Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Video assistant referee

Video assistant referee (VAR) is a match official protocol in whereby a video assistant referee, supported by assistant video assistant referees, reviews video footage to assist the on-field solely for clear and obvious errors or serious missed incidents in four key areas: goals and whether they should be awarded or disallowed, penalty decisions, direct events, and cases of mistaken identity. The system, formalized by the (IFAB) in 2018 laws of the game, limits interventions to maintain referee while aiming to enhance decision accuracy through technological review. First trialed in non-competitive and lower-stakes matches around 2012-2016, VAR entered competitive use in leagues such as the Dutch Eredivisie and Australian A-League before its high-profile debut at the , where it overturned decisions in notable instances like a disallowed goal in the versus Australia opener. Empirical analyses indicate VAR has empirically raised refereeing accuracy rates from pre-implementation baselines of 82-92% to 96-98% across major competitions, reducing critical errors in reviewed incidents. Despite these gains, VAR has sparked persistent controversies over its causal effects on game dynamics, including extended stoppages averaging additional minutes per match, heightened issuance of disciplinary cards post-intervention, and debates on whether "clear and obvious" thresholds introduce new subjective biases that undermine real-time flow and fan engagement. Ongoing refinements, such as semi-automated offside technology integrations, seek to mitigate delays, though data reveals mixed outcomes on overall match performance variables like possession and shots.

Definition and Principles

Core Concept and Role

The Video Assistant Referee () serves as an off-field match official equipped with access to multiple camera angles and video replays to support the on-field 's decision-making in . This system, governed by protocols established by the (IFAB), limits intervention to rectifying clear and obvious errors or addressing serious missed incidents within four defined reviewable categories: incidents involving goals (including preceding offences), penalties, direct red cards, and of players. The VAR team, typically comprising the VAR and two assistant VARs (), communicates potential issues to the referee via a private audio link, ensuring that only factual corrections—rather than subjective reinterpretations—are proposed. Central to the VAR's role is the principle of minimum interference, maximum benefit, which prioritizes preserving the game's natural flow while enhancing decision accuracy on high-stakes calls that could alter match outcomes. Interventions occur only after the referee's initial on-field decision, with the VAR prompted to review footage if a reviewable error is suspected; however, the referee retains ultimate authority, either accepting the VAR's recommendation or conducting an on-field review (OFR) by viewing the replay on a pitchside monitor. This structure aims to mitigate in real-time officiating, where unaided perception limits—such as obscured views or rapid action—can lead to inaccuracies, without supplanting the 's judgment on matters like subjective fouls outside the protocol's scope. Empirical evaluations of VAR implementation, including trials preceding its debut, indicate it reduces critical errors in targeted incidents by up to 95% in controlled settings, though its effectiveness depends on consistent application of the "clear and obvious" to avoid over-correction. The system's design reflects a causal focus on verifiable evidence from synchronized footage, countering optical illusions or positional biases inherent in live observation, yet it does not extend to non-reviewable elements like indirect free kicks or yellow cards unless tied to the core categories.

Objectives and Decision-Making Protocols

The primary objective of the video assistant (VAR) system is to assist the on-field in correcting clear and obvious errors or identifying serious missed incidents within specific match-changing situations, thereby enhancing the accuracy of final decisions without supplanting the 's authority. This intervention is strictly limited to ensure that VAR supports rather than disrupts the game's flow, prioritizing factual verification over subjective reinterpretation of routine calls. Guiding principles include minimum interference, whereby VAR intervenes only when a clear and obvious error is evident, respecting the referee's initial on-field decision unless it demonstrably deviates from the Laws of the Game. Another core tenet is accuracy over speed, with no imposed time limits on reviews to allow thorough examination of footage, though prolonged delays are avoided to maintain game momentum. The referee retains ultimate decision-making authority, receiving recommendations from the VAR team but finalizing outcomes independently, often after an on-field review (OFR) at a pitchside if deemed necessary. VAR reviews apply exclusively to four categories of incidents:
  • Goal/no goal decisions, including any offences or offside positions leading to the goal;
  • Penalty/no penalty decisions, encompassing related offences;
  • Direct red card incidents (excluding second yellow cards);
  • Mistaken identity, such as incorrectly cautioning or sending off the wrong player.
The decision-making protocol begins with an automatic, silent check by the VAR of all potentially reviewable incidents using multiple camera angles and replays. If a clear error or serious miss is identified, the VAR communicates factual observations—such as positioning or contact details—to the referee via a dedicated protocol, recommending a review without dictating the outcome. The referee then decides whether to maintain the original call, accept the VAR's input directly, or initiate an OFR, where they view selected footage in a designated review area while remaining visible to stadium audiences. The assistant VAR (AVAR) supports by cross-checking and may assist in communication, but post-review, the referee announces the final decision, potentially adjusting disciplinary sanctions if new evidence warrants it, provided play has not restarted. Reviews cannot be triggered by players or coaches, and certain decisions become non-reviewable once play resumes, except in cases of mistaken identity or specific serious fouls like violent conduct.

Technical Implementation

Review Procedures and Check Categories

The video assistant referee (VAR) system employs a structured governed by the (IFAB), emphasizing minimum interference-maximum benefit to correct only clear and obvious errors or serious missed incidents without unduly disrupting . This principle requires the on-field to make an initial decision based on real-time observation, with VAR intervention limited to specific match-altering situations; the referee retains sole authority to initiate any review, accepting or rejecting VAR recommendations. Reviews prioritize accuracy over speed, with no fixed time limits, though play is stopped only when necessary in neutral zones to facilitate assessment. VAR conducts an automatic check—a preliminary inspection—of all incidents falling within defined categories using multiple camera angles and synchronized replays, remaining silent unless a potential error is identified. The four primary reviewable categories are:
  • Goal/no goal: Including preceding incidents such as fouls, offside positions, out of play, or encroachment by non-participating .
  • Penalty/no penalty: Encompassing the location of offenses (inside/outside the ), , fouls, and movement or encroachment.
  • Direct red card: Covering violent conduct, serious foul play, or denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (DOGSO), but excluding decisions based on a second .
  • Mistaken identity: Correcting sanctions applied to the wrong player, applicable to both s and cautions.
Upon detecting a potential issue during a check, the communicates findings to the via headset, recommending an on-field review (OFR) for subjective judgments (e.g., foul severity) or a VAR-only review for factual determinations (e.g., offside positioning or offense location). In an OFR, the views footage at a designated pitchside , often after verifying the attacking possession phase, and must publicly signal the review process to maintain . VAR-only reviews allow the to overturn decisions remotely without monitor consultation if evidence is conclusive, ensuring the original call stands absent unequivocal proof of error. No reviews occur post-restart except for or certain sending-off offenses, and players or coaches cannot demand checks, with violations potentially incurring cautions.

Equipment, Camera Systems, and Operational Setup

The Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system employs two primary configurations certified by : full VAR setups, which support at least four cameras with no upper limit, and VAR Light systems, restricted to a maximum of eight cameras for cost-effective implementation in lower-tier or resource-limited environments. Full VAR requires dedicated positions for a replay operator (RO) to handle footage synchronization, whereas VAR Light relies on the VAR performing this function without a separate RO, necessitating additional training for operators. Camera systems utilize high-definition feeds from multiple angles around the , integrated with broadcast signals for comprehensive coverage; slow-motion replay is mandatory for factual assessments like contact points, while normal speed suffices for evaluating subjective elements such as foul intensity. In high-profile events like the , setups expanded to 42 broadcast cameras, including eight super slow-motion and four ultra slow-motion units, supplemented by semi-automated offside technology feeds. Operational setup occurs in a secure Video Operation Room (VOR), typically located near or within the for full VAR or in a neutral site for VAR Light, housing the , one or more assistant s (AVARs), and ROs as needed. The maintains independent access to replay controls for footage, connected via the match officials' communication system, which uses button-activated audio links to the on-field to minimize disruptions. AVARs support by monitoring live play, offside positions, or field events; for example, in the 2022 World Cup VOR, AVAR1 tracked the main camera feed, AVAR2 handled offside checks via specialized stations, and AVAR3 coordinated replays with three ROs. Monitoring equipment includes upper screens for primary live feeds and quad-split displays for multi-angle incident reviews, ensuring the team can isolate and analyze potential errors in goals, penalties, direct red cards, or mistaken identity without time constraints, prioritizing accuracy. For on-field reviews, the accesses a pitchside monitor displaying VAR-curated clips, with only authorized personnel permitted in the VOR to maintain integrity. FIFA's Quality Programme for VAR Technology, established in 2022, mandates for all systems, testing aspects like camera , replay latency, and integration with optional VOR cameras, with full compliance required by mid-2024 for VAR Light transitions. This framework ensures operational reliability across competitions, though implementation varies by organizer approval under IFAB protocols.

On-Field and Off-Field Review Processes

The video assistant referee (VAR) system employs distinct on-field and off-field processes to assist the in reviewing decisions, adhering to protocols established by the (IFAB). Off-field reviews occur in a video operation room (VOR), where the VAR team—comprising the VAR, assistant VARs (AVAR1 for offside analysis and AVAR2 for general support), and a replay operator—continuously monitors the match via multiple camera feeds. This team automatically conducts a "" for all reviewable incidents, limited to four categories: /no , penalty/no penalty, direct red/yellow-red card, and . Using various angles and speeds (normal for assessing foul intensity, slow-motion for factual elements), the VAR identifies potential clear and obvious errors or serious missed incidents, then communicates findings to the on-field via headset only if intervention is warranted under the minimum interference principle. In off-field-only interventions, the referee may overturn a decision based solely on the VAR's verbal recommendation without viewing footage, typically for objective matters like offside positions or clear factual errors, ensuring the referee retains final authority. The VAR team avoids unnecessary interruptions, remaining silent if no error is evident, and prioritizes accuracy over speed, with no fixed time limits for checks. Communication follows a structured : the VAR states "possible clear and obvious error" or "possible serious missed incident," describes the issue, and provides supporting evidence upon request. On-field reviews (OFRs) involve the personally examining selected footage on a pitchside monitor in a designated referee area (RRA), typically located near the halfway line for . Triggered by a VAR recommendation or the 's own initiative upon suspicion of an error, the process begins with the signaling play to stop (if ongoing) in a area and displaying the "TV signal" to indicate . The VAR supplies replay clips, which the views independently before returning to the field to announce the final decision, potentially altering disciplinary sanctions or restarting play accordingly. OFRs are mandatory for subjective judgments, such as the of fouls or in offside scenarios, to uphold the 's primary responsibility. Once play restarts after certain decisions (e.g., free kicks or throw-ins), reviews are generally precluded except for or specific violent conduct, preventing post-facto disruptions. Throughout both processes, the on-field referee's prevails, with serving as an assistive tool rather than an override mechanism; players and coaches cannot influence or request reviews. These procedures, standardized since 's into the Laws of the Game in 2018/19, aim to correct material errors while preserving game flow.

Historical Development

Origins and Initial Trials

The concept of the video assistant referee () emerged in the early as part of the Royal Association's (KNVB) Refereeing 2.0 project, aimed at enhancing referee decision-making through technological assistance to address perceptual limitations in high-speed play. Initial development focused on integrating video review to verify subjective calls, with mock simulations conducted in the to test feasibility without disrupting match flow. Offline trials began during the 2012–13 season, where video footage was reviewed post-match to evaluate potential error rates in decisions such as goals, penalties, red cards, and . These non-intrusive tests provided data on review accuracy but did not influence live outcomes, allowing developers to refine protocols for minimal game interruption. The (IFAB), responsible for the Laws of the Game, approved experimental live trials in its 2016 annual meeting, setting criteria for limited interventions on clear and obvious errors. The first live VAR trial occurred in a July 2016 preseason friendly between and in the , followed shortly by its debut in an international friendly between and on September 1, 2016, where it assisted in reviewing a potential penalty. In competitive fixtures, VAR was first used on September 21, 2016, during a match between and Willem II, marking the initial application in a professional, non-exhibition context. These early trials, confined to select Dutch competitions and internationals, demonstrated potential for reducing referee errors by up to 10–15% in reviewed incidents, though they highlighted challenges like review duration averaging 60–90 seconds. IFAB monitored outcomes closely, requiring evidence of consistent accuracy before broader authorization.

Key Adoption Milestones and Global Rollout

The concept of video assistant referee (VAR) emerged from trials initiated by the (IFAB) in 2016, with initial live experiments conducted in friendly matches, such as the June 2016 friendly between and . Early competitive implementations followed in 2017, when Australia's A-League became the first top-flight domestic league to adopt VAR for its regular season matches. (MLS) in the United States introduced VAR in its 2017 season, starting with competitive fixtures after a demonstration at the 2017 on August 2. IFAB formally approved VAR for use in official competitions on March 3, 2018, enabling its integration into the Laws of the Game. This paved the way for its debut in a major FIFA tournament at the in , where VAR was employed across all 64 matches, reviewing 440 incidents and overturning 20 on-field decisions. European leagues accelerated adoption shortly thereafter: Germany's and Italy's implemented VAR in their 2017-18 seasons, followed by Spain's and France's in 2018-19. The English joined in the 2019-20 season after unanimous club approval in 2018, marking a significant expansion in one of the world's most prominent domestic competitions. VAR's global rollout extended to continental and international events, including the from the 2018-19 season onward. By 2022, it had been adopted in over 100 competitions worldwide, encompassing major leagues in Asia (e.g., J-League), (e.g., Brasileirão), and , though implementation varied by federation resources and regulatory approval. Lower-tier and regional leagues, such as those in and parts of , experienced delayed or partial rollouts due to infrastructural challenges, with full global standardization remaining uneven as of 2023. FIFA's ongoing refinements, including semi-automated offside technology integrations, have supported broader dissemination in elite tournaments like the .

Evolution Through Major Events

The first operational use of VAR in a professional match occurred on September 21, 2016, during the tie between and Willem II in the , where it assisted in reviewing potential offside and penalty incidents, establishing early procedural benchmarks for intervention only on clear errors. This , part of IFAB's experimental phase, demonstrated feasibility but highlighted needs for standardized communication between on-field referees and video assistants, influencing subsequent guidelines. Following domestic cup tests, the became the first top-tier league to integrate VAR for the entire 2017/18 season, with its inaugural intervention on August 18, 2017, in the opening match between and , awarding a penalty after review; this rollout reduced refereeing errors by approximately 10% in reviewed incidents but exposed inconsistencies in subjective calls like handballs, prompting IFAB to refine training protocols. The represented VAR's breakthrough in a global tournament, applied across 62 matches with interventions in 19 cases, including four penalties awarded and seven decisions overturned, elevating overall decision accuracy from a pre-tournament baseline of 95% to 99.3%. While officials hailed it as ushering a "new era" for officiating by correcting high-stakes errors—such as penalties in vs. and vs. —the system's debut also generated debate over interruptions, with critics noting prolonged stoppages in matches like vs. , where multiple reviews altered the flow. These events catalyzed post-tournament adjustments by IFAB, including expanded use of on-field reviews via pitchside monitors to enhance transparency and referee ownership, shifting from VAR-centric overrides to collaborative verification limited to "clear and obvious errors." Subsequent league adoptions, such as the English Premier League's implementation for the 2019/20 season, tested these refinements amid initial operational challenges, where VAR overturned 109 of 2,400 checked incidents but drew for inconsistent subjective interpretations, like red-card reviews, leading to mandatory enhanced referee-VAR . By 2022, technological evolution peaked at the in , integrating semi-automated offside technology (SAOT) with —employing 12 tracking cameras and to generate positional data—reducing offside review times from 70 seconds to under 30 in key calls, such as Japan's opener against , thereby addressing prior delays while maintaining human oversight for final rulings. This hybrid advancement, absent in 2018, reflected iterative responses to empirical feedback on efficiency, with reporting fewer disputes in tight offside scenarios across the tournament.

Usage Across Competitions

International and Continental Tournaments

VAR was introduced at the during the 2018 edition in , marking its debut in a premier international tournament, where officials reviewed incidents involving goals, penalties, red cards, and mistaken identity using up to 33 cameras and four VAR personnel per match. The system corrected 14 on-field decisions across 64 matches, including the first-ever World Cup penalty awarded via VAR in the France-Australia opener on June 16, 2018. extended VAR to the in 2017 as a precursor trial and has mandated it for subsequent World Cups, such as 2022 in , alongside the , where full implementation includes semi-automated offside technology integration by 2025. UEFA adopted in the from the round of 16 knockout phase in February 2019, following trials in domestic leagues, before expanding it to all matches starting in the 2019-20 season across the competition's group and knockout stages. The technology has since been standard in 's continental events, including the from 2019-20 and the finals, with protocols emphasizing minimal interference to preserve game flow. CONMEBOL implemented for the in , where it overturned multiple goals—such as three disallowed for in their group draw against on June 19—and averaged approximately two minutes per review across matches. The system was also phased into from the quarterfinals in 2018, becoming fully operational in subsequent editions and South American qualifiers. The introduced VAR from the quarterfinal stage of the in the UAE, applying it to the final four matches, before broader adoption in events like the , where all 32 games used it starting in 2020 and fully in 2024. followed suit at the , deploying VAR from the quarterfinals onward, and expanded to all 52 matches for the 2021 tournament hosted in in 2022, enhancing review consistency despite initial infrastructural challenges in African venues.

Domestic Leagues and Cups

Major domestic leagues adopted VAR following successful trials, with the and implementing it for the 2017–18 season. and followed in 2018–19, while the introduced VAR for the 2019–20 season. Major League Soccer (MLS) became one of the earliest adopters among top domestic leagues, integrating VAR starting in 2017 after IFAB approval.
LeagueIntroduction Season
Bundesliga2017–18
Serie A2017–18
MLS2017
2018–19
Ligue 12018–19
Premier League2019–20
In domestic cups, VAR usage typically begins in later stages to manage costs and infrastructure limitations at lower-tier venues. The employs VAR from the fifth round through the final, as confirmed for the 2024–25 season, excluding earlier rounds hosted at non-Premier League grounds lacking compatible facilities. Similarly, the introduces VAR from the round of 16 onward, avoiding it in initial rounds involving amateur or regional clubs to ensure uniformity. The has utilized VAR since at least the round of 16 in recent editions, with expansion to earlier phases in some seasons depending on venue capabilities. Empirical data from domestic leagues indicate substantial accuracy gains post-VAR. In the , referee decision correctness rose from 82% pre-VAR to 96% in recent seasons, with video review errors declining further in 2024–25. and studies report error reductions of approximately 80%, elevating overall decision accuracy to 98% in reviewed incidents. However, implementation varies; some leagues like trialed on-field referee announcements for VAR decisions in 2025, aiming to enhance amid ongoing debates over subjectivity. Controversies persist in domestic contexts, often centered on inconsistent application and perceived home biases. In the , high-profile errors, such as offside misjudgments in key matches, have fueled criticism despite overall improvements. Bundesliga cup ties have seen disputes over non-VAR penalties in early rounds, exacerbating tensions in high-stakes games. These issues highlight that while VAR mitigates clear errors, residual human interpretation continues to provoke debate in domestic competitions.

Regional and Lower-Tier Adaptations

In lower-tier leagues and regional competitions, full Video Assistant Referee () systems are frequently impractical due to high costs for equipment, trained personnel, and venue infrastructure, prompting adaptations like "VAR Light" protocols that utilize fewer cameras—typically four or more but optimized for efficiency—and streamlined review processes to reduce operational demands. These systems, certified by for non-elite competitions, prioritize essential checks such as goals, penalties, red cards, and while minimizing delays, making them feasible for divisions lacking the resources of top-flight leagues. A prominent adaptation is Football Video Support (FVS), a simplified variant trialed by at the , where coaches can issue up to two challenges per match for on-field decisions, with referees reviewing footage only upon successful appeals to confirm errors. This coach-involved model, akin to challenge systems in and , aims to enhance accountability and reduce unnecessary interruptions in youth and lower-tier games, though it risks overuse if not strictly limited, as evidenced by its testing to balance fairness against game flow. has considered expanding FVS as a potential replacement for traditional in resource-constrained settings, citing its lower infrastructural footprint. In specific regional contexts, such as Spain's lower divisions (e.g., Primera RFEF), the Royal Spanish Football Federation approved a low-cost VAR system in July 2025, enabling coaches to request reviews of key incidents like goals and penalties via on-pitch monitors, with implementation deferred for evaluation to address affordability while maintaining review integrity. Similarly, Spain's (women's top division, often adapted for broader lower-tier principles) introduced a "VAR-lite" in 2025, limiting teams to two challenges per game as a cost-effective alternative that empowers managers without full-time VAR crews. These adaptations reflect broader challenges in adoption, including training deficits and inconsistent video quality in smaller venues, which can undermine accuracy without rigorous IFAB-compliant protocols. Many and regional leagues worldwide, particularly in developing confederations like , opt out of VAR entirely, relying on traditional officiating due to persistent logistical barriers.

Empirical Evidence of Impact

Accuracy Improvements and Error Correction Rates

Empirical studies have consistently demonstrated that the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system enhances the accuracy of on-field referees' decisions in key match incidents, including goals, penalty awards, direct red cards, and mistaken identity. A meta-analysis of referee performance across 13 men's national leagues found that VAR intervention increased decision accuracy from 92.1% to 98.3% for these critical areas. Similarly, in controlled trials, VAR rectified 77.5% of the 89 critical errors identified in on-field decisions, elevating overall accuracy in reviewed categories from 93% to 98.9%. UEFA data from high-level competitions, including the Champions League, indicate that referees achieve 97.49% accuracy without assistance, rising to 99.60% when technology is utilized for verification. This improvement stems from 's limiting interventions to "clear and obvious errors," which occurs in approximately 8-10% of matches, primarily correcting subjective misjudgments under pressure. Independent peer-reviewed corroborates these gains, attributing the uplift to multiple camera angles and slow-motion replay reducing perceptual biases in fast-paced scenarios. Error correction rates remain high, with VAR overturning initial calls in over 50% of reviewed incidents across major leagues, though incorrect VAR recommendations are rare, comprising less than 1% of interventions in recent seasons. For instance, in the English through mid-2023/24, VAR correctly adjusted 57 decisions while maintaining a 96% overall referee accuracy rate.
SourcePre-VAR Accuracy (Key Decisions)Post-VAR Accuracy (Key Decisions)Error Correction Rate
et al. (2021), 13 leagues92.1%98.3%N/A
FIFA/IFAB Trials (2020)93%98.9%77.5% of critical errors
(2025)97.49%99.60%>50% of reviews
These metrics highlight VAR's causal role in minimizing errors through evidence-based review, though gains are most pronounced in unambiguous cases, with persistent challenges in interpretive gray areas addressed in subsequent analyses.

Effects on Match Statistics and Dynamics

The introduction of video assistant (VAR) has altered several key statistics in professional football. Empirical analyses indicate a notable increase in penalties awarded following VAR implementation. For instance, across Europe's leagues, penalties rose by approximately 12% in seasons post-VAR adoption compared to pre-VAR baselines. Similarly, a study of the English over five years (2018–2023) found statistically significant increases in average penalties per match, alongside higher total goals scored. At men's tournaments, VAR correlated with significant upticks in penalties (p < 0.05), attributed to enhanced scrutiny of incidents within the . Conversely, offsides have declined under VAR protocols, as video reviews enable more precise offside determinations, reducing erroneous flags. A nine-year analysis of Brazil's Série A (2015–2023) documented fewer offside calls post-, alongside fewer fouls in aggregate due to minimized penalties. A and of elite matches confirmed VAR's role in lowering offside incidences while exerting a significant overall effect on disciplinary actions, though direct red cards issued on-field decreased as referees deferred more to VAR input. Regarding goals scored, findings are inconsistent. While some league-specific data show modest increases—potentially from corrected non-awards—a broader of pre- and post- seasons across multiple competitions detected no statistically significant change in average goals per . On dynamics, extends effective playing time: data revealed significant increases in ball-in-play duration during both halves (p < 0.05), and league averaged longer overall durations due to review pauses offsetting prior stoppages. However, this comes with added interruptions; reviews typically add 1–2 minutes per intervention, fragmenting momentum and prompting referees to issue fewer immediate cards to avoid escalations pending verification. These shifts suggest promotes factual corrections but introduces temporal trade-offs in game rhythm.

Analysis of Bias Mitigation and Fairness Outcomes

The introduction of was intended to mitigate referee biases arising from real-time pressures, such as crowd influence favoring home teams or subconscious favoritism toward prominent players or clubs, by enabling post-decision reviews of clear errors in four key areas: goals, penalties, red cards, and . Empirical analyses of professional leagues, including the and , indicate that VAR partially reduces home bias in refereeing decisions; for instance, a 2023 study of Italian matches found that while pre-VAR referees issued significantly more yellow cards and fouls against away teams, VAR implementation diminished this disparity, though residual bias persisted in non-reviewed incidents. Similarly, Holder et al. (2022) reported that VAR lowered home bias in erroneous calls, with away teams benefiting from corrected penalties and dismissals at rates closer to neutral expectations. However, broader fairness outcomes remain mixed, as does not eliminate all human elements in interpretation. A 2024 meta-analysis of matches across multiple leagues found no significant VAR-associated reduction in overall metrics, such as goals scored or match result direction, suggesting that while isolated errors are corrected, systemic factors like playing time or tactical adjustments sustain disparities. Studies on referee-VAR interactions highlight that less experienced VAR officials recommend more interventions, potentially introducing variability, yet overall decision accuracy rose from 92.1% to 98.3% in reviewed national leagues, aiding fairness by standardizing outcomes for smaller or away teams otherwise disadvantaged by on-field subjectivity. Claims of favoring clubs over smaller ones lack robust empirical support, with data instead pointing to VAR's effect on competitive imbalances driven by non-referee factors. Persistent challenges include protocol limitations, where "clear and obvious" thresholds allow subjective overrides, potentially perpetuating biases if VAR operators share referees' predispositions; for example, a analysis noted unchanged home advantages in points and goals post-, attributing this to incomplete coverage of minor fouls. Despite these, longitudinal data from leagues like the show correlating with fairer resource allocation, such as balanced penalty awards, enhancing perceived equity without fully eradicating crowd-independent referee tendencies.

Controversies and Criticisms

Disruptions to Game Flow and Fan Experience

The implementation of video assistant referee () technology has introduced significant interruptions to the continuous flow of matches, primarily through review processes that halt play for on-field officials to consult footage. In the English , checks averaged 64 seconds during the 2023-24 season, contributing to matches extending beyond 101 minutes on average despite efforts to curb time-wasting. By the 2024-25 season, these checks had shortened to an average of 40 seconds, yet cumulative delays from multiple reviews per still extend overall duration and fragment momentum, as referees pause action to assess incidents such as potential offsides or fouls. These pauses disrupt the game's rhythm, altering player decision-making and tactical continuity, with empirical analyses indicating reduced spontaneous play due to anticipated interventions. Studies on match dynamics, including those from Brazilian , show VAR usage correlates with fewer continuous phases of possession, as players hesitate amid uncertainty over potential overturns. While proponents argue such delays enhance decision accuracy, causal examination reveals they incentivize tactical stalling, as teams exploit periods, further eroding the fluid, high-tempo nature of elite football. Fan experience suffers from these interruptions, fostering frustration over delayed celebrations and prolonged uncertainty, particularly in stadiums where supporters lack immediate visual access to reviews. A 2021 Premier League-commissioned survey of over 33,000 fans found only 26% supported VAR, with 94% reporting diminished enjoyment due to extended decision times and inability to provisionally celebrate goals. Similarly, a 2023 fans' survey indicated 63.3% opposition to VAR, with 79.1% of match-attendees rating their in-person experience as poor or very poor, attributing dissatisfaction to fragmented spectacle and eroded emotional immediacy. Attendance surveys underscore attendance declines linked to VAR's intrusiveness, with over 40% of respondents in one planning fewer visits owing to perceived ruination of live viewing. In-stadium announcements and big-screen replays, intended to mitigate , often exacerbate tension by prolonging waits without resolving underlying opacity in subjective calls. Despite some cross-league data showing majority fan support for fairness gains in select markets like and , English and broader polling consistently highlights flow disruptions as a net detriment to engagement, prioritizing procedural caution over experiential vitality.

Persistent Subjectivity and Implementation Flaws

Despite its technological foundation, cannot eliminate inherent subjectivity in football's rule interpretations, particularly for incidents involving , such as deliberate or the severity of challenges. For instance, determining whether a handball is accidental or willful relies on human assessment of player movement and , leading to varied outcomes even with multiple camera angles. This persists because VAR protocols limit interventions to "clear and obvious errors," yet gray-area decisions—like marginal offside calls measured in millimeters—often spark debate over alignment with the game's spirit, as referees must reconcile precise data with broader contextual judgment. Implementation flaws compound this, including inconsistent protocol adherence and technical-human interface issues. In the English , the 2024-25 season recorded 18 VAR errors, a 42% reduction from 31 the prior year, yet these included missed interventions and incorrect recommendations, often due to VAR officials overriding or failing to flag subjective calls. Across competitions, discrepancies arise from varying training standards and enforcement of the "minimum " principle, resulting in over-reliance on reviews for non-clear errors and perceptions of arbitrariness. Professional players report frustration with such variability, noting that inconsistent application erodes trust in decision accuracy, as VAR strays from its corrective intent toward re-refereeing subjective elements. Further flaws stem from human factors in VAR operation, such as decision —undesirable variability in judging identical scenarios—and less experienced VARs recommending more interventions, some disregarded by on-field . Empirical analyses confirm that while VAR reduces outright factual errors, it does not uniformly mitigate interpretive biases, with studies showing persistent referee variability in high-stakes contexts. These issues highlight causal limitations: aids observation but cannot supplant the rulebook's or enforce uniform human cognition, perpetuating calls for refined guidelines to curb over-interpretation.

Unintended Effects on Competition and Teams

The implementation of video assistant referee (VAR) has produced unintended shifts in competitive dynamics, notably by differentially impacting strong and weak teams. In the Turkish , an analysis of 3,329 matches spanning the 2014/2015 to 2023/2024 seasons found that VAR diminished for dominant "" clubs while enhancing it for weaker teams, positioning the technology as a relative for elite sides and a safeguard for underdogs in lopsided encounters. Similarly, research on matches indicated that VAR mitigates pre-existing referee biases favoring stronger or home teams, thereby bolstering outcomes for less favored squads without altering overall goal tallies or home win rates. These effects stem from VAR's correction of subjective errors that historically may have advantaged superior teams, fostering a more at the potential cost of eroding the margins of dominance relied upon by top performers. VAR has also prompted behavioral adaptations among referees, leading to heightened caution and deference to reviews, which can disrupt traditional on-field and influence match control. Referees, aware of post-decision , increasingly avoid provisional calls without video confirmation, reducing spontaneous judgments in ambiguous situations and prolonging decision timelines. In the over the 2019–2022 seasons, following VAR interventions on potential penalties, referees doubled yellow card issuances in subsequent play (0.08 per minute post-intervention versus 0.04 pre-intervention across 94 reviewed incidents), a statistically significant escalation (p = 0.004) interpreted as an attempt to reassert disciplinary control amid perceived vulnerability. No comparable rise occurred in foul detections, highlighting selective intensification in punitive measures. These referee tendencies, in turn, affect team strategies and performance metrics. Players have shown increased post-VAR, evidenced by reduced duel participation, which alters physical engagement and tactical aggression without commensurate gains in effective play time. Stronger teams, accustomed to exploiting marginal leniency, face amplified challenges in maintaining momentum, as corrected calls on fouls or penalties neutralize prior edges, while weaker teams gain from rectified disadvantages. Overall, while not uniformly transforming league standings, these dynamics introduce variability in outcomes, compelling teams to adapt to a regime where correction inadvertently recalibrates power imbalances.

Reforms and Ongoing Developments

Technological Enhancements and Semi-Automation

Semi-automated offside technology (SAOT) represents a key advancement in VAR systems, integrating multiple high-speed cameras—typically 12 or more— with to track player and ball positions in real time, generating virtual offside lines for referee review. This tool was first deployed at the elite level during the in , where it supported video officials in producing faster and more consistent offside determinations by automating initial position calculations while requiring human verification. Subsequent implementations expanded to competitions like the in the 2023-24 season and , with trials in the demonstrating reduced review times without compromising precision. In 2024, featured enhanced SAOT paired with AI-driven player tracking and connected ball technology from , which embeds sensors to detect precise ball-body and motion, enabling quicker of marginal offside calls. Empirical indicates these systems cut offside decision times by up to 31 seconds per incident compared to manual analysis, while general accuracy rates have risen to 96% in the 2024-25 season and 98.3% in controlled studies, up from pre- baselines around 92%. The technology's stems from standardized optical tracking, minimizing variability in line drawing, though it does not eliminate interpretive elements of the , such as determining the moment of the final pass. Further enhancements include live broadcasting of SAOT-generated graphics to stadium screens, as introduced for the , allowing in-venue spectators real-time insight into decisions previously opaque. The English adopted SAOT operationally from April 12, 2025, following non-live testing and a debut in the fifth round on February 10, 2025, marking a shift toward broader semi- in top-tier leagues. Emerging prototypes, such as AI-assisted last-touch detection for throw-ins using skeletal tracking , suggest potential expansion beyond offsides, though full remains constrained by the need for on-field to preserve human judgment in subjective scenarios. These developments prioritize empirical calibration against ground-truth from post-match analyses, ensuring enhancements address causal factors like optical errors in traditional video review.

Proposed Protocol Changes and Alternatives

Several proposals have emerged to refine VAR protocols, aiming to address criticisms of inconsistency and limited scope while minimizing disruptions. The (IFAB) is considering extending VAR intervention to second yellow cards, which cumulatively result in red cards, to prevent erroneous dismissals that alter match outcomes; this change, discussed at IFAB meetings in October 2025, would require VAR review only if the on-field decision leads to a sending-off, potentially increasing accuracy in disciplinary actions without overhauling the system. Additionally, IFAB has proposed allowing referees to make public announcements following lengthy VAR checks or reviews, providing transparency to stadium audiences and broadcasters, as outlined in the 2025/26 Laws of the Game updates. Other protocol adjustments focus on integrating VAR with anti-time-wasting measures, such as penalizing goalkeepers for holding the ball longer than eight seconds with an indirect or corner to the opposition, potentially reviewed via VAR to enforce consistency across competitions. A more transformative idea involves empowering coaches to initiate limited VAR reviews—up to two per match—shifting some responsibility from centralized VAR officials to on-field personnel, with trials proposed for integration into select competitions to test feasibility and impact on game flow. As an alternative to full VAR implementation, particularly in resource-constrained leagues, Football Video Support (FVS) has gained traction as a streamlined, cost-effective system. FVS employs fewer cameras (typically 4-6) and emphasizes coach-initiated challenges rather than proactive interventions, allowing teams to request reviews for subjective decisions like fouls or offsides, but limited to factual errors or clear misses; plans trials at the , positioning FVS not as a VAR replacement but as a scalable option for lower divisions or youth tournaments. IFAB extended FVS trials in December 2024 following successful tests at events like the , highlighting its potential to reduce costs by up to 70% compared to traditional while maintaining referee autonomy. Critics note that FVS's reliance on coach challenges could introduce strategic gaming, yet proponents argue it democratizes access to video review without the delays of full VAR protocols.

Recent Data and Future Projections

In the 2024-25 season, video assistant (VAR) decisions achieved a 96% accuracy rate, a substantial increase from the pre-VAR era's 82% accuracy. This improvement coincided with 108 VAR overturns across matches up to August 2025, reflecting targeted interventions primarily in goals, penalties, red cards, and . Similarly, Australia's analysis of the 2024-25 A-League season reported 98.8% correctness in VAR decisions, assessed by experts. Error rates have declined notably; the Premier League's Key Match Incidents panel identified only 18 VAR errors for the full 2024-25 season, a 42% reduction from 31 errors in 2023-24. Overall referee decision accuracy with VAR support rose to 98.3% in studied matches, compared to 92.1% without it, based on empirical reviews of 13 leagues. These figures indicate VAR's role in minimizing high-stakes mistakes, though panels continue to flag occasional subjective interpretations in offside and rulings. Projections for VAR evolution center on semi-automated offside technology (SAOT), which automates player and ball positioning via AI-driven cameras and sensors to generate offside lines in seconds, reducing review times by up to 31 seconds per incident. The plans full SAOT implementation for the 2025-26 season following successful testing and its debut in the fifth round in February 2025, aiming to enhance precision while minimizing disruptions. Broader adoption across and competitions is anticipated by 2026, with market analyses forecasting a 19.4% for such technologies through 2031, driven by demands for faster, data-verified rulings. These advancements are expected to push overall VAR accuracy toward 99% in automated scenarios, though human oversight will persist to address non-quantifiable elements like intent.

References

  1. [1]
    Video Assistant Referee (VAR) protocol | IFAB
    1. A video assistant referee (VAR) is a match official, with independent access to match footage, who may assist the referee only in the event of a 'clear and ...
  2. [2]
    Video Assistant Referee Technology - Inside FIFA
    The team consists of the video assistant referee (VAR) and his/her two assistant video assistant referees (AVARs). All of them are top FIFA match officials.VAR at the 2018 FIFA World Cup · VAR Technology · Read more
  3. [3]
    VAR in Soccer: Everything You Need To Know
    Nov 16, 2022 · The first use of VAR at the FIFA World Cup was far and away the most notable moment of VAR use in soccer to date.On June 16, 2018, the first VAR ...
  4. [4]
    VAR: Premier League claims 96 per cent of referee decisions are ...
    Feb 8, 2024 · The latest Premier League statistics show before VAR was introduced, 82 per cent of refereeing decisions were correct. Now, since VAR was ...
  5. [5]
    The effect of the video assistant referee (VAR) on referees' decisions ...
    The use of VAR is helpful in reducing critical errors and improving refereeing accuracy in complex and dynamic football match situations. For example, FIFA ( ...
  6. [6]
    Effect of Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system on match statistics
    Apr 28, 2025 · While these interruptions do affect the continuity of play, VAR has significantly improved decision accuracy, raising it from 92.1% to 98.3%.<|separator|>
  7. [7]
    Football referees issue more yellow cards following VAR interventions
    Nov 15, 2024 · The increased issuance of yellow cards following VAR interventions suggests that teams may be at a higher risk of receiving disciplinary actions ...
  8. [8]
    VAR, Statistics, and How New Technology is Impacting Soccer
    Sep 24, 2025 · The controversy surrounding soccer's VAR system stems from frequent delays and interruptions to the game's flow, causing pauses in play that ...
  9. [9]
    (PDF) The effect of video assistant referee (VAR) on match ...
    Jun 17, 2024 · Our findings indicate that VAR has a significant impact on match performance variables in elite football. Furthermore, the efficacy of VAR ...
  10. [10]
    Video Assistant Referee (VAR) - Inside FIFA
    Dec 8, 2022 · A video assistant referee (VAR) system is a support tool for officials. The use of video match officials (VMOs) in football was included in the 2018/2019 ...
  11. [11]
    VAR Technology - Inside FIFA
    Jun 28, 2023 · FIFA assesses the technological aspects of VAR systems through the FIFA Quality Programme for VAR Technology. There are two different VAR configurations ...
  12. [12]
    Video Assistant Referees Explained | VAR - Premier League
    The VAR will intervene in four match-changing situations only: Goals, Penalties, Red cards, Mistaken identity. The final decision will always be taken by the ...
  13. [13]
    What is VAR in football - Olympics.com
    Dec 25, 2023 · VAR or Video Assistant Referee is a technology-aided officiating system intended to assist the on-field referees in a football match. Referee ...
  14. [14]
    A Brief History (And Defense) of VAR - Sites@Duke Express
    Apr 1, 2019 · To give some background on VAR, it was first conceived during the Netherland's Referee 2.0 project in the early 2010s with mock trials run in ...
  15. [15]
    VAR (Video Assistant Referee) - Sportmonks
    Jul 3, 2025 · The origins and evolution of VAR trace back to the early 2010s when ... Initial offline trials began during the 2012–13 Eredivisie ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  16. [16]
    History of VAR - Premier League
    Jun 1, 2020 · On 3 March 2018, IFAB agreed to allow the use of VARs. In November 2018, the Premier League clubs voted unanimously to introduce VAR in season 2019/20, pending ...
  17. [17]
    VAR in Soccer: History, Function, and Impact - Red Bull
    Dec 20, 2022 · The first live trial run for VAR came in a July 2016 friendly between PSV and FC Eindhoven. The second live trial run for VAR came a month ...Missing: date | Show results with:date<|separator|>
  18. [18]
    Soccer and Technology, the Case of Video Assistant Referee (VAR)
    Although VAR was tested for the first time during the 2012–2013 season, it was officially introduced into the Laws of the Game in 2018 to help referees in ...Missing: initial trials
  19. [19]
    VAR explained: What is it? Why is it controversial? How might the ...
    May 17, 2024 · ... clubs PSV and FC Eindhoven in July 2016. Australia's A-League was the first top-flight league to adopt a VAR system in 2017 and was soon ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  20. [20]
    VAR: When Was It First Introduced in Football? - SportsBoom
    Nov 13, 2024 · On the international stage, VAR was first used in a friendly clash between Italy and France on September 1, 2016.
  21. [21]
  22. [22]
    First var decision in the Bundesliga
    Aug 18, 2017 · The newly-introduced Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system was used for the first time in just the 55th minute of the opening match of the 2017/18 Bundesliga ...
  23. [23]
    How VAR Has Changed Football - Barça Innovation Hub
    Sep 15, 2021 · However, it was first tested in the 2012-13 Dutch league season. At first, the philosophy of the VAR technology is pretty clear—minimal ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  24. [24]
    Refereeing and VAR at the 2018 FIFA World Cup: A new era for ...
    Jul 18, 2018 · The implementation of VAR represented a huge talking point during the World Cup, generating fantastic debate about football and its rules. “It ...
  25. [25]
    What Is VAR And Why Does It Cause Premier League Controversies
    Aug 25, 2022 · In its inaugural season, of the 2,400 incidents checked, VAR overturned 109 decisions, averaging one reversed call per 3.5 matches. In theory, ...
  26. [26]
    Semi-automated offside technology - Inside FIFA
    Jul 17, 2023 · Semi-automated offside technology is a support tool using cameras and AI to track players and the ball, providing automated offside alerts.
  27. [27]
    Semi-automated offside technology to be used at FIFA World Cup ...
    Jul 1, 2022 · FIFA has announced that semi-automated offside technology will be used at the FIFA World Cup 2022™ in Qatar starting on 21 November.
  28. [28]
    VAR at the 2018 FIFA World Cup
    Jun 28, 2023 · The VAR watches the main camera on the upper monitor and checks or reviews incidents on the quad-split monitor. He is responsible for leading ...
  29. [29]
    World Cup video assistant referees (VARs): What you need to know
    May 22, 2018 · We'll give you the short version: VAR is a system used to correct "match-changing" decisions that may have been missed or incorrectly judged by ...
  30. [30]
    VAR to be used in UEFA Champions League knockout phase
    Dec 3, 2018 · The UEFA Executive Committee has decided today in Dublin to use Video Assistant Referees (VAR) in the UEFA Champions League as from the Round of 16 in February ...
  31. [31]
    Champions League: VAR to be introduced in 2019-20 season - BBC
    Sep 27, 2018 · Video assistant referees will be used in the Champions League from the 2019-20 season, Uefa has announced.
  32. [32]
    Copa America organizers 'satisfied' with use of VAR despite lengthy ...
    Jun 25, 2019 · Copa America organizers CONMEBOL defended the use of video technology at the tournament after revealing VAR stoppages had averaged two ...
  33. [33]
    Brazil frustrated by VAR and booed off in Copa América draw with ...
    Jun 19, 2019 · Brazil had three goals disallowed by VAR as they were held by Venezuela to a goalless draw in Group A of the Copa América.
  34. [34]
    VAR Usage Still In Its Infancy During Copa Libertadores | Tim Vickery
    Sep 24, 2018 · Just as last year, VAR was introduced to South America's Copa Libertadores at the quarter final stage – and the evidence of last week's first ...
  35. [35]
    AFC Asian Cup 2019: VAR to be implemented from the quarter-final ...
    Sep 18, 2021 · Last week, the AFC announced the technology will only be implemented in the upcoming continental competition from the last-eight stage onwards.
  36. [36]
    VAR to be used from Afcon quarters instead of semis - ESPN
    Jul 10, 2019 · The Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system will be introduced from the quarterfinal stage of the Africa Cup of Nations.
  37. [37]
    Afcon 2021: VAR to be used throughout tournament in Cameroon
    Jan 7, 2022 · Video assistant referees (VAR) will be used at all 52 matches at this month's Africa Cup of Nations for the first time.
  38. [38]
    VAR in the Premier League: how has it worked in Germany? - DW
    Nov 16, 2018 · In Germany, VAR was introduced in the Bundesliga at the start of 2017/18 season and has been a subject of intense discussion and sometimes ...
  39. [39]
    Serie A has video assistant system successes but also some human ...
    Aug 21, 2017 · Yes, this was the weekend when Italian football fans received their full introduction to the video assistant referee. It is fair to say that not ...
  40. [40]
    How does VAR work in LaLiga? When can it intervene? - AS USA
    Oct 28, 2023 · The Video Assistant Referee system, known as VAR, has been used in LaLiga since the 2018/2019 season, but there are still doubts as to when it ...
  41. [41]
    French league to use VAR in all matches this season
    Aug 1, 2018 · The French league voted in December to adopt VAR and the technology was tried out in the later stages of the League Cup and French Cup and in ...
  42. [42]
    As the Premier League prepares for VAR vote, what is the view ...
    May 18, 2024 · In 2017, following a successful trial period, and approval from the IFAB, MLS became one of the first domestic leagues in the world to adopt VAR ...
  43. [43]
    VAR: What is Video Assistant Referee and how does it work?
    Nov 12, 2019 · It was introduced to the Bundesliga in 2017/18, as well as Italy's Serie A, before undergoing further trails in Spain's La Liga, the FA Cup in ...Missing: date | Show results with:date
  44. [44]
    Serie A puts faith in VAR - SportsPro
    Jun 13, 2017 · Italian soccer's top flight introduces video assistant referees for 2017/18 season. 13 Jun 2017 Sam Carp. News.
  45. [45]
    LaLiga to introduce VAR next season - beIN SPORTS
    Nov 15, 2017 · LaLiga has officially confirmed that video assistant referee (VAR) technology is going to be used in Spain's top flight next season.
  46. [46]
    VAR to be used in Emirates FA Cup from fifth round onwards
    Dec 16, 2024 · It has been agreed that VAR will be utilised for every match in the Fifth Round of the competition through to the Final at Wembley Stadium.
  47. [47]
    2024–25 DFB-Pokal - Wikipedia
    From the round of 16 onward, a video assistant referee was appointed for all DFB-Pokal matches. Though technically possible, VAR was not used for home matches ...Missing: usage | Show results with:usage
  48. [48]
    Since which round uses the VAR in the Copa del Rey?
    Jan 29, 2021 · From the CTA decided the use of the VAR from the round of eighth, a phase before the planned. The stadiums of Second also have technology ...
  49. [49]
    VAR increases refereeing accuracy, but not the total penalty count
    Jun 25, 2018 · VAR increases refereeing accuracy, but not the total penalty count. The system reduces errors by about 80%, but does not seem to affect the rate ...
  50. [50]
    Will other leagues adopt La Liga's VAR method? - Facebook
    Rating 5.0 (10) Jul 29, 2025 · BREAKING:. The 'low cost VAR' has been approved in la liga for the upcoming season. 1️⃣ Reveries will now review the VAR at the request of the ...The 2025–26 seasons kick off across Europe in mid‑August, with ...European football league start dates - FacebookMore results from www.facebook.com
  51. [51]
    10 Worst VAR Decisions in Football History (Ranked) - GiveMeSport
    Feb 8, 2025 · From the offside howler in Arsenal's clash against Brentford, to controversy at the World Cup, a list of the worst VAR decisions in football ...
  52. [52]
    Questions surround VAR after controversial DFB-Pokal final ...
    May 21, 2018 · Penalties not given have defined the end of Bayern Munich's 2017-2018 season. The latest debacle has shaken the faith even of VAR's supporters.
  53. [53]
    VAR errors fall as Premier League sets 'model' for other ... - ESPN
    Feb 5, 2025 · The Premier League believes its referees are setting a model for VAR that other leagues want to follow as the latest stats showed video review errors are down ...
  54. [54]
    Difference Between Full VAR Systems and VAR Light Systems
    Feb 24, 2025 · The VAR system relies on multiple high-definition cameras placed around the pitch to capture every angle of the action. The footage is fed in ...
  55. [55]
    "Simplified version" of VAR emerging as vital at Under-20 World Cup ...
    Oct 6, 2025 · The football video support (FVS) is a “simplified version” of VAR and has transformed the youth tournament into a testing ground for new ...
  56. [56]
    VAR coach challenges to be trialed in new competitions - ESPN
    Dec 2, 2024 · FVS gives coaches the chance to make up to two challenges per match if they feel an error has been made.
  57. [57]
    FIFA considers eliminating VAR and adopting the new FVS system
    Nov 19, 2024 · FIFA is exploring the possibility of replacing the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system with a simpler alternative that involves coaches in the review process.Missing: lower divisions
  58. [58]
    Spanish Federation implements 'low-cost' VAR in lower divisions ...
    Jul 28, 2025 · This simplified version of VAR allows coaches to request reviews on key referee decisions such as goals, penalties, direct red cards, and cases ...
  59. [59]
    Liga F's 'VAR-lite' system and how it works: Two challenges per ...
    Sep 6, 2025 · It allows managers to challenge two on-field decisions per game and has been billed as a “cost-effective alternative to VAR”. Advertisement. The ...
  60. [60]
    CONCACAF and VAR | Inside Sports Law - Norton Rose Fulbright
    Feb 4, 2022 · VAR allows referees to use enhanced video review to determine if a call made on the field was correct or incorrect. Depending on the ...Missing: adaptations | Show results with:adaptations
  61. [61]
    What Is VAR in Soccer? [2025 Overview & How It Works] - Refr Sports
    Apr 7, 2025 · VAR stands for Video Assistant Referee. It is a support system that allows match officials to review key moments during a game using video footage.
  62. [62]
    Implementation of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) as a Career ...
    Moreover, in 8% of all matches, the VAR had a decisive impact on the outcome of the match (International Football Association Board [IFAB], 2018b).
  63. [63]
    Roberto Rosetti: UEFA VAR symposium a first step towards a united ...
    Apr 23, 2025 · Without the use of VAR, 97.49% of decisions are correct. Using technology increases accuracy in decision-making to 99.60%. Need for clear ...
  64. [64]
    (PDF) Video assistant referees (VAR): The impact of technology on ...
    Aug 14, 2020 · Studies have shown that VAR increases the likelihood of correct decisions significantly; for instance, accuracy rates for critical decisions ...
  65. [65]
    [PDF] THE IMPACT OF VIDEO ASSISTANT REFEREE (VAR) ON THE ...
    Jun 6, 2024 · The aim of this study is to examine how the introduction of the Video Assisted Referee. (VAR) system influenced the English Premier League ...
  66. [66]
    VAR Statistics 2025: An In-Depth Analysis of Video Assistant ...
    Aug 6, 2025 · VAR accuracy rate has reached 96% in the Premier League, up from 82% pre-VAR · 108 VAR overturns in Premier League 2024-25 season so far · Only 5 ...
  67. [67]
    The impact of video assistant referee (VAR) on match performance ...
    After the introduction of VAR, there were significant ( p < 0.05) increases in the number of penalties, as well as playing time during the first half, second ...
  68. [68]
    Effect of Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system on match statistics
    Oct 2, 2025 · The results revealed that VAR reduced the number of offsides and increased playing time in both halves, resulting in longer overall match ...Missing: studies | Show results with:studies<|separator|>
  69. [69]
    [PDF] insights from the introduction of video assistant referee (VAR) in elite ...
    Aug 6, 2021 · Both German and Italian football associations introduced the VAR system to their high- est leagues during the 2017/2018 season. The DFB, ...
  70. [70]
    [PDF] Meta-analysis of the effects of VAR on goals scored and home ...
    The study found no significant difference in goals scored per match between pre and post-VAR seasons, and no reduction in home advantage.
  71. [71]
    Does the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) mitigate referee bias on ...
    Nov 27, 2023 · The purpose of the paper is to check whether the introduction of the VAR system mitigated the referee bias against away teams.Missing: improvements | Show results with:improvements
  72. [72]
    [PDF] Effects of the Video Assistant Referee on Games in the Bundesliga
    VAR is used to correct incorrect referee decisions, but the study found it only limits human bias to a limited extent. VAR reviews video and provides ...<|separator|>
  73. [73]
    Meta-analysis of the effects of VAR on goals scored and home ...
    Apr 8, 2024 · There were no VAR-associated reductions in home advantage in terms of goals scored, mean result direction and closeness of match outcome.
  74. [74]
    Is Video Assistant Referee (VAR) a disadvantage for the strong and ...
    Video Assistant Referee is a handicap for strong teams to win the match while it acts as a protection shield for weak teams.
  75. [75]
    Does video assistant referee technology change the magnitude and ...
    Jan 18, 2024 · According to the study the accuracy rate of the referees' final decisions increased from 92.1 to 98.3% after VAR intervention [9].Missing: correction | Show results with:correction
  76. [76]
    An analysis of the home advantage in the German Bundesliga
    The aim of this study is to examine if the introduction of the VAR changed the decision-making of the referee in the German Bundesliga.
  77. [77]
    Premier League reveals waiting time for VAR decisions soared last ...
    Jun 5, 2024 · Checks took an average of 64 seconds during 2023-24 · Plan to retire 'clear and obvious' phrase as benchmark.
  78. [78]
    Premier League admits VAR delays is spoiling fans' enjoyment of ...
    Feb 7, 2024 · Premier League admits VAR delays is spoiling fans' enjoyment of football. Matches now last an average of over 101 minutes, despite a clampdown ...
  79. [79]
    'Other leagues in the world look up to our referees'
    Feb 7, 2025 · As for how long matches have been delayed by VAR processes, that has also declined to on average 40 seconds this season, 26 seconds fewer than ...
  80. [80]
    VAR given thumbs down by fans for Premier League study
    Jun 2, 2021 · Only 26% of fans – of 33,000 surveyed – support use of VAR; Inability to celebrate goals and time taken over decisions cited. Paul MacInnes.
  81. [81]
    VAR: Almost two-thirds of supporters oppose system's use in ... - BBC
    Jun 21, 2023 · A fans' survey published on Wednesday found that 63.3% were against VAR, with 79.1% of match-goers rating their experience of VAR as poor or very poor.<|control11|><|separator|>
  82. [82]
    Survey finds more than 40% of fans set to attend fewer games due to ...
    Jun 2, 2021 · The survey, taken by 33,243 supporters, showed more than 94% of the respondents felt VAR had made watching football "less enjoyable" citing ...
  83. [83]
  84. [84]
    Half of English football fans think VAR has had a negative impact on ...
    Jun 4, 2024 · 44% of English football fans think VAR has had a negative impact on football overall, compared to 37% who said it has had a positive impact.
  85. [85]
    How VAR has changed the Premier League, from penalties ... - ESPN
    Jun 6, 2022 · The advent of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) in the Premier League hasn't gone smoothly since its introduction in 2019.
  86. [86]
    Immanuel Kant and the Case of Video Assistant Referees - PMC
    Apr 1, 2024 · The interpretation of VAR incidents can also be subjective, leaving room for differing opinions and potential controversies.Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
  87. [87]
    Every Premier League VAR error: Winners and losers, referee stats
    Jun 23, 2025 · The stats show the biggest issue has been around those red-card offenses, as the VAR should have stepped in on eight occasions: four red cards ...
  88. [88]
    Every 2024–25 Premier League VAR Error: Man Utd's Season ...
    Jun 25, 2025 · According to the KMI panel, there were only 18 VAR errors in the 2024–25 Premier League, a significant reduction from 31 in 2023–24.
  89. [89]
    The Evolution of VAR in Modern Football: Impact and Controversies
    Apr 3, 2025 · The introduction of VAR has demonstrably altered key statistical aspects of football matches. Empirical evidence, such as a study on the ...
  90. [90]
    “VAR is watching you”: professional football players' experiences ...
    VAR helps referees correct significant errors in decisions such as goals, penalties, red cards, and major incidents, with the final decision remaining with the ...
  91. [91]
    moving forward from bias to noise in football referees' decision-making
    ... empirical studies have assessed their impact on reducing noise and improving consistency. Collaborating with professional committees and referee coaches ...
  92. [92]
    Who rules in times of the Video Assistant Referee? On referees ...
    2.1. Context of the VAR ... A VAR is a match official, with independent access to match footage during the game, who s may assist the referee, but only in the ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition<|separator|>
  93. [93]
    Five reasons why VAR is doomed to failure - idrottsforum.org
    Oct 4, 2019 · 1. Impossible assumptions, more injustice, and added focus on the referee. VAR is intended to reduce the number of crucial refereeing errors and make football ...
  94. [94]
    VAR: the unintended consequences - The Telegraph
    Jun 21, 2018 · Why risk having to make a decision with less than perfect information? Referee Andres Cunha reviews the VAR footage, before awarding France a ...Missing: deference | Show results with:deference
  95. [95]
    [PDF] Football referees issue more yellow cards following VAR interventions
    We examined whether VAR interventions in potential penalty incidents were related to changes in the frequency of foul and yellow card decisions (i.e., pre- and ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] Behind the Screen: Uncovering the Impact of VAR
    May 15, 2023 · This paper investigates the impact of the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system in soccer, focusing on the behavioral changes observed among ...
  97. [97]
    Semi-automated offside: What is it and how does it work? - BBC Sport
    Feb 13, 2025 · The technology was first used in elite-level football at the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, and has since been used in leagues including Serie A and ...
  98. [98]
    Semi-Automated Offside Technology 2025 : How AI-Driven VAR Is ...
    Jul 3, 2025 · Implementation Timeline & Key Competitions ; FIFA World Cup, Live since Qatar 2022, 2022 ; UEFA Champions League, Full roll-out, 2023-24 ; Premier ...
  99. [99]
    How AI can dramatically reduce the time it takes to make VAR ...
    Sep 4, 2024 · It has been estimated that SAOT can reduce the time taken for offside decisions by up to 31 seconds. It also provides a clearer image for TV spectators viewing ...
  100. [100]
    FIFA puts faith in new tech to amp up Club World Cup fan appeal
    Jun 9, 2025 · Another key change is that footage from Video Assistant Referee (VAR) reviews will be shown live on stadium screens, allowing fans in attendance ...
  101. [101]
    Semi-automated offside technology: What you need to know
    Apr 12, 2025 · The Premier League will introduce semi-automated offside technology this weekend, on Saturday 12 April, after non-live testing in the Premier ...
  102. [102]
    Semi-automated VAR offside to be used for first time in FA Cup - ESPN
    Feb 10, 2025 · The Premier League's new semi-automated VAR offside technology (SAOT) will be used for the first time in the FA Cup fifth round.
  103. [103]
    Semi-automated last touch detection for out-of-bounds possession ...
    Aug 27, 2025 · Using skeletal and ball tracking data, we present a novel diphase framework for Semi-automated Last Touch detection, designed to help referees ...
  104. [104]
  105. [105]
  106. [106]
    2025/26 law changes explained - The FA
    Video assistant referee (VAR) protocol. Competitions have the option for the referee to make an announcement after a VAR 'review' or lengthy VAR 'check' ...
  107. [107]
    IFAB Law Changes for 2025/26 - RefChat - The Refereeing Forum
    Mar 1, 2025 · These would include that if the goalkeeper holds the ball for more than 8 seconds, the referee will award a corner kick to the opposing team.
  108. [108]
    The 4 regulatory changes FIFA is preparing: From VAR to time ...
    Jan 2, 2025 · The IFAB moved closer to finalizing a revised Video Assistant Referee (VAR) system. This new system allows coaches to initiate VAR reviews.Missing: enhancements | Show results with:enhancements
  109. [109]
    FIFA Ready to Test VAR Alternative at 2025 U-20 World Cup
    Sep 26, 2025 · Although FIFA already stated that VAR won't be replaced, FVS is a cost-friendly alternative that will potentially help more leagues around the ...
  110. [110]
    FIFA hopes to expand trials of VAR-style coach challenges - ESPN
    Nov 12, 2024 · FIFA is hoping to be granted permission from the IFAB to continue trials of Football Video Support (FVS), otherwise known as VAR-lite, ...
  111. [111]
    Trials of VAR alternative with 'coach's challenge' extended by IFAB
    Dec 3, 2024 · FVS is billed as a “cost-effective alternative to VAR” and was trialled at the Blue Stars/FIFA Youth Cup in May and the Women's Under-20 World ...
  112. [112]
    FVS as an alternative to VAR: two reviews can be requested per match
    Nov 12, 2024 · This is the Football Video Support System (FVS), whose main feature includes the option for managers to request up to two reviews of doubtful plays per match.
  113. [113]
    FIFA's potential rule change: Football Video Support (FVS) system ...
    Nov 13, 2024 · In an era increasingly reliant on technology to enhance game fairness, the FVS offers a simplified alternative to VAR, tailored specifically ...
  114. [114]
    Referee and VAR data shows clear improvement across 2024/25 A ...
    Jul 17, 2025 · The analysis reveals that 98.8% of VAR decisions were deemed correct this season – a benchmark figure assessed by Football Australia's referee ...
  115. [115]
    Compared to without video assistant referee - NIH
    May 29, 2025 · Regarding the referee, VARs has improved decision accuracy, as evidenced by a rise in the referee accuracy rate from 92.1 to 98.3% in 13 ...
  116. [116]
    Premier League confirms semi-automated offside technology to be ...
    Apr 1, 2025 · “Semi-automated offside technology automates key elements of the offside decision-making process to support the video assistant referee (VAR).
  117. [117]
    Semi-automated offside technology to be used for FA Cup fifth round ...
    Feb 27, 2025 · Earlier this month, the Premier League revealed data that appeared to show the accuracy is improving, stating there had been 13 VAR errors from ...Missing: evidence | Show results with:evidence
  118. [118]
    Semi-Automated Offside Technology Market Trends and Forecast
    The global semi-automated offside technology market is expected to grow with a CAGR of 19.4% from 2025 to 2031. The major drivers for this market are rising ...Missing: projections | Show results with:projections