VAR has never been an easy companion for English football. The Premier League was the last of Europe's major leagues to adopt it in 2019-20, and it has never been accepted. He never understood what VAR wants to be and we are left with a hybrid model that does not satisfy anyone.
A step forward Wolverhampton Wanderers, who on Wednesday became the first club to raise their heads above the parapet and ask for VAR to be eliminated for next season.
– Stream on ESPN+: LaLiga, Bundesliga, more (US)
Premier League clubs will vote on the motion when they meet at their annual general meeting in Harrogate on June 6. The Wolves resolution is unlikely to get the 14 votes it needs to pass – although it wouldn't be a surprise if Nottingham Forest were one of the clubs to support it given their recent outbursts – but it will at least provide an opportunity to reflect and reset. .
Clubs that regularly participate in European competitions are unlikely to break ranks with football in general. Despite all of Mikel Arteta's complaints earlier this season, the Arsenal manager has regularly spoken of his desire to work with Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL). ESPN is aware of at least two other clubs outside the Big Six who will not vote in favor.
Clubs have invested huge sums of money to introduce the semi-automatic offside VAR (SAOT) system next season (it was approved by vote last month) and that would also have to be scrapped. They have also invested huge resources in the VAR center at Stockley Park. Money alone shouldn't be the reason VAR is staying, but this investment clearly wasn't made for one season, especially SAOT, which involves a contract with a new technology partner. Clubs cannot eliminate VAR and still implement SAOT.
Over the five seasons of VAR, when all decisions for and against are counted, the Wolves have a net score of -17 (15 decisions for, 32 against). The second worst score is held by Arsenal, which has a distant -7. Of the 13 clubs that played in the top flight during that time period, only two others have negative VAR scores: Tottenham (minus-3) and West Ham (minus-5).
This is not to denigrate Wolves' stance, but it does explain why they, of all clubs, would be the ones to make this move.
The Independent Key Match Incident Panel has recorded three VAR errors against Wolves this season, but that shows only part of the picture of their frustration. They have had a catalog of other decisions they have not agreed with, notably a handball penalty awarded on the field to Luton Town and a late equalizer ruled out by VAR for offside against West Ham United.
It was the goal against West Ham that led manager Gary O'Neil to confront referee Tony Harrington afterwards, resulting in a Football Association charge and a one-match touchline suspension. In the following days, Wolves president Jeff Shi issued a statement that gave an indication of what was to come.
“When a goal is scored and no one inside the stadium questions the validity of that goal, including the players, the coaches, the fans and even the match officials themselves, it is time to ask whether someone remotely disallowing that goal is really what does football want or need,” Shi said. “We sincerely hope that the Premier League and PGMOL recognize the importance of addressing these concerns to uphold the integrity of the competition and demonstrate why the Premier League is considered the best in the world.”
Shi's words will ring true for many fans. The refusal of FIFA and the International Football Association Board to allow VAR to develop naturally has caused stagnation and frustration, and has exacerbated all the problems it faces in its efforts to be accepted in football. Meanwhile, the Premier League is so determined to protect its own product that it has introduced a VAR system that has caused more harm than good.
Few will argue with the points raised in the Wolves' statement. This is especially true for fans attending matches, and if clubs surveyed their subscribers, VAR would almost certainly disappear. Statistics may show that decisions are now 96% correct, up from 82%, but fans feel that 14% is even more.
The way the fan experience has not evolved in the seven years since VAR came in has been a remarkable display of stubbornness from those at the top. The Wolves' proposal comes as there are finally changes afoot that could improve that. Still, the fact that referees are allowed to announce VAR decisions to the crowd is just one example of that.
The Premier League, which is firmly against Wolves' proposal, has its own doubts. He has been so afraid of damaging the physical and fast pace of the game that he has created a VAR system that is neither one thing nor the other.
The PGMOL takes most of the criticism for this (and the blame is limited to the officiating standards). But it is the Premier League that decides how it wants the match to be played: from voting on the use of VAR, on SAOT and how it wants the matches to be refereed. The PGMOL is in effect the service provider; The Premier League sets the parameters.
The Premier League is desperate to ensure VAR does not become too involved and fears its winning model will be undermined. The hands-off approach gives the impression that controversial decisions are not even examined. It invites the feelings of injustice that the wolves clearly feel. Statistics may show that VAR errors have decreased by 23.68% year on year, but that is irrelevant if fans and clubs feel it is going in the opposite direction.
Wolves complained about the “overreaching of VAR's original purpose of correcting clear and obvious errors”, but in the Premier League at least, there has been a push for VAR to return to that ethos. It is simply being done incorrectly.
Of the 29 VAR errors recorded this season, 24 are failed interventions. The referees are paralyzed by an instruction to send referees to the monitor only if it matches the high bar, an intervention point that cannot be measured and is itself subjective. It gives a feeling of inaction, that the VARs deliberately avoid sending referees to the monitor. And when they do, you can be almost sure it will change.
For the perception of VAR to improve, the Premier League must adopt the way it was meant to work. Referees need to have more control and make more decisions on the most controversial calls, and that means we need to see more referees being sent to the screen and following through on their decisions. Would Liverpool fans be more accepting of the decision not to award a penalty for Jérémy Doku's tackle on Alexis Mac Allister if referee Michael Oliver had confirmed his on-field call on the monitor?
The Premier League board may not like to hear that, but it is a key reason why trust, as Wolves say, has been eroded. We're not talking about a huge number of extra stoppages, just that most of those 24 errors could be avoided with a more relaxed approach, and there could be greater acceptance from fans and clubs if some controversial decisions are approved by the referee .
In fact, the worst decisions against Wolves this season came about because VAR didn't intervene (remember, the decision to disallow that goal against West Ham was the right decision).
On the first weekend of the season they should have received a penalty against Manchester United, but the VAR supported the referees on the field. Newcastle United and Sheffield United were given on-field penalties that should have been overturned. These are implementation issues, rather than the VAR itself.
That is not to say that this will solve all the problems of VAR. That is impossible with this system. Fifa's narrow view of the protocol it began drafting 10 years ago has stifled any development and means we remain in a fog of “clarity and obviousness” where every goal could be disallowed.
But perhaps if the Premier League started operating VAR closer to other leagues, rather than trying to reinvent the intent of the monitor, things could start to improve.
At least the Wolves could have started the conversation.
