How many layers of refereeing does English football need to get a decision right?
When Bruno Fernandes tackled James Maddison at Old Trafford, referee Chris Kavanagh quickly issued a red card for serious foul play. VAR Peter Bankes had the chance to review using footage unseen by Kavanagh, but he chose not to overturn the decision. United appealed, and the FA’s disciplinary commission, comprising three ex-players, ruled in their favor, making Fernandes available for the next three games.
Opinions on the red card vary. Initially, it appeared high and dangerous, but replays showed Fernandes slipped and made minimal contact with Maddison, posing little risk. Maddison himself claimed it was a foul, not a red card. The incident shows how subjective decisions can be; the VAR and disciplinary commission viewed the same footage differently. Kavanagh’s decision was marginal: valid enough to not be overturned by VAR but not enough to withstand the commission’s review.
This raises doubts about VAR’s effectiveness. The idea that technology guarantees correct decisions is flawed; even with replays, interpretations differ. Technology alone won’t solve the subjective nature of many decisions. The fan experience has suffered, with lengthy waits diminishing the joy of celebration, and moments that fans cherish being lost in the process.
Defenders of VAR argue that better training could achieve the dream of complete accuracy, but this is unrealistic. Football’s nature and human judgment mean there will always be differing opinions. Arguments to tweak VAR only acknowledge its premise, overlooking the damage it has inflicted.
The solution is clear: abolish VAR. It detracts more than it contributes. When Premier League clubs voted in June, only Wolverhampton Wanderers supported abolition. Time will vindicate them. Until then, expect more layers of review and officials seeking elusive “correct” answers.
#Football #VAR #PremierLeague #BrunoFernandes #Referee #Soccer #FA #ManchesterUnited #FanExperience #SportsDebate
