How Premier League managers would improve VAR

Another week, another flurry of VAR fury.

“Maybe tonight has finally turned me against VAR,” said Wolves manager Gary O’Neil after a controversy-packed defeat to Fulham, reckoning that the video assistant referees sitting at screens in west London had now cost his side seven points this term.

Over in Paris two days later, Newcastle United were thwarted in stoppage time when referee Szymon Marciniak — called to the monitor — punished Tino Livramento for handball in a decision former striker Alan Shearer labelled “disgusting”.

A venting Mikel Arteta branded the call to award Anthony Gordon’s recent goal for Newcastle United against his side as a “disgrace”, coming hot on the heels of Liverpool’s Jurgen Klopp suggesting his side should have a replay after a VAR gaffe against Tottenham Hotspur saw a Luis Diaz goal wrongly ruled offside.

Each contentious or botched decision brings enraged bosses, frothing pundits and frantic social media takes, but what would the managers themselves actually change about the system and its implementation if they could?

The Athletic asked them.

GO DEEPER

What the laws say about VAR's most controversial issues

‘More responsibility for refs… what’s the point of the screen?’

Newcastle boss Eddie Howe — who reckons “any football fan, unless you’re from the PSG perspective” would have disputed the Livramento penalty — wants referees to rule with more conviction.

“If the referee makes a decision and he is taken by the VAR to look at the screen, I’d love the referee to keep more from his perspective, rather than be told what to give,” Howe said. “What’s the point in going over to the screen? You know the result as soon as he goes over. Now, 99 per cent of referees go with the VAR decision, rather than their own opinion.

“He’s looking at the screen and I’m thinking, ‘Please be strong enough to go with your initial decision, to go with your opinion, not that of someone who is not at the game’. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen for us, but that would be a positive change for VAR. There have been minimal occasions when a referee has been sent to the screen and backed his original call. I’d like to see that more.”

Livramento was punished for this handball (Getty Images)

Howe also wants more clarity on the handball rule, and would prefer to stick with technology that removes or minimises “subjectivity”.

“The handball law is vague and that’s probably been the biggest problem,” he added. “I would struggle to tell you what is and what isn’t handball at the moment.

“Looking at the incident again in the cold light of day with no emotion, the referee on the pitch has made the right decision, so he’s given no penalty, and then he’s been told that the VAR thinks it is a penalty. The on-field decision should be given a little bit more strength. The referee is there, he’s feeling the game, he’s managing the game in the middle, and that is worth something.

“I don’t have an issue with offsides; the lines give you a black and white yes or no. The rest, I’m not in favour. It’s another person’s opinion against another person’s opinion. It’s very subjective.”

Fulham’s Marco Silva agrees, saying: “We have to help the referees, but also give them responsibility to take decisions.”

On attempting to minimise delays, he added: “What everybody wants in football is to try to be as assertive as possible. I would like to see quicker decisions, for the emotions of the game. Not one, two, three minutes.”

‘If one more person says VAR doesn’t re-referee, I’ll explode, mate…’

Tottenham’s Ange Postecoglou warned that the VAR system was “eroding” match officials’ authority after a recent chaotic 4-1 defeat to Chelsea, and reiterated that view when asked by The Athletic where he feels any improvement drive should focus.

“If I hear one person say that it doesn’t re-referee a game, I’ll explode, mate, because that’s exactly what it’s doing,” Postecoglou said at his press conference on Friday.

“It was brought in for ‘clear and obvious’, right? A clear and obvious error would be if all of us in this room see something and go, ‘That’s definitely wrong’.

“If you’ve got to look at something from seven different angles, slow it down to the minute, that’s not a clear and obvious error, that’s re-refereeing the game.

“It’s why the goal-line technology was so seamless. It was black and white, it’s done. Over the line, not over the line, move on.”

‘Expert’ VARs rather than referees?

Aggrieved Wolves boss O’Neil instead thinks the VAR should have more responsibility.

“Things move so fast and your view is always restricted. You can never, ever see exactly what’s happened,” he said. “But with my laptop, I can see exactly what’s happened, I can check again and I can change the view. So putting more responsibility on the VAR is the best way to get the correct decision.

“That may open up different things around whether we really want someone to re-referee the game and whether we want it to take so long.

“But if you want to get more decisions correct, it’s the guy sat in the hub with the slow motions who will get more correct than the guy stood there with everything moving very quickly on the field.”

Nottingham Forest manager Steve Cooper suggests that the role of VARs should be a specialist one.

“When match officials go up the pyramid, they have to choose between being a referee or a linesman,” said Cooper. “They have to decide which path they want to follow.

“Now there is the VAR path as well. Do we need to create expert VAR officials, who do the job permanently, rather than getting regular referees to do it? I am not sure they enjoy doing it, referees. Perhaps if there was a third path for match officials to go down, it might help.

“It would also be great if VAR just dealt with the factual stuff — whether the ball has gone over the line or whether somebody is offside. The automated approach seemed to be a better process at the World Cup.”

A VAR station at Stockley Park in west London (Chris Radburn/PA via Getty Images)

Make ‘clear and obvious’ more… clear and obvious?

Manchester United boss Erik ten Hag agrees with Postecoglou, saying: “VAR has to be clear and obvious.”

The Premier League says that a clear and obvious error is identified and can prompt a decision to be overturned “if the evidence provided by the broadcast footage does not accord with what the referee believes they have seen”, but Everton manager Sean Dyche says he remains baffled by the buzzphrase that accompanied the introduction of VAR to the Premier League in 2019.

“The referee stands there listening then gives exactly what he has been told,” Dyche said after John Brooks awarded Manchester United a penalty last weekend following a VAR-prompted pitchside review. “The referee made a very strong decision and the power is taken away. I will ring and ask: ‘Can you explain to me again what is a clear and obvious error?’.”

Klopp has agrees that “clear and obvious” is “not the right wording”. “It is a hiding corner,” he said, fearing that the VAR “thinks he might embarrass the referee with his decision”.

Brentford’s Thomas Frank cut a philosophical figure when asked for his verdict.

“The problem is some of the situations are grey areas,” he said. “No matter what we do, everybody makes mistakes. It’s just how can we be as consistent as possible.”

GO DEEPER

A cure for VAR woes - give managers three challenges per game

Your views: Majority say game is now worse

We asked you, The Athletic subscribers, this month for your thoughts on the VAR system and how it might be improved.

Respondents to our survey were largely split on whether or not football should stick with VARs. Just over half (52 per cent) said it should stay but almost two-thirds (64 per cent) said they felt the game was now worse.

More clarity around the decision-making process emerged as a key area for improvement. Survey respondents said they were keen on having referees mic’d up, decisions explained live and on-screen replays.

Who decides any VAR changes?

Football’s lawmaker, the International Football Association Board (IFAB), formalises VAR protocols and any changes in how they are implemented.

Any proposed amendments will be considered for approval at the IFAB’s annual general meeting (AGM) in Glasgow on March 2, 2024, and potentially incorporated into the laws of the game from July 1.

IFAB members were updated on a FIFA-led VAR review at its annual business meeting (ABM) — a precursor to the AGM — and though the potential for VAR to check free kicks and corners arose after feedback collated for that review, they are keen to stick to an original principle of “minimum interference” and agreed at their ABM that any new measures should not result in additional delays.

Semi-automated offside technology — used at the the men’s and women’s World Cups, as well as in the Champions League and Serie A — will continue to be developed, with potential for wider implementation next season. The Premier League is still considering its potential use amid behind-the-scenes testing.

(Top photo: Getty Images)

ncG1vNJzZmismJqutbTLnquim16YvK57lGpnanFiaHxzfJFsZmpqX2V%2FcMLAq2SmmZ6WtKa%2B0manq52dnrKzecuemKCtlWKwqa3NoJxo