In Defence of VAR: A Good System Being Used Badly

It has been everyone's bane in the footballing world this season. It has been responsible for chalking off some very good goals. It could only be VAR. However, despite all the negativity, VAR is actually a force for good, but is being used in the wrong way. So, with that in mind, this article will look to defend the video system, but also say how it can be improved, for everyone's sake.

Firstly, the two major rules introduced at the start of this season in conjunction with VAR were that any handball whatsoever, whether it was accidental or on purpose, that led to a goal, would be counted as handball and a free kick to the other side. The other was that offsides would no longer be down to just the judgement of the linesmen, Instead, linesmen were encouraged to keep their flags down if they weren't sure about an offside, and let VAR deal with it instead.

So having said that these are the two roles that are causing the most issue, let's look at the positives of them. For the handball rule, it does ensure that goals that would have previously been given when referees hadn't seen a handball before it, are now chalked out. That is good, because it means we now only have goals that are legal, or at least a lot more that we did have. Positives for the offside are that, because we now have the ability to go back and look at possible offsides now, there are no "was it or wasn't it" situations afterwards - the player either is or isn't. The other thing about having VAR is that we can know fairly quickly, except this is one of the problems with the way it is currently being used.

Onto the negatives, and here it gets interesting. The handball rule should never have been introduced, because it means players now get penalised for every time the ball nudges their wrists, and sometimes you just can't get out of the way quick enough - that's human nature and, while our reflexes are good, they aren't that good. That is something most people agree with. When it comes to the offside rule, and this is going to sound slightly ridiculous, but sometimes the VAR replays are just too precise. We all want to stop goals being scored from offside positions, and we all remember goals in seasons past where you look afterwards and the players are offside. But now players can be offside by a toenail, and that just doesn't seem fair.

So how can we be moaning previously about goals being scored from offside positions, and now moaning that goals are being chalked off for being offside, and the technology brought in to do so being too precise? Well, that is a difficult one to answer. Firstly, though, the lines on the VAR replays might look like they are helping, but the simple fact of the matter is that they aren't. In the opinion of most football fans, pundits and writers, they should be scrapped. But how should they be replaced, as obviously we need something to help us see whether a player is offside, don't we?

Well, actually, do we? Taking a look at rugby union's TMO (Television Match Official) system for a moment, they don't use lines or anything - just simple slow-motion replays. It is possible that this could be what is implemented into football's version, and that would already be a huge improvement on the current ways of working that we have at the moment.

But we can go even further than that. For a start, VAR checks need to be massively sped up. One of the things that we were told was that if something wasn't clear and obviously wrong, VAR wouldn't get involved. So that meant that if an offside wasn't obvious, play would be allowed to carry on and goals would stand. This is perhaps a way that we can stop people being offside for toenails, and still have goals that are scored or not scored with correct decisions.

Another way of improving it is to allow the on-field referee to have the final decision. They should be the one driving the conversation, and saying to the VAR official what they see, not the other way around. At the end of the day, the referee in the middle is the chief official of each match, but at the moment it seems that they are being told what to do. This idea of referees making the decisions does not mean monitors on the sidelines, although these are a good start, but to actually show the footage on the big screens in the stadiums - again, like rugby union. We have now seen the first time that a referee has used a monitor to make a decision, with Paul Tierney upgrading Norwich defender Ben Godfrey's yellow card to a red card following a look at the incident again - this is, as I say, a good start.

We should also be able to hear what the referee is saying, so we can hear the workings out of the VAR official and on-pitch official, and then at least if they are taking a long time reaching a decision, we will know why. Rugby TMO works, and fans have accepted that it is a part of the game - and when football brought VAR in, I thought it would take time but it would eventually be the same. However, until we get to that day (or, more to the point, if), referees going to monitors on the sidelines to view the replays themselves is a good step on the way to a much better usage of VAR.

If these ideas are perhaps implemented to some degree, then football might once again become an enjoyable sport to watch, and fans might be able to celebrate goals when they are actually scored once again. VAR would also benefit, because if fans can see the footage themselves, but the slow-motion replays, not the lines that have been so heavily criticised, then they might understand the workings out as well. So whilst I personally am in favour of VAR as a concept, I don't like it in its current format. However, with these changes, it can become a force for good, and will begin to aid rather than to hinder the sport.