Only use VAR when error is blatant, European referee chiefs insist

Video assistant referees must only intervene to correct decisions that are "blatantly incorrect" or to flag clear missed incidents, according to the collective view of European football's top refereeing officials. Chief refereeing officers from all 55 European national associations met with UEFA refereeing chiefs and a representative from the International Football Association Board (IFAB) last week to address growing concerns over how VAR is being applied. Attendees voiced frustration over what they described as "lengthy, microscoping reviews," arguing that such deep dives indicate the technology has drifted away from its original purpose. When VAR was introduced into the Laws of the Game by IFAB in 2018, the guiding philosophy was "minimum interference - maximum benefit." The aim was to eliminate "unfairness caused by clear and obvious errors or serious missed incidents" in four specific match-changing categories: goals, penalties, direct red cards, and mistaken identity. UEFA confirmed after the gathering that refereeing bosses have now agreed to recommit to that original mission. "It was reiterated that, in accordance with protocol, VAR must only intervene in situations of 'clear and obvious' error, i.e. when a referee decision is blatantly incorrect or when the referee has missed a clear incident," the governing body said in a statement. "VAR is not meant to re-referee the game; it is an essential support to the referees, who must remain at the centre of all decision-making. Lengthy, microscoping reviews are often a symptom revealing that the decision on the field was not clearly and obviously incorrect, and should therefore be limited." Officials also acknowledged recent guidance from IFAB clarifying the "mistaken identity" rule, which was introduced before this summer's World Cup. That amendment allows a booking or sending-off to be changed if the offence was committed by a member of the opposing team. Switzerland's Breel Embolo became the first player dismissed under this new regulation after a controversial second yellow card for simulation against Argentina. Leandro Parades had initially been shown a yellow card for his challenge before VAR stepped in. IFAB has now clarified that VAR can only review cautions to identify the correct player, not to reassess the nature of the offence itself. There was also unanimous backing for recent rule changes designed to cut unnecessary stoppages, including time limits for goal-kicks, throw-ins, and substitutions, as well as new regulations governing on-field injuries and goalkeeper tactical timeouts. Analysis This statement of intent sounds promising on the surface. Everyone knows what a "clear and obvious error" is supposed to look like - Luis Diaz's incorrectly disallowed goal for Liverpool in 2023 is often cited as a textbook case. That call should have been overturned by VAR, though the failure was down to human error, not protocol. But the phrase "clear and obvious" is inherently subjective. One manager's egregious mistake is another's reasonable call. There has been considerable debate about whether a time limit should be imposed on VAR checks - if a review takes too long, perhaps the original decision should stand. In principle that makes sense, but multi-step incidents (offside, then a potential handball, then a foul) can require a sequence of reviews to get the final answer right. IFAB is clearly trying to refine an imperfect system, and that effort deserves credit. Just do not expect it to end - or even significantly reduce - the arguments over individual decisions.