‘VAR should be used for facts, not perception’

Sikhumbuzo Moyo, Senior Sports Reporter

UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin has added his voice to growing concerns about the Video Assistant Referee (VAR), saying the system was ruining football instead of aiding the game rid itself of obvious errors.

Europe’s top football administrator told Chronicle Sport during his visit to the Matobo National Park on Friday that the English Premier League could be stripped of the VAR licence due to its misuse of the technology.

Ceferin said even with the use of the technology, some game changing decisions like awarding of penalties must always remain with the referee.

“VAR in a way helps football, but sometimes it’s not clear and sometimes ruins the game. It has to be clearer and even with the VAR, the decision whether it’s a penalty or not is with the referee and should always stay as the decision of the referee and we really need to clarify that. We should use it for facts, not for perception,” said Ceferin, a Slovenian national.

Last week, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) secretary-general Lukas Brud said officials on the pitch and monitoring cameras must not be too forensic over offsides or any other decisions.

According to a report carried in the mirror.co.uk, Brud said the IFAB will re-issue guidance on best practice regarding VAR to competitions which use it, probably after its annual general meeting at the end of next month, which will cover all areas that VAR looks at and include information on offsides.

However, the British publication wrote that this would be one of IFAB’s standard circulars and not in response to the controversy and debate over the matter in England.

“Clear and obvious still remains – it’s an important principle. There should not be a lot of time spent to find something marginal,” Brud told the PA news agency.

“If you spend multiple minutes trying to identify whether it is offside or not, then it’s not clear and obvious and the original decision should stand,” he said.

“If something is not clear on the first sight, then it’s not obvious and it shouldn’t be considered. Looking at one camera angle is one thing, but looking at 15, trying to find something that was potentially not even there, this was not the idea of the VAR principle. It should be clear and obvious.

“What we really need to stress is that clear and obvious applies to every single situation that is being reviewed by the VAR or the referee.

“In theory one millimetre offside is offside, but if a decision is taken that a player is not offside and the VAR is trying to identify through looking at five, six, seven, 10, 12 cameras whether or not it was offside, then the original decision should stand. This is the problem; people are trying to be too forensic. We are not looking to make a better decision; we are trying to get rid of the clear and obvious mistakes.”