it more often…right?
Slow decisions
There is nothing worse for fans in the stadium than seeing those dreaded words ‘VAR check in progress’. When you see that message on the screen, or hear it over the tannoy, you know you’re in for upwards of three minutes of waiting without explanation, reason, or any information whatsoever other than the broad reason for the check.
At the end of this wait, by which time you’re likely both bored, annoyed, anxious, or a combination of them all, the decision is made and, if you’re lucky, the screen will give you a five-second flash of what exactly was being reviewed.
Wolves’ disallowed goal on Friday certainly falls into this category, as the entirety of the Molineux was left in frustrated suspension as the VAR check on the goal ran on, and on…and on. Eventually, the verdict was reached (and I’ll come to the actual decision later on) but it was not until afterwards that the entirety of the stadium even knew what was being looked at.
Affecting fans actually there more than those watching on TV (who are usually able to see the review in full), the protracted nature of situations like these are actually not so much the fault of the referees themselves. The officials cannot be blamed for wanting to have surety and precision in their eventual ruling considering this is exactly what VAR was introduced for. Some suggestions have circulated on setting a time limit on how long a review can take, but I believe this would be a mistake. A countdown would only create more mistakes, as referees would find themselves under pressure to complete the review before the limit is reached and may be forced to rush things – which would certainly only lead to more mistakes.
The fix is an even more simple one – show the fans what is happening. All but two of the Premier League’s grounds contain large screens and these are used to display a meagre amount of information regarding the check. Why not use these screens to show the entirety of the officials’ review – as is already seen on TV? Giving the fans this information and context would allow them to understand why and what is being reviewed, what the specifics are, and what the likely outcome is. Doing so will also allow them to understand why it is taking so long, once again building a means of communication between the officials and the fans.
Meaningless decisions
Our final category is the one that has the most controversy surrounding it – those decisions that are taken despite the fact they seem to have little to no impact on the game. The Wolves’ decision I talked about earlier falls into this category: the fact that Diogo Jota’s was ever-so-slightly offside in the build-up from a corner eventually had absolutely no bearing on Wily Boly heading in from Conor Coady’s header back into the box.
This label can also be applied to those numerous VAR offsides where attackers are offside by a toe, finger or hair. While they may technically be offside, they will have gained no real advantage from having the tip of their nose marginally in front of the defenders. To rule offside in such a situation is technically following the rules, but seriously lacking in common sense, and these are the sorts of decisions that frustrate fans and players so much.
They are also the hardest to fix. There is (and shouldn’t be) a ‘common sense’ rule or any training on how to apply common sense in games – the only thing that can start to amend such decisions is experience. This will come with time and games, and each situation helps officials to learn how to handle and judge situations, but it cannot be forced. The end of this year will come with its own internal review of VAR at PGMOL, and referees will use the summer to improve on their decision making. With experience, this will improve, and it should be remembered that the frustration we might feel now will only help to improve the system in the future.
That is, to answer the question we’re all asking, what needs to change. Admittedly, I’m no Jon Moss or Andy Madley, I don’t have years of Premier League refereeing experience under my belt. But when the problems we’ve seen with VAR become persistent, and that question begins to be asked, solutions need to be found.
I have found it strange that PGMOL and the Premier League have not acted sooner, considering how much they prioritise viewership and fan satisfaction, and letting the controversy amount to this level reflects poorly on the organisation. But every ask of the question, every new idea, and every conversation, only helps to show these groups that VAR needs to improve. And, once it has, perhaps Mike Dean will have time to focus on the true priorities in life – mastering his balloon-animal skills for his next birthday party.
