Former Premier League referee Keith Hackett provided insight into the role of VAR following a controversial decision during a match at the Emirates Stadium, officiated by Andy Madley. Hackett explained that VAR would not have been able to intervene in the situation due to the protocols governing its use.
Key Points
- On-Field Decision Stands:
Madley’s decision to issue a yellow card for the incident in question is crucial because VAR is not designed to assess or overturn yellow card decisions. VAR is primarily used for four specific scenarios:- Goals and potential infractions leading up to a goal.
- Penalty decisions, including missed or incorrect calls.
- Straight red card incidents (serious foul play, violent conduct, etc.).
- Mistaken identity in issuing yellow or red cards.
Since Madley’s decision was to issue a yellow card, it falls outside VAR’s jurisdiction unless there was evidence of serious foul play warranting a red card.
- Clear and Obvious Error Threshold:
For VAR to recommend a review, the on-field decision must be deemed a “clear and obvious error.” In this case, the challenge was interpreted as worthy of a yellow card by the referee, a subjective judgment call that VAR does not override unless it involves potential misconduct deserving a straight red card. - VAR’s Role in This Incident:
Hackett also noted that even if VAR had been in operation, it is unlikely that it would have flagged the decision for further review. The nature of the challenge and the context of Madley’s decision did not meet the criteria for intervention, as it did not suggest a clear red card offense.
Implications for Refereeing and VAR Use
This incident underscores both the strengths and limitations of VAR in ensuring fair play:
- Strengths: VAR provides an additional layer of oversight for major game-changing decisions, reducing the margin for errors in critical situations.
- Limitations: Its inability to intervene in yellow card decisions can frustrate fans and players in cases where the on-field call appears questionable.
Criticism and Debate
The decision has reignited discussions about whether VAR’s scope should be expanded to include certain yellow card incidents, particularly those bordering on red card offenses. However, doing so might lead to more frequent game stoppages and undermine the principle of the referee’s authority on the pitch.
Hackett’s explanation highlights the procedural constraints of VAR, emphasizing that while it has transformed officiating by addressing high-impact errors, it cannot—and is not intended to—review every decision. In this case, the judgment call by Madley remains final, reflecting the balance between technological assistance and referee discretion in football.