VAR : A Blessing or A Curse

The scene is the 2023/24 Premier League season and Liverpool had just gone 1-0 up against Tottenham through Luis Diaz’ cool finish, or had they? The fans were left fuming after Luis Díaz’s perfectly valid goal was wrongly ruled offside even after a VAR review. The PGMOL later admitted ‘significant human error,’ but by then, the damage was done Liverpool had lost 2-1. It was a moment that reignited the global debate about VAR’s reliability and role in the sport. VAR was introduced to bring balance and fairness to the football world but almost a decade after it was introduced, the fans do not yet have clarity over its involvement in the sport and an argument can be made that there is even more confusion and discontent with refereeing decisions now than there was in pre-VAR times. This begs the question: is it truly the innovation we needed or is it just here to suck the fun and emotion out of the sport?

The Video Assistant Referee(VAR) is a match official in football who assists the referee by reviewing decisions using video footage and providing advice to the referee based on those reviews. This official is there to alert the referee when he/she has made a clear and obvious error and the situations where the VAR is allowed to interfere include Penalty Calls, Goal Reviews, Straight Red card offenses and cases of Mistaken Identity in the awarding of a yellow/red card. This official was introduced to reduce human error and ensure fairness through technology and its introduction was greeted with optimism by fans and players alike, in hope that injustice could be reduced, perhaps even eradicated.

The reality of VAR has however differed from the expectations. When VAR was introduced, fans were told it would make football fairer. But years later, the question still hangs in the air, fairer for who? Earlier this season at Stamford Bridge, Fulham’s teenage forward Josh King thought he’d scored the dream goal, his first in the Premier League, and one that would’ve put his side 1–0 up away to one of England’s giants. Sander Berge slipped a pass through midfield, King beat his man, and coolly slotted past Robert Sánchez. Fulham’s fans erupted. Then came the familiar pause. VAR stepped in and after a lengthy check, referee Rob Jones was told to review the buildup on the monitor. The issue? A brief moment where Rodrigo Muniz appeared to step on Trevoh Chalobah’s foot several seconds before the goal. It was soft and barely noticeable in real time but VAR deemed it enough to warrant intervention. Moments later, the decision came and the goal was disallowed . The cheers turned into disbelief and even the commentators couldn’t agree on what they were seeing.

The backlash was immediate. Fulham boss Marco Silva called the ruling “unbelievable,” and pundits labelled it “the death of common sense.” The PGMOL later admitted that the VAR team had made an error which was that the threshold for “clear and obvious” was never met. But by then, the damage was done. Fulham’s rhythm was gone, their momentum killed, and a young player’s breakout moment erased.

That has been the recurring problem with VAR, it’s not just about being right; it’s about when and how it intervenes. What was meant to reduce human error has become a new layer of human hesitation.. The technology works, but the interpretation doesn’t always. Instead of bringing clarity, VAR tends to add confusion and in moments like Josh King’s, it takes away the spark that makes football feel alive. The game almost feels colder and even robotic now, the raw emotion that has been a huge part of football since time immemorial is now being diluted. Fans no longer celebrate instantly. Players don’t know whether to appeal or play on. Stadiums go silent, waiting for verdicts that sometimes feel more like courtroom rulings than football decisions.

However, despite these flaws, VAR has delivered justice on multiple occasions. In the last round of La Liga matches before the international break, Barcelona played Sevilla and Ronald Araújo unfairly challenged Sevilla’s Isaac Romero in the box and initially, no penalty was given but VAR intervened and after listening to the audio, confirmed Araújo had placed his leg between Romero’s legs in the challenge. The referee then awarded the penalty. In the same week, in a match between Manchester United and Sunderland, a penalty was initially awarded to Sunderland early in the match for a high-foot challenge by Manchester United’s Benjamin Sesko on Trai Hulme. VAR however intervened, reviewed, and overturned the decision because there was no actual contact.

At its core, VAR isn’t flawed because of the technology, it’s flawed because of the humans operating it. The cameras, sensors, and replay systems are accurate and they can show angles, timings, and positions with incredible precision. The issue comes when the people interpreting that data apply the rules inconsistently or over-analyze moments that should remain subjective. For example, what counts as “clear and obvious”? Or how much contact justifies a foul? These aren’t questions technology can answer, they’re human judgments. When referees use VAR too eagerly, pausing every big moment to recheck what the crowd just saw, it disrupts the flow of the match.

At its best, VAR should aim to support football, not suffocate it. The technology was never meant to dominate headlines or dictate the rhythm of the game, it was meant to quietly correct the obvious mistakes that can change matches. The balance lies in how it’s used. Referees should only step in when something is truly clear and potentially game-changing.

Football is also borrowing a page from other sports. Following the rugby and the NFL trend where referees speak directly to the crowd during reviews, explaining what’s being checked and why as well as the result of the check. That transparency defuses tension and builds understanding. The solution is perhaps not to abandon VAR but to refine it, to make it faster, more transparent, and less intrusive. If technology can work with the flow of the game instead of against it, football can get the best of both worlds in terms of fairness and the pure and unfiltered emotions.

VAR has improved accuracy in football, but it still hasn’t earned full trust. For every clear correction it delivers, there’s another call that leaves fans confused or furious. The problem isn’t the technology, it’s how it’s applied. Reviews take too long, communication is poor, and the bar for intervention keeps shifting. Football doesn’t need perfection; it needs consistency and if VAR is to stay, it has to be quicker, clearer, and less intrusive. Until then, it’ll keep dividing opinion and draining emotion from the beautiful game.