The Great VAR Debate: To Use, To Remove, or To Change Its Scope?

Would the beautiful game improve in the absence of the Video Assistant Referee system?

Premier League supporters, coaches, and players received a glimpse of what the game was like without VAR during the Football Association Cup fourth-round stage – and it is fair to say this weekend was not without its controversies.

In the current campaign and the prior FA Cup tournament, VAR has not been implemented until the later stages, with a large section of the crowd anticipating a return to football free from delays from technology.

Following a campaign riddled with controversy, delayed decisions, and confusion fuelled by VAR, its continued use has been debated at times, with numerous voices stating the sport would be better without it.

Indeed, after a day full of extensive stoppages, mixed messages, and irate managers in early February, a former Tottenham midfielder remarked: "For the good of the game, you'd remove VAR."

"The issue is what it is doing to the games, to the entertainment value, with the amount of time it takes to get there."

"Do you want more right decisions or do you want a more fluid football experience that is genuine and spontaneous?"

After a couple of offside goals being allowed, a blatant penalty being overlooked plus several other controversial decisions, the recent fixtures certainly thrust the topic back into the public eye.

'A Better Spectacle' or 'More Precise Decisions'?

Everyone is aware of the criticisms of VAR.

Rulings taking too long, goal festivities being put on hold while deliberations take place, confusion as goals are awarded – or disallowed – for extremely close reasons, preventing referees the opportunity to use their own judgment.

But one club's controversial win at Aston Villa on Saturday could scarcely have been more favorable for supporters of VAR – or more damaging for those who argue football is better without it.

The first goal was obviously offside, a full-back inexplicably escaped conceding a penalty for handling, and the same player could arguably should have been dismissed for a reckless challenge as well.

The winning coach commented: "I'm so torn because the game is more exciting without VAR regarding excitement and the viewing experience for the supporters."

"But it does give accurate results. It does make the game more precise in terms of officiating. You have to value those moments."

The defeated team's boss went further, saying "VAR is essential. It's necessary to help the referees".

Additionally, there was some dispute at another ground during a separate match.

A teenage player had a goal incorrectly disallowed for offside, while the visiting team were angry a penalty was given against them.

Another top manager remarked: "Overall, I enjoy watching football without VAR because if you then score you're like 'it's a goal'."

"I support VAR only for the clear and obvious things... So let's stay away from that judgment calls and only go to offside decisions."

Another esteemed coach was unsure whether football was improved with VAR, despite seeing a goal denied for a questionable offside in his side's win.

"On occasion before I thought it was preferable and sometimes I think VAR aids us to have a fairer game," he said. "To be honest I don't know."

Have Referees Too Reliant on VAR Now?

According to some pundits, it is simple – rather than VAR being a remedy for errors, they would argue officials just need to get things right.

When asked whether the errors seen put him in support of VAR, a former striker said: "No. I would like the officials to perform their duties correctly. It is not too much to ask, is it?"

"If you ever needed any proof of the negative impact that VAR has done to referees, I think Saturday is a prime illustration of that."

"These guys look terrified to make a decision because they didn't have a safety net."

A former goalkeeper commented: "It shows you why we use VAR. A lot of decisions the officials got wrong... VAR is like a security blanket for referees."

"The decision is removed from the officials. The assistant referee has been told all season not to put their flag up, so their instinct has been trained."

When asked whether football had become overly dependent on VAR, a manager had some sympathy with the argument.

"One could argue to say yes," he said. "Because when VAR is there, there is a inclination to think 'oh well I won't give that because VAR is there to check it'."

"Then your ability to make a call isn't as sharp as it would normally have to be. Maybe there is a shift there."

But a former referee feels it is unfair to claim officials use as a crutch VAR.

"I genuinely disagree that's accurate," he said. "Obviously I work with them closely and I know these guys and they're not like that."

"I spent a portion of my career with VAR and half without it... And your approach essentially stay the same."

"What has changed though is with VAR you don't have that spell in a game where you know you've made a really big error and you now have to reset and go again."

'Much Better Without' or 'Chaotic' – Fan Views

Against VAR:

• James: Football without VAR is real football. Having gone, the last few years have been terrible in comparison. I don't celebrate goals any more as the officials are far more interested in finding ways of ruling goals out than the entertainment of the match-going fan.
• Frank: I backed the introduction of VAR, but it was refreshing not having it. It wouldn't be so bad if there weren't so many absurd VAR errors.
• Alan: Much, much better [without]. VAR has ruined the game, thankfully I now support grassroots football where there are humans, making human mistakes.
• Stephen: Much better without VAR. No waiting for obvious incidents that everyone can see immediately but takes VAR forever to decide. Time for return of refs and linesman to start refereeing the game again.
• Mike: Better, even though a goal was probably wrongly disallowed. Right or wrong, its so much better to just know immediately if its a goal or not. VAR is a moment-killer.
• Les: The game is so much better without VAR. It flows without problem like it used to do. The officials are there to make decisions rightly or wrongly. VAR are always making wrong calls so I can't see the point of it.

For VAR:

• Bonnie: As a supporter, that is exactly the decision that VAR doesn't get credit for. VAR gets it right every time.
• Roger: That was so blatantly offside, have linesman lost their natural ability to spot stuff like this since the introduction of VAR? Poor decision.
• Peter: There's an simple solution for VAR offsides. If you can watch one TV replay and see the on-field decision is clearly wrong, you intervene.
• Stephen: That's what you all wanted isn't it? More goals irrespective of whether they're actually legitimate or not?
• Liga: It's these types of situations and these types of situation only where VAR should and needs to be used for offsides. Not those incredibly marginal pointless situations.
• Callum: This season is proving 2 things. 1) VAR is a necessity. 2) Brave football is under threat.
• Ben: What are linesman for exactly? Having no VAR is another shambles, who makes these decisions?