The 2018 World Cup showed the benefits of VAR

The argument

Video assistant referees were in use throughout the 2018 World Cup in Russia, and the argument here is that the tournament's record settles the question of whether the technology helps. The headline figures concern accuracy. During the tournament 335 incidents were reviewed using VAR, of which 14 resulted in the referee changing his original decision. That contributed to referees getting 99.3% of decisions correct, up from 95% without VAR. The two numbers together show what the system did: 335 reviews produced only 14 reversals, which means the great majority of the time it confirmed what the referee had already seen, while the reversals closed most of the remaining error rate. The effect was clearest in the penalty area. Twenty-nine penalties were awarded, 22 of them scored — five more than in any previous World Cup — as the system enabled the refereeing team to spot and penalise fouls committed while players jostled for position in the box, along with other infringements. That area of the pitch is the hardest for one official to watch, crowded with players jostling for position. Clear and obvious fouls that had initially been missed were duly punished, including a handball penalty in the final between France and Croatia. Goalline technology, now an established part of the game at the highest level, played the same role in a narrower domain: there was no debate in any match about whether the ball had crossed the line. More correct decisions, more fouls caught in the area where they had been going unseen, and no arguments about goals — on this record the 2018 World Cup showed the benefits of VAR, and technology is good for football.

Context

For the first time at a World Cup, in 2018, VAR (video assistant referee) technology was used. This followed the introduction of goalline technology in 2014, which proved an instant success. Under the VAR system, a referee is alerted by a team of assistants watching the game elsewhere when a decision needs to be reviewed. The referee will then watch the incident on a video screen and either uphold or revise his initial decision.

Premises

Counter-arguments

While referees did make more correct decisions overall, there remains criticism over how the system is used and how decisions are measured. As the system relies on other humans advising the referee, most decisions taken using VAR retain some element of subjectivity. Therefore, the figure of 99.3% correct decisions is not necessarily an acceptable assessment - one person's clear handball may not be the same as another's. Some referees are more lenient than others. Even when VAR was used, some wrong decisions were still made and the system was not used when it should have been on other occasions.

Rejecting the premises

Even with VAR in place, referees and their team of assistants did not catch every single foul, with incidents of players being hauled to the ground in the penalty area being notable examples.